I'm thinking of getting a canon XL1s just because of it's reputation as a great camera. But i'm not sure what level the picture quality is at. Or if it's worth all that money. Also i'm not sure how all the other prosumer cameras measure up to the XL1s. And i've just heard that canon is about to release the XL2 so any advice on my future purchase would be appreciated. And if any of you guys have an XL1s i'd like to know if you think it's worth it or not and what kind of advantages it has over the other dv cameras.

heya,
the xl1s is a sweet camera! They have announced the xl2 and there are some great improvements. It also costs more. Cameras you didn't mention that you may want to look into is the Panasonic dvx100a and the Sony PD-170. They are all great cameras--you can't go wrong. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses. Personal preference will decide which camera is best for you.

Joren, I thought I'd ask you (or anyone who can help) here rather than make another topic.

Do you know if there is some way of adapting other camera lenses to fit the xl-1. Like, with photography lenses or whatever?

This will adapt cannon EOS lenses to the xl1. It should be mentioned that the auto focus and auto aperture won't work for the lenses.

This adapter, which is the talk of town, adapts so you can use 35mm motion camera lens'. This costs ten times what the above converter does.

thanks joren, i think i'm gonna go with the xl1s just because of it's open architecture. but if anyone else knows anything i'm open to suggestions

I dont want this to turn into a "The DVX is the best camera in the world" type thread but I must toss in my two cents.

At this point, unless it is simply a cost restraint thing I would NOT purchase an XL1s. The camera is simply had its day, and its passed. That isnt to say those who already own one dont have a solid little cam but purchasing one now would be a step in the wrong direction in IMO. Heres why.

The DVX for example has 24p capability (as well as 60i and 30p) in addition to the stellar color controls and "Cine-like gamma" The XL2 will also have 24p as well a some aray of gamma controls (just what they can do remains to be seen) The XL1s on the other hand shoot 60i or a veriation of 30p in "Movie Mode" *which looks terible BTW) and while it has a detachable lense, you have to ask yourself, "Are you going to purchase lenses for the camera?" If not, whats the use? Even the DVX can utilize 35mm lenses with a P+S telecine adapter (Which uses a rotating ground glass to create a larger imaging area, use the lenses and get 35mm DOF) The XL2 will also have said interchageable lense capabilities along with an updated 3CCD chip (the DVX has a newer one then the XL1s as well) Newer technology usually means better performance and picture.

Once again I will say, if it is just a matter of not ebing able to affored the DVX or XL2 then you may still wan to look into a GL2 or a Sony PD150. XL1's are notorious for shooting somewhat soft images, where the other two tend to give a cleaner image.

So there it is, for what it's worth. I used to use the XL1 and really enjoyed it. Now that I have a DVX, you could'nt pay me to use it. (WEll... maybe if you payed me)
R. Michael

ZuluCom-

It should be noted about those XL1 adapters that the Canon EOS solution multiplies the focal length of the lens by 7.2. In other words, your 25mm lens is now 180mm when slapped onto the xl1's 1/3" imaging plane. Not very useful for most dramatic applications.

The reason for the great expense of the Mini 35 adapter is that there is no magnification. The adapter contains its own 35mm ground glass, and the xl1 captures the image off of it. Expensive yes, but much more useful as well.

also, i've read that the EOS adapter for the xl1 makes ANY lens you put on it a telephoto lens. so you lose your wide angle characteristics because of the adapter.

i don't think that's anything to worry about when you're starting out, but it might come up right? yea.

I believe the XL1s is the most versatile of the cameras arround at the moment, yes including the DVX. I am not saying it is any better, but from sheer operability it is very easy for the true cinematographer who operates EVERYTHING manually to use, both on the spot (aka for doco and live shoots) and on set, where there is time to play arround.

Just my two cents for you

I do not mean to offend anybody by saying 'true cinematographer', however, camera manipulation is one of 'those' factors, that sets the pros and the amatuers appart.

that's what i was trying to get at with my post. you would lose some of your creatively technical choices if you bought the XL1 along with the adapter thinking you're going to use all the Canon EOS lenses with no change in quality or characteristics.

also, i think you video guys should stop worrying aobut the 24p thing.

from what i've read and gathered, the 24 frame standard for film had more to do wtih the physical capabilities of the people at the time than with anything else. it's not like has always been 24 frames anyway. it used to be a lot slower. 16=18.

30fps was just a limit of our electronic capability at the time, but obviously that isn't so much the case anymore.

if people are going to keep pushing for better images and better quality, we're going to get away from 24p, 30i, 60i and all that, and move on to higher refresh rates and pick the best of either progressive or interlaced as technology allows.

so in the end, video will look better than film, and we'll use that as a new standard, film will look like film, video will look like video.

i think you'd be better served if you just accepted the differences and used them to your advantage and focus more on your storytelling and filming techniques than what the technology is doing, or instead of trying to get something look like this or that.

i've never heard anyone say to someone else, ever, "you really captured that film look with that video camera". usually they ask "film or video" and once they get the answer, they go on to point out the mistakes you made in story, acting, editing, lighting, and everything else.