If it helps, at the major U.S. trade shows Canon has displayed the B&W CRT on an AC-powered XL2 many times. Don't know if that means it's official, but it can be done.

Thanks Chris. Glad to hear it's doable. I wouldn't imagine it would be possible to mess the viewfinder up by doing this even if it was not an official solution (but then again, I'm not an engineer).

How would the Canon's native 16:9 image appear in the B&W viewfinder?

The image appear properlly letterboxed in the CRT B&W viewfinder.

Right lets get this thread back to the top of the forum!

I have now had a PAL XL2 for around 3 weeks, and have the final verdict on how much of the image the LCD screen displays

I don't have much time, so it will be a quick summary.

It is much, much better than the XL1s, I mean much much better - and here i'm talking about the amount of image displayed, not the obvious quality of the viewfinder (which is also much much better - but it still does suffer slightly from that shifting contrast issue when you look at it from different angles like on the xl1s, but not as much as on the xl1s)

Ok I have simultaneously viewed the image on the viewfinder, and on a monitor/TV, and it shows pretty much the same as whats on the TV! Very good Canon! I would say there is a very slight slither that creeps into the edge of the frame on the TV that the viewfinder doesn't show. I would have guess that the viewfinder shows 98%-99% of what the TV shows, which is great news, and much much better than the 88% of the xl1s!

I really think this is a very important issue, basically with the xl1s you couldn't frame up accurately! Now you can perfectly with the XL2 - you can trust and judge the frame with the XL2 viewfinder!

Regards
Lawrence

Are you talking about what your monitor shows in underscan or just normal TV crop?

Just plain old normal tv crop

Which at the end of the day is what you should be looking at, as you will be watching the finished footage on a tv 99% of the time, unless you are going to film print

The issue for me isn't what you watch on TV but being able to see the full frame while shooting. It's not a big huge thing in most cases, but numerous times over the years I've saved an interview shot by being able to see the mic creeping into the top of the frame and being able to tilt down before it got out of underscan.

I agree with Bill. Being able to see what's coming before it comes is a big deal to me as well. I'm doing fictional stuff, so imagine getting at the end of a long complicated sequence with camera movement that you finally got right and oops... the tip of that freakin gobo has shown in the frame at the end position. Had you had underscan, you'd have been able to see it and stop just before ruining the shot. Same applies for mics on boom poles.

But more than that, not all of us are thinking only about what will be shown on TV. Even if you plan for digital projection and not film transfer (either on a big screen or on a computer), you want 100% of the image to show when you frame and nothing less. I'm used to having an underscan portion, frame delimitation and TV safe delimitation in a viewfinder, and anything less than that is a problem to me for framing. I can live with no frame and TV lines like with the FU-1000 (might be able to draw those lines yourself on a clear sheet and put it in front of the viewfinder's mirror) but not having 100% coverage is a serious limitation to me.

All that and I haven't mentioned the resolution issue yet, which I found to be problematic as well with the LCD viewfinder. Mind you I've never seen the XL1 viewfinder, so I cannot get impressed by the big leap forward. All I can do is realize it's not quite good enough for me and I will therefore need to shell the extra $1500 to get the CRT viewfinder.

Had you had underscan, you'd have been able to see it and stop just before ruining the shot. Same applies for mics on boom poles.
But, to be clear, underscan shows you what is in the frame, not what's outside it. It just shows the whole frame, inclusive of the overscan area.

So if you were to see the gobo or mic boom pole creeping into your shot, it's too late -- it's aready IN your shot, and will show up on a film transfer, on a full-screen computer display, during transitions in editing, etc.

Film cameras have larger-than-recorded-area viewfinders, and let you see more than what's actually in the frame. But with video cameras, if you can see it, it's in the frame. It may be outside the "TV Safe" portion, but it's in there.

Really? My reference is with film viewfinders. But having read the FU-1000 review I was under the impression it showed a bit more than the actual frame. I must have misread.

I'm fairly new to video and sometimes my assumptions come from the fact I transpose film concepts and/or gear to video and assume it works in a similar manner.

Well it's pretty bad if I cannot see more than the actual frame even with the FU-1000. Is this the same for all video cameras? I mean, if there's a use in film for seeing more than the actual frame, there must be a use for it in the video world too no?

I'm guessing only cameras intended for screening might have that function (like HDTV maybe). What a bummer...

An underscan monitor shows the entire video frame, with a standard TV crop area marked. Assuming your program is for TV, ie., released in video, then underscan helps in keeping mics out of your viewable area. But as noted above, if you are going to CD, DVD or film, you get the full frame in all its glory. However, if the DVD is played on a TV, then the crop takes care of the issue. It's only when it's played on a computer monitor would you see the entire thing. Lots of the stuff I shoot does end up that way, so I have to be extra careful these days.

Looks like I will need to re-thing my shooting habits in order to be extra careful not to get anything too close to the frame (like rehearsing a few times with the sound guy, getting those flags and light stands out of the way, etc.).

I still need the FU-1000 though, since I'm planing to shoot for digital screening, DVDs and Web release, so the full frame is a must.

Well to confirm the answer to my own stupid question, in the event somebody else would want to know, yes, it's possible to use the XL2 without a viewfinder attached, I just did.

BTW, I finally bought my crane on eBay for $300. It was a big risk, but I'm not disapointed. I didn't like some of those jib arms with a cable pulley system. Seemed too flimsy to me, with a risk of cable slippage. This crane has a solid aluminum tilt control handle.

Also, don't know if this is present on all cranes, but the one I got has an auto-tilt feature, meaning if you want your camera to remain level during the crane movement, the arm has a pin that, when attached, will automatically keep the camera level, without having to control the handle. All you then have to do is move the arm up and down and the camera will remain level throughout the movement.

Here's the link (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3319&item=3846916093&rd=1) for people who might be shopping for one. I mounted the XL2 on it with the 20x lens and it works like a charm.

I did a slight modification on it (not that big, just made a bigger hole where the tripod attaches) to be able to use a heavy duty industrial handle with a 3/8" screw to lock it in place on my tripod. That way, I could hammer the thing to no avail, it will not move by one hair. Not that it was necessary mind you, but I'm the kind of guy that likes to customize and adapt all the gear I buy based on my very own requirements.

David

Looks like a pretty nice rig...the only point that looks a little suspect is the mount itself...the L- shaped brack seems a little wimpy for a camera like the xl2...did you have any problems with it (tilting, or wiggling)/

Barry

The L-shaped brack on which the camera mounts is 1/4" thick. I guess it could be better as it does tilt slightly to the right, but I did not have any problems mounting the XL2 on it. I used the nearest hole from the arm itself (there's 3) to minimize the weight put on and avoid being oddly balanced and it seems to work rather well. Maybe making an other hole even nearer the arm would be a good thing (there's still some room left). It might be a bit wobbly when you play with it by hand but it does not shake during movement.

The success you have with this crane will also greatly depend on the tripod you put underneat. For example, having a head that can do smooth pans and can lock the pan and tilt features independently, to compensate for the slight tilt the camera has when mounted, will go a long way in acheiving nice results.

I do however recommend a bit of adjustment on the rig itself.

I recommend changing all the plastic washers for big metal ones, something I did right away without even trying it once. They looked too flimsy for me.

I also put some tool grease between all the major washers used for rotation and the arm in order to be able to thighten everything a bit more without affecting smoothness of operation.

Like I said in a post above, an other thing I really did not feel comfortable with was that it used the standard 1/4" camera screw to mount on the tripod, which I felt was a bit too risky for my taste considering it needs to hold in place the weight of the camera, the weight of the rig and the weight of the counter-weight. So I made a bigger hole to fit a big 3/8" screw with a large industrial metal handle I bought in a work shop for about $5 and now I don't have any worries regarding operation. The screw fits in my quick release plate and the handle squeezes the whole thing thight from above.

I'm really paranoid about seeing my $5000 camera going up and down without touching it so I might be overdoing it, but only good can come out of that.

I did not use other inexpensive cranes like this so I cannot really compare, but I find this one to be adequate for the XL2, and the auto-tilt function I must say will quickly become a must for me. Very handy, especially when you need to pan and tilt at the same time.

That being said, bare in mind it is a $290 crane, so I'm also being realistic in regards to my expectations. The bigger mounting screw and changing the plastic washers for metal ones is something I felt I needed to do to feel more comfortable with the rig, but without any kind of practice with it, I acheived some nice results. I will also try it in combinaison with a dolly to see if it's useable in those situations too. I might post a small video some other time to show it in operation, although that might not be the forum to do so.

so THAT'S what a jib is! thx for clearing that up guys!

This might sound like a dumb question, and maybe it is, wouldn't be the first time that happened to me, but how in the world are you supposed to get a standard foam & chamois eyepiece (got mine from B&H) to stick to the viewfinder's eyepiece?

I swear I've tried every man-made tape available out there, including some very sticky duct and gaffer tape, and some double sided tape. It will just not hold. Same goes for velcro. The glue used under the velcro pieces is just not strong enough.

It seems the material used to make the LCD viewfinder's rubber eyepiece has some sort of anti-adhesive treatment. I've tried washing it clean with alcohol, but that's not solving anything.

I'm that close to make a permanent kind of surgery, but if I can avoid it, I'd prefer.

Any input will be appreciated.

David:

The chamois is meant to wrap around the rubber part of the eyepiece, sort of like a shower cap. No adhesive is needed.

Thanks Charles, didn't even notice the opening inside the foam part of the eyepiece. I had never used that before.

I knew it was a dumb question. Well maybe this will help out the other dumb souls out there looking for the same answer ;)

Hi there,

I want to know if the XL2 has safety zone marker outlines displayed in the colour viewfinder for 16:9 and 4:3 areas.

I will need to shoot in 16:9 but need to be able to frame the shot so 4:3 viewers can see talent in the 16:9 shot.

Bit hard to do in 16:9 mode without a 4:3 outline showing on the vf.

David

To the best of my knowledge it does not have this feature. The
previous XL1S model had optional 16:9 guidelines in 4:3 mode,
I wouldn't be surprised to find those on the XL2 as well. I couldn't
find anything in the manual though (the previous model didn't
have 4:3 guides in 16:9 mode!)

That's a pretty bad omission when you think about it, but I guess that is where the camera shows that it is truly a "prosumer" and not a "professional" camcorder.

I am yet to shoot in 16:9 and get paid for it but one of the tv stations I wil be working for requires 16:9 and now I will just have to continuously make sure I leave enough space (how much exactly, I wonder) to each side of the action so it doesn't get lost when viewers are watching in 4:3.

Is there a way around this omission?

Thanks

David

David, if you plan on shooting 16:9 with the EVF and want a 4:3 safety zone, just flip open the eyepiece and put a clear piece of acetate on the LCD screen with the 4:3 frame marked. Nothing fancy, but it will work just like a regular on-camera safety zone, and you will be able to remove it when shooting 4:3.

Thanks David, pardon my ignorance, how do you know exactly what the 4:3 framing is to begin with? I guess you just switch between 4:3 and 16:9 and mark the difference?

When you say acetate - what is that exactly - obviously it can be removed easily enough. Is that "sticky tape"?

I guess you could also put a small pencil line top and bottom above and below the TFT screen on the plastic of the viewfinder that shows a guide.

...starting to answer my own questions in a forum now....uh oh! :-)

David

Yes, you can determine the limit of the 4:3 frame but putting the XL2 in that mode (heard the 4:3 frame on the XL2 covered about 98% of a regular TV frame so it's accurate enough). You then switch to 16:9 and mark lines to reproduce that 4:3 frame.

Or you can also calculate it. Knowing the height of the screen becomes extactly 23.5 mm when cropped in 16:9 mode (i just checked on mine), you know that your width will be 31.33 mm to get a 4:3 ratio.

Sorry, about the acetate, this is the french appellation, don't know extactly what this is in english, but it's just a clear sheet of plastic that you use for projector presentations of text documents. Any clear and thin sheet of plastic will do. Try to find something that will hold in place using static only. I think this would be the cleanest and most practical way to get it on/off in a matter of seconds.

G'day guys, Just to let you know that even high end cameras sometimes don't have 4:3 safe in the viewfinder. I use a Sony DXC D30 camera head with SP,SX and DVCam backs and it doesn't have safe marks. The next model the D35 had them though. Being a freelancer I get used to a whole different range of cameras and you just adapt. Marked Plastic sounds like a good idea though.
George
Red Rock

I just purchased the XL2 Body Kit today and I noticed that the viewfinder does not seem to stay still past 90 degrees by itself.

For example: If I were to be in the middle of normal shooting (with the viewfinder closed and not flipped open) and my eye left the eyecup, the viewfinder starts to sag under its own weight until it's pointing towards the floor. As of now, it's not completely loose as there is still some tension in it, but I could see it getting much worse as time went on. I called B&H about the problem but they had never heard of that before. I'm going to exchange it tomorrow, but I wonder if anybody else has had that problem. Just by feeling how heavy the viewfinder is on the swivel joint, I can't imagine that another one will be much different or that over time, the joint will become loose again.

Anybody else experience this?

Thanks.

Been using it for 3 months and never had a problem. If anything the darn thing is very snug and tight. Sorry to hear it happened to you but take a little comfort that in the 3 XL2's I have physically handled they all have been tight so you should be getting a good one when you replace it.

I noted when I got my xl2 that it had a lighter tension than I was used to with the xl1s. Mine doesn't fall on its own but just the pressure of putting my eye to the cup with gradually send it lower. Sounds like your's needs an adjustment. I'd call canon and send it in.

Barry

Thanks guys. I hope my next one doesn't do it. I'll check it right there with them standing over my shoulder this time.

Hi all

Has anybody noticed that the text and graphics in the viewfinder look awful in 16:9 mode? It's like as if they have been interpolated to fit in the smaller screen size and the edges flicker, especially the battery symbol.

It's quite annoying. It's an awful pity they didn't put a 16:9 lcd in.

THe display is pretty much perfect in 4:3 mode.

Is it just me or do other people find this as well?

Donie

I've noticed that the latest generation of Sony consumer DV camcorders have proper 16:9 flip-out LCD displays... sure hope Canon learns a thing or two from that. But then again I suppose we should consider ourselves fortunate that it's even letterboxed to begin with...

I wonder could it be fixed with a firmware upgrade? Yes, i agree about being letter-boxed, it was awful shooting 16:9 on the XL1s but I didn't use wide-screen then so I wasn't too put out.

I bough the Xl2 because my new projects are all wide-screen. I guess I'll live with it but you'd expect more of a camera of this price range.

So I just received my XL2 and was ecstatic, but after a little use I noticed 2 dead pixels in the EVF. I've run through some tests and here's what I can tell:

- one pixel is locked in green while the other is purple
- their positions remain the same in 4x3 or 16x9, while zooming
- they don't record to tape, I checked the footage on my comp

So I basically assumed they were an EVF issue, but they turn off sometimes whenever I switch between 24p, 30p, 60i. WTF?! No idea what's going on here. I checked the connections for the EVF and all looks clear. Any idea what's going on here? Anyone else have this problem? I'm definately shipping it out soon to get fixed, just really upsetting when you shell out this much money for a camera and something like this happens fresh out of the box.

I have a Panasonic MX500 with 1 dead pixel in the EVF, it was like this straight from the box. I haven't done anything about it because it came from overseas. It is always black, it never changes colour or anything.

Hope you can work it out.

I assume you bought the camera with warranty. I would have it
replaced when you receive it with dead pixels.

Rob, I did buy it under warranty. I'm going to call canon and see what they can do to remedy the situation. It's still a pain! I really love the images though...extremely clean. Can't wait to shoot a short with it!

Hi all,
With a heavy heart, I have to say that I think Canon's quality is slipping.

I have been an XL1 user for some time, and I just upgraded to an XL2.

I have now had to return my second Brand New XL2 for replacement. The first model had a problem communicating with the lens, the second XL2 has a problem with the viewfinder sagging. (The viewfinder lens sags under it's own weight) which is an unacceptable problem.

I also notice that the little doors on the XL2 are extremely cheap, the "Iris Set" rocker feels like it is ready to fall apart and is extremely difficult to push.

As much as I LOVE the form factor of the XL series, and as much as I feel like the design of the camera adds to the creative process, I am afraid that Canon is not putting it's best foot forward on this one.... it just "feels" like they are cutting corners.

Matthew,

Sorry to read of your troubles; my XL2 has been trouble-free and I love it. You have a right to expect your purchase to operate as advertised, so don't be shy about getting satisfaction from Canon.

If it should turn out that there is a user adjustment for the viewfinder tension, please do share it with the community...mine is fine, but now I wonder what will happen with extended use!

Pete,
Thanks for the reply. Canon has again been very receptive to my complaint. They have agreed for a second time to replace the camera without making me wait. Fed-X will pick up the camera and as soon as the Fed-X tracking number is received, Canon will expedite a third XL2 to me. Pretty impressive that they will not make me wait for them to inspect the return.

Canon had me talk directly to (what they call) "High Level Tech Support" and together we decided that the problem was not fixable and that a replacement is necessary.

Anyway, I have had a bit of a bad run of luck eh?

Well maybe the third time is a charm? I hope so.

Matt

Yeah, every product line is going to have at least an occasional bad apple so it can be difficult on an individual basis to know if you're just unlucky or there is really a systematic problem. Folks like you posting their experiences help us to sort that out though...and I must say that it is great to learn that Canon will actually stand behind their product. Thanks!

Perhaps a bit O.T., but I had similar experience with an expensive HP scanner. The transparency adapter / sheet feeder had a problem. Over the phone they agreed it sounded like a defect and overnighted me a new one even though I wasn't expecting overnight service.

There'll always be horror stories, I suppose, but it does seem like customer service is beginning to regain an importance that seemed lacking over the past several years. Maybe the companies are learning that consumers do vote with their wallets...

I agree, it's a pain when something you buy breaks or turns out otherwise, but it's the customer service that counts afterward. If you're treated well, then that's all that matters in the end.

Matthew, let us know when you receive the third camera, hope it's okay. Also, could you describe who you contacted first, and at what numbers? Not that I want to have this happen to anyone (knock on wood) but I think it will be useful to the community what steps you took to reach that "high level" of support.

Hello! I just received an XL2 kit purchased from B&H Photo, and the thrill of opening it up quickly disappeared when it became clear that the viewfinder/LCD/EVF wasn't functioning.

The viewfinder is connected (securely) to the color viewfinder port. The red LED's underneath the LCD screen will light up (e.g., the gain light), but the actual LCD screen is completely blank, and has been since the XL2 came out of the box. (It looks like the backlighting doesn't come on at all.) If I connect the XL2 to a TV, I can see the image and menus fine through the TV. It appears all functions of the camera are working fine; it's just that nothing will show up on the viewfinder. (Which certainly makes it kind of hard to use!)

I contacted Canon tech support, and they thought it sounded like the camera was dead on arrival and suggested returning it to B&H. I contacted B&H, and am waiting for them (for a few hours now) to e-mail me a shipping label so I can return the camera for a replacement. (And it sounds like that could take a week -- after paying $140 to get the camera shipped next-day priority shipping. Sigh.)

I thought I would make a desperate plea here to see if anyone has experienced this problem, or knows of a simple solution. If the EVF is really dead on arrival (e.g., the backlighting bulb is blown out), then there's nothing I can do.. But I'm hoping there's a button hidden away somewhere that turns off the EVF that I don't know about, or some other voodoo I can perform to make it magically start working.

Failing that, any comments on B&H's returns process might ease my mind. (I've purchased plenty of items from B&H before, but never had to return something; this is a case where I would have much rather purchased the camera at a local retailer where I can simply swing by and swap it for a new one.)

Besides the LCD not working, the XL2 seems like a fine camera. <Sigh.>

Thanks,

- Scott

The only thing I could think of is that the brightness and contrast in the EVF display settings is set to the lowest setting, but even then you should still be able to see the menus and everything. So I think you're probably out of luck.

The only other thing I can suggest is to make sure that there is a solid connection between the EVF display cord and the input.

Good luck with all of this, and welcome!

Scott, I too ordered an XL2 from B+H and when I got it there were 2 dead pixels in the EVF. I shipped it to Canon for repair and it should be coming back tomorrow, but I must say I was thoroughly upset after shelling out $4300 to not be able to use the camera for 2 weeks. You'd expect the cameras would be flawless after coming right off the production line. Sounds like a lot people have been experiencing problems like ours. Can't say I'm too pleased with that, but the images the camera produces are simply amazing. What a double-edged sword!

Hello devein,
When you shipped your camera to Canon, where did you ship it, ie. the address and did you call them first to get an RMA number. If you called them, what number did you use? I need to do this also with an accessory(charger).

Ed, I just called customer support and they sent me an email with directions on what to do. There's a canon repair facility in Jersey where all the east coast products go. Don't expect to get the charger back for 2 weeks.

Hi folks -- thanks for the comments. It seems like the backlight isn't getting any power (or maybe the bulb is dead), so the viewfinder is dead on arrival. It's a little disconcerting that a problem like that could make it out of manufacturing, assuming it wasn't introduced by a wild and crazy ride in the back of the FedEx truck. (It was packaged well by B&H, so I doubt that was the case.)

I never did get the shipping label via e-mail that B&H promised me, so I guess I'll have to call them again tomorrow and finalize the return. A little depressing, because I paid $140 for overnight shipping -- and now it will probably be at least a week before the camera's back. Hopefully B&H will have a quick turnaround time and there won't be any problems with the replacement.

Outside of possible dead-on-arrival issues, does the XL2 seem reliable? A long-term dream of mine is to take the XL2 on a trip to Antarctica to make an independent documentary. That wouldn't be a day in the park (for the camera or me!) I've had a Nikon D100 (still digital camera) for a couple years and have really given it a beating, and the only problem it has had is occasional dust on the CCD. I haven't had a video camera in awhile so I guess they might not be as rugged with the extra moving parts.

On a side note, I'm glad I discovered this resource -- looks like a great message board with a lot of useful tips.

Thanks,

- Scott

Why are you being charged for shipping? Seems like B&H and/or Canon should be picking up the bill for this. I would certainly expect it for any brand new item I received DOA.

Is this B&H's normal policy with regard to DOAs?