Fs100 vs Canon xf100/300 at DVinfo.net

Gerald OConnor · June 13th, 2011, 08:46 AM

I know there is a bunch of differance's between these but is there a major differance in Picture Quility. Would the fs100 be better because of the changeable lens.

Brian Drysdale · June 13th, 2011, 09:07 AM

It really depends on what you want to use the camera for.

The Canon cameras have a better recording codec and the resolution of the XF300 is impressive and is accepted by HD broadcasters like the BBC as meeting their HD specs. It's the quality of the XF300 zoom lens allows it ti be accepted by the broadcasters.The FS 100 would need an extremal recorder to be accepted and may possibly be in the Panasonic AF 100 case by case situation.

The FS100 is intended to outperform the DSLRs and if you want a shallow DOF and/or to shoot in very low light levels the FS100 will meet your needs. The major difference in pictures would be the large sensor "look" and the sensitivity. Also, if you need to use prime lenses for your productions, zoom lenses are a bit more problematic on the large sensor cameras and can be expensive, unless you're happy with varifocal stills camera zooms.

If that's not important, but you want to shoot low budget broadcast HD, without needing accessories like Nanoflash etc, the XF300 would be the business. Something even more compact, but not needing broadcaster considerations the XF100.

Alister Chapman · June 13th, 2011, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

It's the quality of the XF300 zoom lens allows it ti be accepted by the broadcasters.

Uh, no, the lens has little to do with it's acceptance. It is the codec and relatively low noise for a 1/3" camcorder that got the 305 it's BBC approval. Then lens is OK, but not why it was approved.

Brian Drysdale · June 13th, 2011, 04:39 PM

Indeed, it's the combination of these 3 items. The lens was mentioned because of the interchangeable lens aspect in the question. It was also an item which Alan Roberts found to be better than he expected.

Gerald OConnor · June 14th, 2011, 06:40 AM

Thanks guys I'll use this info, for my second camera hopefully soon.

Glen Vandermolen · June 23rd, 2011, 05:46 PM

I have the XF305. I really like the camera, the images are beautiful.
I am considering getting the FS100, but I'm trying to decide if I have to sell my XF to get one. I prefer not to, I'd rather have both, but I don't need both.
I like playing with my VG10, so the FS100 is very intriguing. I love playing with the depth of field.

June 13th, 2011, 08:46 AM	#1
Gerald OConnor Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Princeton MA Posts: 142	Fs100 vs Canon xf100/300 I know there is a bunch of differance's between these but is there a major differance in Picture Quility. Would the fs100 be better because of the changeable lens.

June 13th, 2011, 09:07 AM	#2
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,143	Re: Fs100 vs Canon xf100/300 It really depends on what you want to use the camera for. The Canon cameras have a better recording codec and the resolution of the XF300 is impressive and is accepted by HD broadcasters like the BBC as meeting their HD specs. It's the quality of the XF300 zoom lens allows it ti be accepted by the broadcasters.The FS 100 would need an extremal recorder to be accepted and may possibly be in the Panasonic AF 100 case by case situation. The FS100 is intended to outperform the DSLRs and if you want a shallow DOF and/or to shoot in very low light levels the FS100 will meet your needs. The major difference in pictures would be the large sensor "look" and the sensitivity. Also, if you need to use prime lenses for your productions, zoom lenses are a bit more problematic on the large sensor cameras and can be expensive, unless you're happy with varifocal stills camera zooms. If that's not important, but you want to shoot low budget broadcast HD, without needing accessories like Nanoflash etc, the XF300 would be the business. Something even more compact, but not needing broadcaster considerations the XF100.

June 13th, 2011, 04:39 PM	#4
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,143	Re: Fs100 vs Canon xf100/300 Indeed, it's the combination of these 3 items. The lens was mentioned because of the interchangeable lens aspect in the question. It was also an item which Alan Roberts found to be better than he expected.

June 14th, 2011, 06:40 AM	#5
Gerald OConnor Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Princeton MA Posts: 142	Re: Fs100 vs Canon xf100/300 Thanks guys I'll use this info, for my second camera hopefully soon.

June 23rd, 2011, 05:46 PM	#6
Glen Vandermolen Space Hipster Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 1,596	Re: Fs100 vs Canon xf100/300 I have the XF305. I really like the camera, the images are beautiful. I am considering getting the FS100, but I'm trying to decide if I have to sell my XF to get one. I prefer not to, I'd rather have both, but I don't need both. I like playing with my VG10, so the FS100 is very intriguing. I love playing with the depth of field.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search