Disappointed with the poor lens on the xf100 & xf105

I'm more confused than ever................and I can't wait forever.

Hmmm let me try to write this so it translates well to Japanese......
Personally I think Canon is hard to speculate about and I can't recall anyone ever doing a good job of it. Case in point, this thread is several pages long and nobody predicted a single 1/3" chip solid state GL2 with the pro audio people wanted for the last 10 years and spitting out 50mbs 4:2:2 long GOP. Search DVInfo. Where do you find users asking for small single chip cameras with a silly 10x lens?

HINT: People want cameras with the stuff they talk about here. Making cameras with the things people want might be a good concept for selling lots of product. Just an idea.

The time gap between the GL2 and its XF100 successor is flabbergasting. So is the gap between the XH-A1 and the theoretical XF200. If the prediction of an XF200 is sometime in 2011, multiple competitor models with better low light performance and solid state recording will have been in the market already for 3 years; some with their second model while Canon comes out with version 1.0. I'll give Canon credit that their 1.0 is better than average, but the fact that it's 3 years late is why David and everyone else like him are frustrated or have given up and moved to other brands. It's all very mind numbing.

余りに時間がかかった. さようなら Canon 私はに変更した Sony

No one did indeed predict a single CMOS chip camera. And yet Canon has obviously put lots of time and effort into building it. As far as building what people say they want on this site, If I may quote Steve Jobs:

"You can't just ask customers what they want and then try to give that to them. By the time you get it built, they'll want something new."

Apple builds products that they believe people will want. They have no focus groups. And they've been darn successful at it. Do I need to mention the success of the iPhone and iPad?
If Canon operates the same way, and puts out quality, innovative products at a good price - what's wrong with that business model?

Who really expected Canon to produce the XF line, a 1/3" 3CMOS camera with a codec and other features that were so outstanding, the cameras were instantly accepted by the BBC? How many other 1/3" CMOS cams can make that claim?
And what about the DSLR HD video revolution? Who can lay claim to starting that? Did posters on this board request Canon make the 5D? Even if Canon accidentally backed into the DSLR video craze, no one was screaming at Canon to build a large-sensor VIDEO camera in a DSLR body.
If anything, right now it seems Canon is riding the crest of the wave.

Strategic product platforms and feature sets are two different things. Making something new and building products with the features people want are not mutually exclusive. Coming up with innovative Dick Tracy-esq iPods is independent of responding to customer feedback on say ummm removing the Express 32 slot in the 15" MBP. Years ago, Apple first pulled the Firewire port on the iBook and quickly put it back based on customer feedback. All that was independent of strategic decisions in it's product line like unibody construction and green displays.

What makes speculating on Canon hard is that it's purposely last in the game but eventually enters with a well engineered product based on what it thinks the market was going to be. But given the long development cycles, that strategy means we're seeing products today based largely on what Canon was thinking what today would look like xx months ago and adjusted as best it could along the way... and maybe that's why we're seeing a single 1/3" chip 10x GL2 replacement on the strategic 50MBS 4:2:2 platform.

It also seems Canon has been slower than usual to move past tape in a very fast moving and changing time in the market. That slowness created lots of frustration and "input" from its customers in the middle that hasn't been addressed. So to re-state my point with less sarcasm, there's been a lot of "input" for camera features and capabilities given here. Products that incorporate that on whatever strategic platform it's decided on will sell well.

Neither the XF300 nor XF100 are intended to address the "middle" market. From what we read, IBC will see more Panny and Sony with large sensor in a camera body products/technology and according to what's been written here, Canon will deliver another 3-chip 1/3" based equal-to-aging-competitor cameras on the 50MBS 4:2:2 platform but sprinkled with the trademark Canon-esq innovative features like 3-D assist, maybe a power switch that turns off <smirk>.... According to past rollout behavior, the mid-range will be pushed out so as to not affect uptake of XF300 and IBC model....fix some of the complaints of the XF300 and XL version maybe .... it remains to be seen if the uptake on that will be a flood or a trickle because it took so long.

All that said, given the development cycle, it's already well known what the supposed XF200 will be and the play is in the middle of executing it. There's two data points and soon a third that will point to it ... more 1/3" 3-chip 50MBS 4:2:2 ... and hopefully a feature set that people want ... but with Canon, there's plenty of things to keep people guessing and time to give some input right here in this thread as Jim and others say Canon reads it regularly.

interchangeable lens ?
 

Am I the only XLH1 owner waiting for an interchangeable lens version of the XF 305?

No, i doubt you're the only one.

Why do you want the interchangeable lens feature? Apparently the lens on the XF cams is very, very good, maybe the best in its class. Will you gain anything by switching lenses? Are there that many quality 1/3" lenses out there? I can understand on a 2/3" cam with the many lens choices you have, but do you really benefit that much with a 1/3" cam?

One obvious use is for the EF adaptor with still lenses - a great combination for wildlife and other situations calling for high magnification.

Glen, to answer your question, yes, I use both the 20X and the 6X lens regularly. Just two weeks ago, I went to a shoot with the 20X lens on the camera and ALMOST didn't bring along the 6X because I (lazily) thought I wouldn't need it that day and already had too much stuff to drag along on an especially hot, humid day. As soon as I arrived, you guessed it, the 6X immediately went on the camera to save the day. Could one use an XF300 plus a wide adaptor in a situation like that? It probably would get the job done in most situations but certainly not better than an equivalent interchangeable lens camera.

Also, I don't personally use EF lenses with the XL but many do, especially those shooting nature stuff. The current XF cameras don't really accommodate that niche.

Like many, I'm not at the 2/3" interchangeable lens type camera price point, so I'm eagerly waiting to see if and when there will be an XF version of the XL cameras to stick that 6X lens onto. In the meantime, as much as I want to put tape behind me, I'm not ready to drop so much money on the current XF -- as an interim solution.

As Paul has guessed, I use the EF adapter for wildlife, with the EF 300mm for long shots and the 100mm macro (which becomes a 700mm macro (24x36 equivalent) on the XLH1 ! :-)
You can't do this kind of stuff with the 18x zoom lens of the XF305, unfortunatly. But it's possible could with the Sony EX3, so Canon, I hope you're listening!

Interesting points, gentlemen.
I wouldn't be surprised if Canon makes an interchangeable lens XF. After all, they do make the XLs. They certainly have the know-how.

There certainly are many of us hoping (if not expecting). I'm just a bit afraid of what the price might be, given how much the first XF cameras cost. Also FWIW, since the "affordable" video world seems to be going CMOS, I sure hope that CMOS global shutter is in the wings.

I second Pete's hope! I also shoot wildlife and macro close up using the XL H1s and (in my case) Nikon lenses. If the hoped for XF ... interchangeable system is in a reasonable price range, it would open up a world of potential for nature work videographers in a superior quality.

Alan

As a wildlife filmmaker I'm also waiting to see if Canon will soon release an interchangeable lens model of the XF series. I've used the XLH1 for more than 4 years and hope to go tapeless soon. The main thing though is having full HD camera that's approved by companies like BBC and having the ability to add a night vision lens or attach higher power. I believe it may happen by years end and in the meantime I'll keep shooting on what I have for 2 films, after all it's hard work that gets rare footage and not cameras, right?

Leon Lorenz
Canadian Wildlife Productions: Grizzly Bears, Bighorm Sheep in Alberta & BC Rockies DVD Videos

Getting a removable lens version of XF is certainly complicated by DSLR. Does Canon consider the needs of an ultra-long lens shooter like a wildlife filmaker? I doubt it.
What's also unclear to me is how the Japanese companies have divided up the market in this new era. What boundaries still concern Canon? How has the potential of RED influenced future products? Post iPhone, iPod etc they certainly take RED seriously.

The really good news is how good these new models look. I don't really care who makes high quality affordable equipment as long as those products are available. We are reaching the point where camera IQ will be similar across a wide range of models and price point is about features and glass.

Anyone at IBC going to or been to the Canon booth yet??? Is there anything hiding under glass???

Jim Martin
FilmTools.com

Given that the XF cameras meet e.g. the BBC specs. for broadcasting (unlike the Sony EXs) and assuming that this was intentional on the part of Canon, could we not expect a interchangeable lens XF which not only takes EF lenses but also, given that it meets "broadcasting specs", comes with a range of Canon "mini" broadcast lenses?

Wishful thinking , but would that any such new lens (40x zoom?) is both affordable and fits my XLH1.

Ron

I am waiting for an interchangeable lens version of the XF. I have Canon prime lenses (300, 400 f2.8L IS) to use. People may say that 7*400 = 2800 and that is too much. However, there are situations where that would be the only solution. I have purposefully planned a project by 2011 Nov/Dec hoping for such a camera to be in place. If not, then I have to buy something else.