Ok, so I have been comparing the Xl1s to the PD-150 for a shoot this summer. For this its important that we fit the part as its a documentry.

After a discussion with a friend he seems to think that the Xl1s looks plasticy, tacky, un professional and more like a childs toy then a peice of expensive professional equipment compared to cameras such as the PD-150.

Whats your opinion on this? Ever had anyone comeup to you asking why you are using a cheap camera?

Matthew :)

This thread (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4715) will answer any questions you have about the XL1 looking like a toy.

When I come in with the XL1 most asked question is "What TV station are you shooting for?" (I'm not) - and the Joe/Jane Sixpacks with handicams move out of my way. The GL1 form factor does not command the same respect from random passing civilians.

Matthew,
I think your friend has his camera perceptions bass ackwards...:-)

Although having a flip-out LCD screen on the PD-150 is handy, it puts it (visually to specatators) in the same league as Uncle Fred's 1-chipper.....

Your friend must have never seen a professionallly equipped XL1s in action....

Who really cares what the camera looks like it's the performance that matters. Professionalism has nothing to do with what camera you are holding but how you conduct yourself and your shoot. Just because some one uses an XL1s doest that make them a professional, no, just because someone uses a Panasonic 953 in a very professional manner does that make him less of a pro, no. It's all about selecting the best camera for the job. I use my XL1 both professionally and for just shooting stuff for myself but I always try to be as professional as possible in my approach to the job.

he seems to think that the Xl1s looks plasticy, tacky, un professional and more like a childs toy then a peice of expensive professional equipment compared to cameras such as the PD-150.The XL1 is larger than the PD150, for starters, plus it has the ability to inter-change lenses. Furthermore, I've got both XL1 and VX2000 footage here at home; and by far, the XL1 footage knocks my socks off---I can't say this about the VX footage. Perhaps your friend is a little confused. My 2 cents.

A lot of people come up to me and ask what I'm doing because
they thought I have a professional looking camera. But if you
want you can spice it up a lot more, see this photo (http://www.zgc.com/zgc.nsf/DV35_color_jpg_large.jpg?OpenImageResource).

Good point Adrian...I really wanted to put similiar verbiage in my original post...

Thanks Mark,

It seems lately that too many people worry about looking professional, ie camera colour, shape, what accessories, etc, than actually getting out there, shooting, aand letting their work speak for it's self.

There are plenty of examples of XL-1s being used professionally. One recent film employed them. In a Bond flick they were used as a prop in one scene.

The truth remains that it is the skill of the nut behind the cam rather than just the cam that makes a camera perform.

Besides, one of the biggest problems of the XL-1 is that it does look professional and attracts unwanted attention...

"Xl1s looks plasticy, tacky, un professional and more like a childs toy "

Guess your friend doesn't share the same as my friends and people i come into contact with. Most say something like "Sweet, its like a pornstar camera" or other things like that.

Once my XL1s is armed up with MA-200, Matte-box, and shotgun mike, it looks anything far from a kids toy. Tell me how many kids could lift it never mind use it.

I have used the PD-150 since it even hit the market, as our University was sponsored by Sony. So we used these a great deal. And i never had nowhere as many comments as I do with the XL1s. Plus the PD-150 with flip out screen is just like most cameras people own themselves. And the untrained eye, noticing the XLR inputs, it looks just like the VX2000 just a slighltly darker colour. So carrying it around people just thought you were a camera enthusiast on holiday. As soon as I get the XL1s out fully armed I have the same problem as Nathan...lots of attention and almost non-stop questions about the camera and if I work for BBC or what channel is it going to be on. Or if we are making a new film.

But at the end of the day as has been said...who cares what the camera looks like. I have seem people produce better stuff on Sony PC100 than on PD150. Its all down to the final image and as long as the client can see what you can do they will be happy with a Kids toy or not.

The quality of the end product - what people watch on their TV - is about 90% or more talent in script development, directing, shooting and editing. Maybe 10% (more likely less) is the technical quality of the grear (hardware and software) used to do the shooting and editing.

The XL1 looks pro to the untrained eye, the 150 a bit less pro, but overall both are about equally professional in their own ways.

I'm thinking of selling one of my XL1's so I can get a GL1/2 that attracts less attention for certain types of shooting.

The XL1(s) screams "HEY COP! YEAH YOU! LOOK OVER HERE! I'M SHOOTING SOMETHING IMPORTANT, CHECK TO SEE IF I HAVE A PERMIT!!"

Matt, who cares what your friend thinks. BTW, does he drive a pinto? XL1S has the styling and the technical abilities. Just like Don mentioned, people assume you'r eshooting for TV and will ask for your business card. Add this to some solid composition and editing skills and you and your "plasticky" camera will always be the envy.

Mathew,

People are not going to gauge your level of professional based upon what camera you use. Your output is what people will gauge you by.

Now, perhaps you may want to consider the issue of how "low profile" your documentary crew needs to be. You could certainly say that the PD-150, with its' muted grey color and smaller form factor, is more "low profile" or "transparent" than the XL1S. If you need to be as "transparent" as possible, use a HandyCam for those instances. For example, when I travelled around the world to various Third World countries with "The Visionaries" for PBS, many times we were entering small remote villages, where it was rare for the people to see a video crew. We found that using smaller miniDV VX1000's and PD-150's allowed us to "blend in" more with the community - and because we were so low profile, we were able to get better shots with less people staring directly at the camera...

You need to decide how tranparent you need to be - that might mean that you have to scale down your crew too.

Speaking from experience, walking onto the set with an XL1S tends to command more respect than a HandyCam would - but who the heck cares? Your demo reel and your cumulative experience is what the professional community judges you by.

- don

People are not going to gauge your level of professional based upon what camera you use.

****
Ok someone has to say it - I buy the biggest baddest cameras, the biggest baddest suits, and the biggest baddest cars. Then I waltz around like I own the place and charge 30% more than everyone else and ya know what? I get the jobs. Go figure.

That is a quote from a shi*ty photographer friend, and we laff that this is part of his actual business plan and it WORKS. People think hey, this guy is serious, look at the size of that thing, look at that starched shirt, we should hire HIM.

Of course this only works to a certain level but it does have it's merits - limited as they are.

Go figure.
James

It would probably only work once and in a saturated market such as photography/video return business is what keeps you going.

It probably works the best with people that have never hired a videographer before. It suits the wedding video market perfectly.

This whole debate is silly. It's like saying a black Hummer is more "impressive" than a red Lamborgini. It's clearly a matter of taste. They are both expensive and stink of wealth, but they drive VERY differently.

The hummer is way better. Sure the sports car can outrun it but the hummer can drive over it.

I guess size DOES matter!

Looks does matter. or rather Ergonomics does.
I just came back from a 8 day shoot in the warmer parts of Japan, shooting for the official documentary of the Japan Olympic Baseball team. Follow the coach around the different camps, shooting the coaches and players on the field and interviews, etc.

First I was told to shoot with a PD-150. I refused. There is no way I am going to shoot the PD-150 all day long! got out my XL1s + Azden mic as a cam-mic, Sennheiser MKH-416 (external mic) + Canon x16 servo lens, + Canon x3 short zoom lens, + Canon MA-100(I still do not see too much use for the MA-200. will make the package too big.) + Endura 80 batteries (one battery last a whole day of shooting plus preview! One less thing to worry about) IDX camera light. Used 16 bit audio, L-ch. Azden cam-mic and R-ch MKH-416 which was held by the director. The 416 kept capturing the voice while the camera moved around. We tried using a wireless so that we can totally move around independantly, but there was a risk of the sound being taken by other tv stations, so we stayed cabled. We got to go every where in the stadium where other cameras where not able too. Does anyone know if there is a way to secrately go wireless and not be noticed?

I do shoot alot with the PD-150, or DVX-100, I'd have to admit they have better quality being newer cameras, but for run and gun shootings like this one, if I cannot shoot with a proper ENG camera, I'd definitely go with the XL-1. In some case when all the media huddle up for an quick interview, it's rather much more easier to lift up the xl1 than an beta camera above the heads of journalists. While the DVX-100 has better image color, the XL1 has more stable shots. Even if the image has great colour, wouldn't be usable if it was shaking all the time.

In the bull pin, shooting pitchers, the x16 servo works really good, though it would be nice to have manual zoom control, the image stabilizer keeps the image really steady. While the ENG cameras where all shooting long from a tripod, I was shooting off my shoulder. (Unfortunately I do not have the manual lens yet, but the servo x16 has it's advantages. I wonder if I can get canon to sponsor a shoot like this... I wouldn't mind haveing to carry around an extra manual lens : ) ...) x3 short zoom lens was also great. much wider than the DVX-100, 4.5mm (the PD-150 6.5mm!! is just out of the question) I like shooting without a wide convertor so the short zoom is always great.

The drawback for the xl1 is control of iris. This was the only time I felt I'd rather have a proper beta-cam. There are alot of contrast on the basebal field, and you just cannot move the iris quick enough. The dial only goes 4 or 5 stops in a time... This was sort of a drag. Auto Iris does not get the exact EXP. value that I want when I want it.

The shoot has been really good so far, hope to keep shooting with an xl1 or two, or three. It did feel good to see the XL1 on the evening news amongst all the bulky BEta cams. Hope this could wake up some of the XL1 users in Japan. I wouldn' mind a little help from canon for the production.

Takeshi
Fukushima

Folks

I recently attended a local press conference where I carried in a fully loaded XL1 and tripod. Without batting an eye, the security guy waved me through. Behind me was my partner carrying in a Sony PD150. Guard refused to let him through even though he showed him his press credentials.

On the negative side, I was on vacation with my family over at Canada's Wonderland Park (Toronto). I brought my XL1 with me. I was taping an aquatic show when one of the security person walked up to me and said which TV station I was from and that I was not allowed to tape the event and that I needed a permit, even though everyone around me with their little camcorders had no problem. It took a while before I convinced her that it's for personal use. "But sir that it rather a big camera" is all I remember her saying .... (hahaha)

Folks

I use both the XL1 (and getting the XL2 once it comes out) and the Sony PD-150.

In weddings, I exclusively use the XLI with the 1.5 extender with the standard lens. With the MA100 and image stabilization, I can get extreme closeups with no shakes at all. Clients are extremely happy and wonder how I am able to get such tight stable shots at all. With the PD-150, forget it ... I use the PD150 mainly at receptions as it beats the XL1 for low-ight shots.

Same goes for sports events, I'm able to shoulder mount the XL1 and get tight extreme shots (these are the money-making shots) where even the Betacam folks cannot get. For example, during last years Montreal Dragon Boat races, I was able to get tight shots (1,5 XL extender with the normal 16X lens) of the rowers' arms showing the intensity and excitement. The Betaceam shots my friends were doing couldn't even get half as close without shaking all over (they are quite heavy, so shoulder mounting them is quite a feat).

By the way, anyone try to use 2 1.5 Extenders at the same time? I'll rent an extra one for my next shoot and see it goes before purchasing one.

Folks

I'm on a roll here ...

Another thing I forgot to mention is that I shoot everything (wedding, sports, etc.) in FRAME mode. Even the local TV station has no problem accepting this.

It DOES look different.

I don't want to get into all this in this forum. If you want more information on the "film look" head over to the "Towards a film look using DV" part of the forum ...

I'm with you Norman! But I still say this thread is pointless. We're not even talking about the original subject anymore. The question was: "Does the XL1 look like a toy?"

I think the answer is a big... NO!!

Frankly, I've always thought it looked like a chainsaw.

Takeshi Fukushima -- thanks for a great report!

I re-read the posts here and I will add in my vote. No, it's NOT a toy and folks who do approach me have all given their thumbs up.

I've seen this thread from time to time and pretty much avoided it but thought I'd break down and give my 3 cents.

Just from a non-professional, first impression point of view the XL1S wins hands down.

When you see cameras like the PD100 people only see what looks like something the same shape and such as their home video camera--- the XL1S doesn't look like any home video camera.

This was actually one of the final items that made my choice for me, I would have hated to show up and shoot part of a British TV Documentary with what looked like a handi-cam---


No offence to the innards of the other cameras but I really think that some of these other manufacturers need to rethink this sort of thing. When you show up on a commercial shoot you want to client to be impressed not look at the camera and think "god, I could have gotten my nephew herbie to shoot this..."

I was collecting b-roll of the Hollywood-Highland complex, the Kodak Theatre and Mann's (Grauman's) Chinese Theatre with my XL-1s and was shooed from each venue by security guards. I enlisted the aid of a friend who lives in LA and owns a PD150. Since I shoot better than he, we traded cameras and went back to Hollywood. I had him mimic the shots I was doing but placed him 10 feet from me. Sure enough, he was quickly told he could not shoot in the area but no one approached me.
Does the Canon XL-1s look different from other small DV cameras? Yes.
Does it look like a toy? Apparently, not to people outside the video business.

In a few weeks I may do another test. This time using a Betacam SP rig and the XL-1.

It's true, people do think you must be filming something important if they see the Canon XL1(S). I often get asked what TV Channel I'm working for. I've even managed to convince people that it's a Live broadcast!

Test results!
Three of us converged on the Hollywood-Highland complex carrying video cameras. One had a Sony Beta SP rig, another had a PD150 and the third had an XL1s. The Beta SP operator and the XL1s operator were quickly asked to leave since we didn't have prior authorization. Nobody even approached the PD150 operator.
Very Unscientific Conclusions
If you want to blend with the crowd and be less obvious, use the PD150 (which I do on occasion).
The XL1s is perceived as a professional camera.

Be proud of that strangely shaped camera with the red body parts.

Same here. I use the XL with all pro accessories and it never fails wherever I'm shooting. IF someone does ask, it's who are you with? I've also gotten the eye from other shooters, especially news shooters with Beta or DVC Pro rigs, you know that bless your heart, your trying to be like us aren't you look. Then there are those same industry people that like and compliment the camera. I think the original thread poster's friend is just technically ignorant, just doesn't get out enough or both.

Well, for what it is worth,,,

I'll take my XL1S rig
http://noisybrain.com/firestore/donberube_concept2
over a PD-150 anyday.

Unless, of course, I needed to be super low-profile, then I would probably use a handycam such as the GL2. That PD-150 will only give you a stuttery 15fps Progressive Scan. Canon's Frame Mode is a full 30fps and much smoother.

Best regards,

- don

I've never really shot much with a palm sized camera. I know that it has it's advantages such as the flip out screen and its smaller size. It just seems that there is more stability with a shoulderable camera as uncomfortable as that XL can be for extended shots. Also, on a smaller camera the buttons are usually in clusters and some have multi-functions to save space on the body. Not fun when you're in a hurry and having to fumble through a menu for what should be a simple adjustment with a dedicated button. I'm with the Donald. I just don't like those little bitty cameras.