Canon XH-A1 really worth it?
 

Since I feel it’s time to slowly leave SD behind I have been doing a lot of research lately on HD camera’s. My original plan was to wait untill AG-HMC150 would come out to see if it’s price would fit my budget. I have been using a dvx100b the last weeks and I really enjoyed the camera, especially the controls and how precise they are. I also liked the big lcd screen which gave me quite accurate visual feedback on whitebalance or iris settings. Because the HMC150 looks like an HD upgrade to the dvx100 I guess it can only get better.

Thing is now that Canon is giving a 480 dollar (300 euro) cashback in Europe on the Canon XH-A1 which is no small change. It would make the camera at least 1500 dollar cheaper then any other HD camera in it’s class. (I took the prices from tape based and memory based camera’s which might not be right but to give an idea) That would make the Canon a real bargain.

Only, the cashback is just this month so I am forced to make a choice, thing is I don’t have a clue yet how much more expensive the HMC150 will be, I have to consider the extra cost of the memory cards as well but also don’t know what that will add on if I need about 4 hours worth of recording time. Another problem is the fact that Premiere cs3 doesn’t support avchd natively yet but I was considering buying a Blackmagic intensity pro card to solve that problem but that will also add up to the total costs. My guess would be that adding this all up the price difference might be 2500 dollar between the XH-A1 and HMC150

So I had a question to those Canon XH-A1 users out there, is the canon really worth giving up all the “benefits” memory cards camera’s have. We can’t deny the ease of use when the camera uses a memory card but I”m not sure if AVCHD is that superior to regular HDV.

I went to a shop yesterday which had the canon in stock so I could get to play around with it a bit, first thing I noticed was how tiny the flipout lcd was which I didn’t like but the control and feel was great, I really liked the big iris ring on the lens but couldn”t understand why they left that small iris ring on the side of the camera as it was difficult to reach and adjusting that was not smooth, not like the big ring on the lens. Although the focus ring was not as accurate as my dvx100 it felt quite allright. I was only worried that the small lcd will not give me the possibility to focus manually.

So, I don’t know what to do, I fear I might regret my decision buying a camera which already exists 2(?) years, I could add a firestore or something similar but I don’t have any experience with that and don’t know how reliable that is but the price difference at this moment would even enable me to buy an extra HV30 as back up cam.

Any thoughts?

If you've seen Blu-Ray, you were probably looking at AVCHD.

Don't understand that one, you can burn hdv or avchd to a blu-ray disk, beside the fact that the difference is mpeg2 or mpeg4 how would you recognize the difference on a blu-ray disk?

AVCHD is a couple steps below HDV as far as editing and such. I guess the question is what are you planning on using the camera for? IF you are planning on fun videos etc, then AVCHD is fine. If you are thinking of earning a partial living, plan at least for the lowest level to work with.....HDV or DVCPRO-HD.

I was looking at the Canon and went with JVC HD110 with Firestore drive because I'm more interested in narrative and commercial work. I couldn't care less about interlaced video. The canon has a fairly nice 24f simulated p format, but I wouldn't shoot on a time schedule with it. 2x the downconversion time and I don't think the 24f looked as good as the JVC 24p. I'm now using 24p even for sports video work as well since it makes nice DVD downconversion as well.

Regardless of Sony, Canon or JVC, if you get a HDV, get a Firestore Pro or a specific Firestore drive for your gear, including the Panasonic HVX200/HPX500. It's killer to shoot 10 hours of HD footage, get home, and transfer all 10 hours of footage in just over an hour to your home RAID or Firewire drives, or edit immeadietly off the firestore in the field with a laptop without capturing. I generally shoot about 3 hours of footage at a time, and it takes about 18 minutes to transfer to my RAID or Firewire 800 drive. Firewire 400 longer, and USB2 it takes forever no matter what anyone says... not enough bandwidth regardless of peak transfer rate.

For a friend who was shooting a pilot and now got a series for the Sportsman Channel and another network, I suggested the Panasonic HVX200 since it's DVCPRO-HD which was one of the minimum quality levels for source material they accepted.

No network will take work from AVCHD.. some MIGHT take up to 10% from AVCHD, but if you did I wouldn't let them know ahead of time... Some networks only allow up to 10% of material to be HDV as well, they often include Panasonic's HVX200's DVCPRO-HD in that group as well, since the lens and sensor isn't up to the standards of say a HPX-500 or a Sony Cinealta.


If you were using this for weddings on a regular basis, the editing might still bog you down. Find some AVCHD files and try editing them on your NLE and see what you think. If I were using AVCHD for anything I would probably capture via component or HDMI in a different format that would be easier to edit (less compressed) It wouldn't look better, but it would be a lot easier to deal with in a larger format.

If it was to record family fun weekends... well the AVCHD would be a wonderfull fun camera... That's the market it was designed for. Again, editing might be an issue, and plan on file import/export issues or capturing via a HD capture card.

You said you need 4 hours of recording time. That would be about $60 (USD) in tape cost. With tapeless, you've got several hundred dollars in costs for the cards. Plus, there's the workflow. You're going to have to either buy enough cards to get through a shoot until you have time to do the data transfers, or take a computer and backup drive on location.

Also, I've never felt it's a good idea to buy the first generation of a new camera. The XH A1 is more of a second generation, since the XL H1 was out a year before. It's also the best deal on the market in terms of cost versus value. And there are no problems editing HDV with most systems today. I edit the 24 frame progressive mode in FCP with no trouble at all.

If you're sold on the AVCHD format, then you might want to wait until the camera is on the market and has some user feedback and then compare the two.

Sorry, forget to tell, I do weddings and event video's, DVCPRO-HD camera's are outside my budget but not a firestore combined with the XH-A1.

This was just my problem, work with a bit older technologie but then combined with an additional firestore pro unit or go for the new tapeless technlologie. I don't care that much about the codec that is used, as long as it performs on all size lcd screens then it's ok for me.

I also have seen really good demo's here from XH-A1 users so I just wanted to hear from them what they think of the camera, and if it was worth every cent.

I wanted to get rid of tapes but since you mentioned how easy the firestore works that would be a good solution. AVCHD actually worries me a bit because it's not even natively supported by Premiere CS3 and needs a workaround solution.

Anyway, all thanks for the answers so far.

Noa,

Sorry, I'll try to explain further. AVCHD is one of the compression formats commonly used to create commercial (aka Hollywood) Blu-Ray discs. It is terrific as a finishing format when you give it adequate bit rate. It *CAN* operate at the 24 Mbps rate, but since most current uses have been on inexpensive camcorders, the bit rate has been kept low giving much longer recording time than similar Mpeg2 type recorders. The new Panasonic seems poised to use a much higher bitrate than previous AVCHD camcorders. This should let it record a signal far better than HDV in the same or smaller recording space.

AVCHD is far more efficient than HDV. At the same bitrate, it looks much cleaner. You can see this yourself by encoding some high end footage as either HDV or Mpeg4.

You can see the codec specs here:

http://www.avchd-info.org/format/index.html

and you can read a bit more about it on the Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD


Hope that clarifies what I was saying a bit.

Hey Noa,

I don't know anything about AVCHD and all that - but I do know I love my A1 cameras (I have two of them - one is in the hospital as you've already seen :(

The A1 LCD is a bit small I agree but I've found it easy enough to focus - even with 35mm adapters. The magnification and peaking features come in really handy.

Shooting weddings and eShoots with the A1s has been awesome - they're much easier to throw around than my old XL2.

As you've mentioned, it's always a compromise between the gear you'd love to have and your budget.

I originally wanted to get an XL-H1 but realised I could almost buy 3 A1s for the same price. Then I drooled for a while over the Sony EX1 footage and tapeless capture until adding up the pricetag and considered the workflow.

After much deliberation I ended up buying two A1s, a HV30 and a 35mm adapter for around the same money I could have spent on a single camera. My opinion is that I've gotten much better bang for my buck with that gear than having only one awesome camera.

The other thing I like about the A1 is the user and knowledge base that is available. There's so much info, experience and knowledge available on this forum it's amazing. Plus, transitioning from an SD to a HD workflow can be tricky enough without being on the bleeding edge of camera technology as well.

It's all about getting the most flexible setup for your money and as Chris Hurd said to me in this thread - http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=120315 - "If you're waiting, you're not creating."

That's my 2 cents for what it's worth - hope that helps.

Cheers,

Matthew.

I've been very happy with my XH A1. Originally I bought it for shooting a big documentary, but now I use it professionally too. In the past I was shooting with a DSR500. The footage I'm shooting now in HDV looks better than the camera that, with lens, cost about 8 times as much as the XH A1.

Before buying the XH A1, I looked first at the HVX200, and I really liked that camera but the tapeless workflow wouldn't work for me; I shoot way too much footage to deal with that, and most of the time under circumstances where I couldn't have another person and computer/data management setup on location. Then I checked out the Sony Z1, which I liked a lot and was within a few days of ordering when I read about the XH A1. I was in a situation where I could wait a month before I really needed the camera. After seeing footage and then checking out the camera in person, I was sold. The two main features I like over the Z1 are the lens and the 24p capability, although the Sony has its own positive features too.

Yup the XH A1 is worth it. After shooting hundreds of hours on it and getting to know it's idiosyncracies, I'd buy another one. And the tape workflow still has a lot of positives for me. 4:2:2 recording is the main feature that would make me upgrade to another camcorder.

Curious hearing about people's thoughts on tapeless workflows. I essentially left tape because I was filming 4-8 hour conferences for archival purposes. There is nothing like interrupting a statewide meeting 5-7 times for "tape changes". So I bought a Firestore Pro. I shot the firestore with tape backup for about 3 months, then abandoned tape completely. You couldn't pay me to go back to it.

In regards to 4:2:2 being a reason to leave, don't most of the new prosumer cameras have 4:2:2?

I think it's worth it, but then I own one. What sold me on my purchase were the large number of positive reviews and the overall value for money spent. After 9 months with mine I still feel the same way.

When you compare the XH A1 with other cameras with comparable features the A1 falls a bit short. Things like one-at-a-time function control with the lens rings, controls that need dedicated dials which are buried within menus, no capability to use the on-board mic and XLR connections simultaneously, no simultaneous mic and line XLR inputs. There are more, but these thing are mostly niggles.

Once you factor in the price compared with those other cameras from Panny, Sony and the like, the A1 comes up looking pretty sweet.

Now, if Canon could only figure out how to write a decent manual.

Color sampling is a function of the compression routine used when recording. All HDV is MPG-2, which is by definition 4:2:0.

Understood, but I wasn't speaking about cameras that record HDV. It seems that the current trend in prosumer cameras is away from HDV, and toward XDCam/DVCProHD/AVCHD/etc.

I think the bell is tolling for HDV.

Tapeless Comment:
I could never understand why ppl want to strap another piece of equipment on their camera. Like the wireless receiver, external mic, light and 10 pound battery pack isn't enough, you'd like to add a firestone. You'd also be taking a chance without shoot tape as your back up, so its not like your going to be saving money. Sure its a pain capturing tapes, but it seems like its not worth it unless your shooting stationary.

HD Comment:
If your clients aren't asking for HD or your not going to get paid more money then why would you upgrade? Take into account the additional money to upgrade your editing system to handle HD. I can't imagine you'd shoot a wedding with only one camera so you'll have to buy at least two hd cameras. All in all a very expensive proposition.

Not that it really matters, but that has nothing to do with the iris. That small wheel has multi-functions, the main being it's a shutter wheel.

My thoughts on the A1... it IS and will be the "best bang for the buck", & will continue to be for quite a while.

HDV & AVCHD specs are 4:2:0. Only DVCPro HD is 4:2:2. Sony's only 4:2:2 XDCAM camera costs US$30,000 and that's before you start looking at US$50,000+ lenses to go with it. Scarlet is on the radar and I really hope it pans out. Or if Convergent Design's nanoFlash CF recorder works, I will upgrade to the Canon XH G1 so I can take advantage of it.

But, for me, if I were buying today, I think the XH A1 is still the one to get and will be for a long, long while.

Untrue. The EX1 also outputs 4:2:2. And the EX3 does also, as well as offering interchangeable lenses.

If that bell was tolling, I doubt the industry would keep supporting and upgrading the HDV hardware & software but that's what is happening. Canon has the new XH model, Final Cut Pro support for HDV is better than ever, heck our Sony HDCAM deck even has an HDV input on it. With several years to prove itself now, HDV is more viable than ever for broadcast level production and from a business standpoint, it seems like a no brainer to choose "proven" over "bleeding edge".

Well, I don't know. On the consumer end, I can still walk in and buy a VHS recorder and blank tapes. Obviously there is a massive established base of tapes out there. But we all know that the days of video tape are nearly over in favor of optical media.

I do agree that HDV has improved markedly since it's inception. And perhaps it has a several more years of life in it. I also agree that HDV will find support for some time, but I suspect it will be more from historical need, than forward moving.

I may well be wrong about this, and that's ok. It's just my feeling and opinion. :)

Thank you all for the answers so far, it has really been helpful for me.

Thank you for clearing that up Bill, in that way it would make more sense indeed.

Well, I wanted to switch to HD last year but since nobody asked for it I decided to wait, this year I have seen a large switch to (big) LCD screens, nearly every new client I get has one and I have seen quite a few Playstation 3 so they can play blu ray disks.
This year is also the first time ever I got 2 complaints of my footage not being sharp and ofcourse those 2 clients had very big lcd screens. There was nothing wrong with my footage, but I have seen many different image qualities from lcd's if you display regular dvd's that this will be a problem that will occur more in the future.
Only thing I can do now is tell that their lcd is actually designed for a blu-ray system and not for a regular dvd.
I want to be able now to tell my clients this upfront about the pros and cons and offer them an upgrade package to HD so that they will be getting a blu-ray disk. If they don't care or don't want to spend the extra cash I'll deliver in SD but I will be sure I won't get any complaints afterwards.
The tv companies have also started to push HD broadcast (in Belgium) as of this year and I'm sure once clients see the difference they will be expecting a videographer to deliver the same.
This might occur much sooner then we expect and I want to be ready when that happens so I can stay competitive.

Another big advantage I see to switching to HD now is that I also have clients who want their film displayed on the internet (a promotional video for a company f.i.) and from what I have seen on vimeo HD display is superior to what I deliver now in DV. You can get a quite big display which feels like looking through a window. My demo's on my site are converted to flash and they look OK but I know that with the available resolution of HD the difference wouldn't go unnoticed.

The XH-A1 gives indeed the best bang for the buck which was the reason why I had some doubts now because of their cashback action this month. I also know that every new model that is available or will come out will be much more expensive and will give more headache trying to implement new technologies.
"If you're waiting, you're not creating." is true matthew but it can also mean "If you're waiting, you're not not loosing any money." :)

Yep, that is true too.

Timing has a lot to do with it as well.

It's tough to pick when clients if our respective areas are going to start wanting HD. I decided to be ahead of the curve in my area and start shooting in HD but still deliver in SD. That way I get a handle on the workflow so that when clients want it I'm ready. Plus, I wanted to enjoy the creative benefits of shooting and editing in HD.

It's different for everyone. Sounds like you're being smart about it.

Gotta get Scarlet
 

Noa,

If you can wait 6 months RED are bringing out Scarlet, and at about the same price as the XH-A1 (US$3k), I think it's a no brainer. I've got 2 XH-G1s and they're great but I'll be upgrading to Scarlets ASAP (I can get 2 Scarlets for 1 XH-G1 and get 3K resolution Vs 1080 etc etc). See the specs: www.red.com

It might not be for you, but there's no way I'd be investing in HD (1080) technology at this point when RED have shown they've got the goods in the Red One, and Scarlet...

Just my 2c worth...

Does the price of the scarlet include the lens? I have read a bit about red camera's but always thought they were actually cinema camera's. The scarlet looks really weird though, I wonder how it handles in a run and gun situation? These handles on the side make it look like a hasselblad camera but it doesn't look very convenient to manualy controll focus, iris and such when you have to do all that in realtime.

It only outputs 4:2:2 through the HD-SDI port, which is exciting if you're using it with Convergent Design's un-released portable nanoFlash recorder. Otherwise, if you're shooting to the card, it's 4:2:0.

hi, just my quick thoughts, I have 2 canon xh-a1s and film weddings, stage shows etc
the one problem i have is focus..even using peaking ive sometimes found the focus slightly soft..bearing in mind event filming often means LOW light so shallow d of f combined with hdvs critical focus means im not always spot on(even when i think i am).
you also cant use peaking and zebra at same time and you cant focus/zoom same time so i cant film ice skating (keeps the vx2100 in use)also forget magnify because you cant record with that on.so if you rely on zebra for exposure you cant then use peaking to confirm focus...
so imho is the canon xha1 the best event camera...maybe not..
thats the negatives..
the positives..for the price it gives fantastic hdv pictures.even downconverted to sd everyone compliments the colours and sharpness..tapes relatively cheap..low light is actualy not bad compared to my old vx2100.
25p filming is also very good.(my prefered choice)
auto focus is ok but not as good as vx2100.(dont use it unless i have to)
having transfered the hdv to bluray and watched on a large plasma it looks great.
so if you can live with or get used to its faults..very good camera
would i buy another....prob not, need better lcd so i can focus without peaking and want to focus / zoom at same time.
hope this helps.
john

Thanks a lot john, that was what worried me about the tiny lcd, it's about the same size of the vx2100 which I always found too small (I also have a vx2100) but once you get used to the dvx100 lcd...

So, not sure if I get this right but I hope you can adjust the iris and the focus on the lens and maintain zoom capabilities on the handle of the camera and have the zebra showing on the lcd or viewfinder?

Also about the focus, does the camera not have a "one push focus button" if you are in manual mode and does it focus accurately then?

I'm no guru on the Red cameras but took a quick look at the lenses on www.red.com - they're pretty expensive - like $6k plus expensive.

Just to clarify, but comparing Blu-Ray MEPG2 vs Blu-Ray AVC doesn't necessarily translate to camcorder comparisons with said codecs. AVC movie files for Blu-Ray distribution are typically encoded by extremely powerful hardware/software systems that have been highly refined and developed for several years now to maximize the codecs strengths. Additionally, the compression is overseen by a compressionist that reviews the encode and manually adjusts settings and re-encodes portions of the video as necessary to ensure the highest quality product. Under this scenario, AVC (and VC1) offer major improvements over MEPG2 and at substantially reduced file sizes.

Now on the camcorder front AVC hasn't been as fortunate. The real-time hardware encoders have so far *not* managed to equal HDV, even at 14-17mbps. The issue is of course not the codec, but the encoding hardware. Its gotten better of course as new generations of encoders have been developed, but so far the best consumer HDV cams still produce better video than AVCHD cams.

I'm excited by Panasonic's new cam and am looking forward to seeing (finally) full 24mbps AVCHD. Assuming they've developed a solid real-time encoder their video should be as crisp and detailed as HDV but with a very clean image and less artifacts. Pans and items in motion will likely retain more rez as well (IMO the MPEG2 encoders soften these sorts of images to help with encoding - a great trick actually since our eyes perceive less detail in moving objects). Of course at the end of the day we're still dealing with 8bit 4:2:0 video, so people that are expecting 24mbps AVCHD to look twice as good as the best HDV might be in for a bit of a let down.


As for the OP's questions, I personally feel that the XH-A1 isn't the best camcorder in the prosumer HD class, but it absolutely is the best bang for the buck. The HVX200a, some of the new Sonys and presumably the upcoming AVCHD model from Panasonic are technically all upgrades over the XH-A1 in features and/or video quality (and some might even debate that). But where the rubber hits the road - your client watching your footage - the XH-A1 can hang with all of them. Considering the A1 costs as little as half of what some of its competitors do, that's pretty amazing. Or put this way, if a client isn't happy with a project, you will *not* be able to blame the XH-A1; its at the quality level where your creativity and ability are 95% of your product, with the A1 easily padding in the final 5%.


Now if you're not in a hurry to buy a camcorder and you can make due with an 8X lens... the Scarlet *is* looking to be a very interesting contender for around $3,000. By all accounts the RED compression should make MEPG2 and AVCHD both look silly. As much as I love my XH-A1, I'm considering selling it and putting the proceeds towards the Scarlet. I just don't have time to get out there and do wedding gigs and event videography like I want to and the Scarlet would likely fit my creative personal projects better.

Noa,

The A1 has an 'instant focus' button - although I must be honest and say I haven't used it yet.

Cheers,

Matthew.

Not only that but it has lenses that look like they have the same characteristics as a regular photolens and if you want a lens that has an equivalent of the wide and tele of a regular cam you would need to buy 3 lenses, the 18-50, 50-150 and 300mm which would add the sum up to 20.000? or am I seeing this wrong?

The Scarlet should come to market at around $3,000 per Mr. Jannard http://www.scarletuser.com/showpost....9&postcount=30

Considering the dollar and inflation lately, I suppose I'm going to just assume a $3,500 price point and keep my fingers crossed for a lower point.

Scarlet will apparently work "out of the box". I believe the only accessory necessary to actually begin recording are CF cards. Of course one will want external mics, perhaps a larger LCD, extra batteries, etc... all the stuff we want for our HD cams anyway.

the instant auto focus button does work ok, better in 50i than 25p but tbh if you have to rely on that rather than your sight, something is wrong and its slower.
you can up the sharpness of the lcd and use it in black and white which helps however
the camera would be soo much better just with an upgrade to the lcd.
I recently spent six nights filming dance shows and sometimes cursed the lcd because of the focus..to get round the lack of zebra(as i was using peaking) i ran in spotlight mode..
now that is very effective ..almost faultless over the six nights zero noise in the blacks( to my eye) and great exposure on the faces under the hot spots.
i wished i had an ex1 because of the great lcd until the last 2 nights when strobes were used extensively during some dance routines and then the cmos partial exposures would have concerned me.
so prob no camera is perfect but the results were first class (well i think so) just shame that one or two extreem close up shots of singers were ruined by soft focus, which looked fine on the lcd but not on the 24 inch monitor!

It better include the lens given that the Scarlet lens is not removable.
Consequently the lens range that applies to the RED One doesn't apply to Scarlet.
The best Scarlet can hope for is a wide and telephoto adapter.
Or an external 35mm adapter setup.

Excellent post Phillip.

You are of course correct that the AVC Encoding of Blu-Ray is done with very sophisticated hardware and under supervision of a professional. And yet, some transfers still do come across all that well. That said, as you noted, the fault doesn't lie with the codec necessarily on the camera end. I am willing to bet that with the increased bandwidth of ~24Mbps like in the upcoming Panasonic, things will begin to look better and better. Perhaps not twice as good as the now mature HDV though as you said.

I think the 4:2:0 video issue has been blown out of proportion to a degree. I was very concerned about this decision with the EX1. But it seems that with the true 1080 imagers, the 4:2:0 sampling is just not that big a deal. I am referencing the testing done by Adam Wilt and others, and I am referencing what I am seeing out of my own camera.

In regards to RED's wavelet compression scheme, yes, it can look fantastic. But I've not heard whether Scarlet is indeed going to offer the same RED Raw codec out of Scarlet, or if they are going to do something else. The potential Scarlet buyer may not have the resources to push around a 3k 4:4:4 image on their editing workstation. And that workflow for RED files is going to need quite a lot of polish before I'd be comfortable recommending Scarlet to the average Joe debating a Sony or a Canon, or a Scarlet. At this point, you can even use RED native files outside FCP. I'm using RedCine as an intermediate step, but processing even 5 minutes of RED Raw into lossless quicktime takes a WHILE. Scarlet is exciting, but no panacea to the common shooter. I still want one though! :)

-P

That was my first impression as well when I looked at the camera, I question if it really will be used by f.i. wedding videographers , just take a look at the option list which is available for the other red models were the side and top handles alone cost 650 dollar, if you want to have all necessary options there's not much left of the promised 3000 dollar price. A viewfinder only costs almost as much as a canon xh-a1!
I mean, were are the controls on this camera if you need them in run/gun situations, beside the focus ring on the lens the camera doesn't seem to have the manual controls "regular" camera's have on the side of the camera. The red actually looks like a Borg ship (for those that are familiar with Star-Trek) :)
Does this camera require you to go inside the menu to adjust settings?

This is why it's a good idea to wait till a camera is on the market and in reasonable use by others before you buy one. You don't want to be like all those people who stood in line for hours and hours for the new iPhone only to find out they couldn't activate it on the day they bought it. Patience is a virtue when it comes to anything electronic.

Scarlet really isn't geared towards the wedding or event videographer IMO, I think the 8X lens alone kills that. As for accessories, well, to each their own. Personally, if I can get my hands on one I'll just use the same tripod and Spiderbrace I've been using with my XH-A1 :) Obviously while RED offers all sorts of nice (and likely high markup) items, they're certainly not prerequisites to shooting.

Benjamin:

If you read the Canon interview at NAB (somewhere on this site) where they introduced the H1s, you will see that the bell most certainly is tolling for HDV for Canon and other mfgs.

However, Canon realizes that without NLE support, a new codec won't fly. But I don't see see why future NLEs should have a problem digesting multiple codecs. NLE software is following Moores law almost as fast as hardware, although there was a huge initial lag (remember editing HDV in 2004?).