Robert: all of the above, but primarily imaging technologies (http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/AboutCanon/ciwciinno.html). Correction to my previous post, Canon is not the third largest, but second largest (http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/AboutCanon/ciwcipatent.html) patent holder in the world.

Don: can't wait to see the whole crew again, should be an interesting week! I'll buy the first round Wednesday night.

The list, as published recently for the years 1993 through 2003 (11 years)

1. IBM
2. Canon
3. NEC
4. Hitachi
5. Sony
6. Matsushita
7. Toshiba
8. Mitsubishi
9. Samsung
10. Motorola

IBM's total was well in excess of 25,000 patents, over 3,4000 just last year. I guess the Japanese have the right idea, with their universities turning out 10 engineers to every 1 lawyer. Well at least we can sue them for infringing on our patents. I wonder if any nation ever sued itself to greatness?

Chris's new list is only a 2003 listing; Jeff's list goes back 11 years. The first list linked to goes back to 1969, i.e., it extends over the entire duration of every issued patent's lifetime, making Canon #3.

Issued patents aren't necessarily currently valid patents (some may have been since overturned), or even patents enforced (often enough, they're the result of a pre-emptive filing just to make sure nobody else causes you trouble).

Wow, I go out of town for a few days and this thread suddenly gets new life!

Chris:

"The XL1 is not a decade old. It's forty months old (Jan '98 to Jul '02). The XL1S is about 24 months old (Jul '02 to Jul '04)"

I'm not trying to nitpick too much here, but didn't the XL1s come out in July of 2001? That makes it 3 years old now, not 2. And 3 seems to be the magic number for canon in terms of upgrade and/or replacement. As you always say, we can learn a lot from history.

And by the way.... why would you say the 'ending' date of the XL1s is Jul '04? We are only now in June.

Did the kennelmaster let something slip there by mistake?
:)

I'll just assume you did it for the sake of ease... round up on your estimates, right?

-Luis

Yes, it's much closer to 3 years than 2.

They may not have started to become widely available until sometime around January 2002, but that still makes them older than 24 months.

Time for a new camera.

XL1S introduced in July 2001, that's right. That was my stupid mistake, sorry.

I search the xl2 wishlist & couldn't find this question so I thought area 51 is a good place :)


Will the XL2 use ccd or cmos technology?


Could Canon just hack their own technology, ie using the cmos chip they put in the 10D?

Increase the fps from 3fps (As it currently is implemented in the 10D) to either 24, 25 or 30 fps

Then compress it to HDV like the JVC to use mini-dv tapes.

Or offer a way to capture uncompressed 6.3 megapixel video to a terabyte firestore :)

Here is what the XL2 frame grabs should look like:

(from a canon 10d)

http://www.pbase.com/image/26211947
http://www.pbase.com/image/26211694
http://www.pbase.com/image/26259572

I know a guy who knows a guy whose cousin is a janitor at Canon in Tokyo and from what I hear Canon is going to announce on July 1st that they are getting out of the prosumer camcorder market for good...

If he's right --- and I hear that he's a very savvy janitor --- that will mean that the XL1S will be the last high-end Canon prosumer camcorder made...

Better get them while you can!

;o)

All I know is, the DVX100A is killing Canon in profits.

heath

Current sales revenues of the DVX are probably exceeding those of the XL1S by a wide margin. It's a chic camera (with good reason).

Gross profits, however, are quite a separate matter. As the XL1 system has many more branded accessories than the DVX, my off-hand guess would be that Panasonic has a long, long way to go to match the profits that Canon has enjoyed from the XL1 system.

"Will the XL2 use ccd or cmos technology?"


Rumor has it that there is a good chance it will be a 3 chip CMOS camera. But again, that is just rumor.

Of course, I don't really know how that will matter from a user perspective, or if it really means much of anything in relation to image quality.

I just know that's what I've heard.

-Luis

<< the DVX100A is killing Canon in profits. >>

No, it isn't. Sales of one particular camera model do not make or break the profit margins of any multi-billion dollar corporation. See my post above, where I present the references to Canon far outstripping Matsushita's (Panasonic's) gross profit margin. For that matter, Canon makes significantly more money from the sales of single-chip camcorders than their three-chip models. For every single XL1S sold, they're also selling a few dozen ZR85's.

You can accurately say that the DVX100A is outselling the XL1S. But from that fact you cannot conclude that Canon is being "killed" in terms of profit because the XL1S is only one of hundreds of products that Canon sells. Nor can you conclude that XL1S sales are down. They're not -- they're up, because of the rebate. They're definitely not selling better than the DVX100A, but they are up.

Rumour has it that the XL2 WAS released at NAB, but it delivered such an incredible picture, that Panasonic bought every single one from Canon before they hit the public market so that the DVX100 would still be the trendiest camera.

I fully understand Chris here, but that also has a flip side. If the XL1s is such a small player in the overall profit of Canon then will they give it the attention and enhancments that we, as video people, would love to see?

Guess we all have to wait and we'll find out soon enough..

Aaron

The xl1s' chips are old and not the equal of the panny. Canon has to upgrade and they know it.

I'd actually be happy with a xl2 with 1/2 chips and 16x9 native. You can shoot some nice stuff with that. Perhaps the GL3 will be like that.

The panny sdx900 is 16x9 native with 2/3 chips and 24p and sells for 25k without lenses. And the footage is very equivalent to super16mm film.

I doubt Canon is going to boink that cam - at the 5k price point.

<<<-- Originally posted by Michael Struthers : The panny sdx900 is 16x9 native with 2/3 chips and 24p and sells for 25k without lenses. And the footage is very equivalent to super16mm film. >>>

When viewed on an NTSC monitor, or projected (digitally? or after a film-out?)

It's a bold statement to claim ANY digitally originated footage as being equivalent to film, especially from a SD camera, albeit a very good one in this case. Only the highest end HD cameras such as the Dalsa can claim comparable exposure latitude.

I think the SDX900 looks great. But Super 16 is still better, and thanks to Kodak's tireless efforts to improve their stocks, the bar keeps raising.

From the few tiny little fissures of information that are leaking out of the hulking dam of secrecy that surrounds the XL2, it seems safe to say that it IS happening, and it WILL be worth the wait. I don't think it will knock the SDX900 out of the water, but it isn't in that market. The question is, will it displace the DVX100 from its current throne. I think, given the "flavor-of-the-month" environment that surrounds this class of camera (partially due to the relatively low price points), that this will be the case within six months of release.

"I'd actually be happy with a xl2 with 1/2 chips and 16x9 native"

Really?
You'd be willing to slum it with just 1/2" chips and native 16:9 on
a $5K camera?
:)

I hope no one is holding their breath for that one to be released.


Charles said:
"it seems safe to say that it IS happening, and it WILL be worth the wait."

What exactly makes you say that it WILL be worth the wait?
I just hope that the 'dam of secrecy' as you put it hasn't caused
over-anticipation for the camera. Then again, Canon doesn't
have to do too much to regain the throne.

"The question is, will it displace the DVX100 from its current throne."

I think it is probably a given that it will displace the DVX, as long
as Canon just plays 'catch up' at a minimum. An XL with 24p, XLR
inputs, and some gamma curve control alone would beat out the
DVX (given that the XL has the interchangable lens options).

If any of the rumors of native 16:9 and possibly HDV modes are
true, then it won't take much for Canon to hit this one out of the
park.


The big point with a lot of people will be 24p. Whether or not we
all agree on 24p video, the majority of people seem to want it. If
it weren't for the 24p options on the DVX, I doubt panasonic
would be selling them so fast.
(you could say they're selling them like they're going out of style).
:)

Does anyone know who holds the patents on Panasonic's 24p?
Did they liscense that technology, or do they own it?

-Luis

So, just how much different does video look when shot at 24p versus the 30p that the XL1S currently utilizes??? Would 24p compare at all to the Frame mode of the XL1S?

I could imagine adding a "new" Canon XL if (an important if) the video shot with one complimented and could be edited with the other without any glaring differences...

"Film Look" covers a lot of territory...

== Ed ==

I shoot on 30p a lot and it looks great, but our 24p cameras that our students use (at the Palm Beach Film School, plug plug) look a lot like film. In that non-35 mm/non-CineAlta way. :-)

heath

"I could imagine adding a "new" Canon XL if (an important if) the video shot with one complimented and could be edited with the other without any glaring differences..."

I don't think we will see a "new" Canon XL.
I think this camera will be a whole new camera.
Think of it as a replacement, not an upgrade.

Canon has a history of upgrading once, and then replacing.
They did it with the L1, L2, XL1, XL1s.

I'm not saying you wouldn't be able to cut them together.
I mean, I guess you could intercut XL1 footage with L2 footage.
But, I woudln't count on it.

-Luis

I would bet that if it's SD you'd be able to cut the camera's together if only because I've seen XL-1 and DVX-100 footage cut together and it really looked pretty good, of course the eidtor is a wiz with FCP which probably helped. I think provided it's a SD camera you can cut together and fix in post. However for live events you might not be so lucky. That being said a lot of live events that are on the national networks use a mix of HD and SD so maybe it's ok to cut that together as well.

The panny sdx900 is 16x9 native with 2/3 chips and 24p and sells for 25k without lenses. And the footage is very equivalent to super16mm film. >>>

When viewed on an NTSC monitor, or projected (digitally? or after a film-out?)
-----------------------

I only viewed it on a large NTSC monitor. And it was indoor footage by a darn good DP. And it looked smashing. I was kind of floored, actually.

I've never seen footage from the sdx900 projected to a big screen or film out...

--------------------------------

All canon has to do to "beat" the dvx100a is
SD 24 and 30p
good xlr
16x9
interchangeable lenses

This canon could pull off with a 3.5 k cam, no problem.

But, there are the "extras" that could push the Canon into another category -

1/2 chips
HDV1080I
Some other form of HD

Unfortunately, I don't believe Canon is willing to bypass the mpeg2 HDV standard...


And hey, how about a dvx100"c" with 16x9 native and a lens mount...

<<<-- Originally posted by Michael Struthers :

But, there are the "extras" that could push the Canon into another category -

1/2 chips
HDV1080I
Some other form of HD

-->>>

That, with the 16:9 chips you mentioned, would push the base street price up into the $6000+ range, well out of the DVX100 class and into the Sony DSR-350 range. Plus, the cost of the lenses (bigger for 1/2" chips) would double. I think the cheapest Canon 1/2" lens, an 18x, is something like $3500 on it's own. Thats the same price as a DVX100 for just a lens.

What I'm saying is, the 1/2" chips ain't happening. It's a completely new field of camera. A camera that, as Jeff and Ken explained above, isn't going to happen.

Although I really wish it was because it would kick ass. What we might see is Sony, JVC, or Panny releasing a 24p/HDV version of their 1/2" chip cameras... Still closer to $10,000 but man oh man...

i noticed interchangable lenses are on everyones list...lets just hope that the xl mount is much improved, or at least new lenses come about....

really i can live with the xl1 as it stands now for the most part, litttle changes here and there like changing the green 'rec' to red, uv meters on screen...n so forth... but the real issue is glass

unless you want to spend for a mini35 your choice of glass is really limited, i don't see why they can't make better glass for the xl mount

if there is no new glass out with the new xl is see no reason of adding interchangable lenses as a benifit...

Ehm, why are you looking for better glass? Canon is one of the
best manufacturers of glass out there. The 16x manual lens
is extremely sharp.

It sounds like you are looking for different mounts so you can
mount other types of lenses. Not "better" glass. Keep in mind
that is SD resolution (the XL1S), not HD or film!

<-- The 16x manual lens is extremely sharp. -->

i disagree, canon's auto lens is one of the worst detachable video lenses i have ever used, based on contrast, sharpness and speed...and the manual lens is not wide enough...

i'm looking for options to get to use a 1/3 sized version of canon's sharp J22ex7, i'm fine with lack of ois...just give me a fast sharp lens...

<<<-- Originally posted by Robert Mann Z. :

"lets just hope that the xl mount is much improved"

"your choice of glass is really limited"

-->>>

Robert,

Do you mean that you would like to see a totally different lens mount for the XL or instead, a wider (better) choice of XL lenses?

You don't like the lens quality? I must not be as discerning as you, because I think the current lens quality is great. Yes, the lenses are not million dollar optics but for the price I think they are exceptional. Could they be better? Sure, but at what price? For Canon to provide the highest quality lens possible would price me out of the camcorder. I try to avoid unrealistic expectations...

I'll agree that without using the EF lens adapter on the XL1S the selection of lenses for the XL is basically either the 3X wide angle or the 16X telephoto... Not really a large selection? I find them both highly satisfactory... You don't? Not wide enough? Not sharp enough? Hmmmmm.

If Canon would change the existing XL mount (very doubtful I hope) so that "old" lenses couldn't be used on future camcorders it would seriously impact my future purchases of "new" Canon equipment...

Personally, the way Canon has it now seems fine to me. If I want an exotic lens I can use the EF adapter and choose from a LARGE selection of different lenses.

Just having the choice between the 3X, 16X and 1.6X extender satisfies my needs though. Your needs must be far different than mine.

== Ed ==

"i noticed interchangable lenses are on everyones list..."

I think most of us have listed interchangable lenses simply because that has always been something that set the XL line apart in its price range. I seriously doubt that Canon would take away the one unique feature they have, and whether or not it is a 'real' benefit, the fact remains that it is a 'perceived' benefit to the majority of consumers (much like 24p when it comes to the DVX).

"really i can live with the xl1 as it stands now for the most part, litttle changes here and there'

Again, maybe I'm expecting too much, but I believe we are going to see something much more drastic than 'little changes.'
Given Canon's history, this new camera should replace the XL1s, not simply upgrade it.

"unless you want to spend for a mini35 your choice of glass is really limited"

There may be some truth in what you say, your choice of glass is limited to a handful of lenses. But, compare that to any other camera in the XL1s pricerange. How much more limited are you with a DVX or a PD170?

"if there is no new glass out with the new xl is see no reason of adding interchangable lenses as a benifit..."

I would still say that it is a benefit to have ANY choice over your lenses, as opposed to being stuck with a fixed lens.

Let's not forget the price range and competition for this camera.
The XL1s doesn't go head to head with the SDX900, or even the DSR500 or 300. We are talking about a sub $5000 camera.

Regardless, if they do make major changes to the design, as I suspect they will, I think it is safe to assume that new lenses will folllow.

-Luis

I was so frustrated with the poor quality and handling of the 16X "white lens" that came with my original XL-1 I nearly trashed the camera. Finally the 16X manual became available and I found myself thinking rationally again. Now if Canon would only offer a manual 3X I'd be ecstatic. Having switched to the XL-1/XL-1S from shooting Sony Beta SP cameras with Canon lenses, I know that they can produce terrific lenses.

Come on Canon! Gimme a 3X manual!

Maybe I'm going to get everyone angry here, but perhaps a
wide angle adapter for the 16x manual would be a way to go?
(I'm just WONDERING here...)

interesting reaction, i had no idea...

but the lens choices are limited, the 16x auto is an bad lens at any price, the manual is good, but not great, could be better

i had no idea my needs are so special or exotic, i don't shoot movies, i don't shoot 24p, just plain old video for watching on the tele, i like it as sharp as possible, i also need a wide lens as i do a lot of interviews, and like the look that a wide lens gives me...

if you offer a $10,000 option for $3,000 camera in the mini35, why not offer a good $5,000 wide 12x lens for those who shoot video for tv playback...

if $5,000 is too rich or exotic for some folks fine don't buy it, use the standard lens, i'm only estimating on the price, i have no idea how much a lens would cost

if you have ever used ef option you would know it's as good as useless for anyone wanting to shoot wide, or inside a room for that matter...it also lacks a rocker

i really don't care if they change the mount or add more lenses, i really don't see canon doing either in the near future, it's just my gripe with the xl1 series

<<<-- Originally posted by Robert Mann Z. : i really don't care if they change the mount or add more lenses, i really don't see canon doing either in the near future, it's just my gripe with the xl1 series -->>>

I'd think that your "gripe" is just as valid as ANYONE elses?

Your wish list is equally worthwhile for you...

If you object to the sharpness (or lack of) of the XL's lenses that's fine too? Me, I am happy with the lenses and think they are perfectly acceptable --- all things (like price) considered. Like I said, they could obviously be much better, but it doesn't seem very realistic to expect a $3k camcorder to have big dollar optics.

I've shot with Sony BetaSP equipment and the XL doesn't compare. Nor does the price...

If you ARE more discerning than me, which seems to be the case --- I don't think it means either of us is "wrong". Maybe I'm just easier to please? [g]

== Ed ==

"i really don't care if they change the mount or add more lenses, i really don't see canon doing either in the near future"

I completely agree that the XL line could use more lenses too choose from.

And although I'm not sure about changing the mount, I would not be surprised to see Canon add new lenses to the XL line if they are in fact coming out with a new camera.

Regardless of whether or not the old XL lenses will be compatible with the new camera, it just seems to make sense to release a new line of lenses with a new camera. I can't see people getting too excited about a new interchangable lens camera if there are no new lenses to be used.

So, you may just get your wish Robert.
Just my opinion of course.

-Luis

<<I can't see people getting too excited about a new interchangable lens camera if there are no new lenses to be used.
>>

I think that if the XL2 has the feature set we hope it will, there will be a LOT to get people excited about.

I agree about the 16x standard (white) lens, I sold mine last year and have never missed. Baffling piece of gear. Love my 14x manual though.

I was disappointed that the 16x manual didn't zoom any wider than the 14x. My sense was that it was all about protecting the existing 3x wide angle lens.

I do hope that in the next year or two they will introduce a "pro" version of the manual lenses that covers a greater zoom range at the wide end and retains a manual iris ring. I would be happy to pay extra for that (well, not happy but content).

<< but it doesn't seem very realistic to expect a $3k camcorder to have big dollar optics.

I've shot with Sony BetaSP equipment and the XL doesn't compare. Nor does the price...>>

i think you are missing the point, i don't expect for canon to give away top glass with an xl1...i just want the option to buy the right lens for me

much like i have the option to spend 10 big ones on a mini 35, i would like option to spend on a nice wide manual...

Here here on a manual wide angle lens.
Especially if it has more zoom than the 3x. Maybe a 5x or 6x with manual controls...

Ooooh yeah....

<<<-- Originally posted by Robert Mann Z. : i just want the option to buy the right lens for me... -->>>

Sure, it would be great if Canon had many more lenses to choose from at various price points... Cheap ones for me and expensive ones for you... [g]

Will Canon's lens selections/options/choices expand? I don't have a clue --- but it would be great if Canon would do that.

For my money, if the "new" XL keeps the same mount (what's wrong with the current mounting system?) I would be much more likely to ADD a "new" body down the road.

If, on the other hand, Canon changes the lens mount just in order to artificially force obsoletion --- I will probably not run out and buy another body... But, I imagine that Canon's Marketing Guru's know what's best for Canon and it probably won't not hinge upon my personal likes or dislikes... :o(

== Ed ==

Great if the current lenses are going to be compatible but isn't there a potential issue to overcome in that incorporating them will be a compromise if the new chip is 16:9?

I've been thinking about this one myself--it depends whether or not the lens engineers designed the XL1 lenses with no "wiggle room" edge to edge. Then there will be the potential for edge softness and/or vignetting if the chip is indeed wider. Certainly my wide angle adaptor will not cut it any more, because it nearly vignettes as it is.

The good news is that the effective focal range of the lens will shift a bit towards the wide-angle side; in other words, the field of view will become wider overall.

I'd been contemplating purchasing a Mini35 but was concerned about the coverage issue. However, the word that I got was that for the current (400 series) version of the system, the absolute worst that would happen would be that a different relay adaptor would be required. Early generations of the Mini35 could potentially be problematic in this regard.

Does anyone know or remember how long after the release of the NTSC XL1 or XL1s we had to wait for the PAL version in Europe?

I have a commission coming up that I would really like to shoot 16:9 25p and although I COULD attempt it on my existing XL1s using frame mode, if there was the slightest possibuility of the replacment being available in PAL land before the end of the year (assuming assertions in this thread stand the test of time!), it would be the way to go.

Missing in the "XL2" wish list.

How about having a manual (or switchable auto/manual) iris ring on the lens like the pro shoulder cams? Id sure like to see that. It could be on the body too, near the lens mount. I really hate that crummy little dial for the iris control on most prosumer camcorders.

Frederic:

The iris ring is not a camera function but a lens function, and is available on the Canon 14x Manual lens made for the XL1 (no longer made but still a bunch floating around out there, a great deal).

Well, on the PD170 and DVX100, iris control in on the camera. But you are saying that there are actual lenses for the XL1s that have iris control on the lens? Why aren't they making the manual one anymore?

In any case, can't wait for the Canon announcement of the "XL2", or whatever it's going to be called. In my case, if the new cam has 24p, true 16x9, and XLR inputs, it's a definite must have.

<< But you are saying that there are actual lenses for the XL1s that have iris control on the lens? >>

Yes. See my Guide to XL Lens Options (http://www.dvinfo.net/canon/articles/article58.php).

Anyone seen this page?

http://www.expandore.com/product/Canon/Canon-XL2.htm

You have to highlight the whole page to see the specs.

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Jason : Anyone seen this page? -->>>

Yes that has been around for quite awhile now...

If you ignore the poor grammar (which is hard to do) the "secret" info is remarkably lacking in details.

Basically just another internet scam/hoax.

Kind of thought that might be the case. Thanks for the heads-up.

2-days till July 1st

;-)

Frederick,

Is that YOU that's holding your breath ???

<grin>