Canon XH-A1 or XL-H1A???

A

aburke09

I'm looking to buy either the Canon XH-A1 or the XL-H1A. I think the only difference between the two is the XL has the interchangeable Lens system and its about 2,000 more than the XH.

Im looking to film good quality films, not youtube quality. and i dont plan on using this for birthdays or weddings. I want to know how important it is now to have an interchangeable lens system. If i go with the XH, how easy/cheap is it to use an adapter for other size lenses?

Please help, i'm going nuts trying to decide which one to buy. Thanks!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
It seems like you need to answer your own question.

I own the XH-A1, chosen because of price vs. capabilities, and am very happy with my choice. Canon makes great optics, even when they're permanently attached. I just used it to shoot an HD feature that looks magnificent.

On the other hand, if you can afford to buy a camera with a lens mount and lenses (keep in mind that your cost will be more than $2000 additional if you're going to purchase primes -- unless you already own them, of course) why not go that way?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
so if i were to buy the XHA1, and i want the footage to look as close to 35mm as possible. what would i need? a 35mm adapter?

if yall had 5 grand, what camera would you buy, and what accessories to make it look like 35mm film???
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
aburke09 said:
so if i were to buy the XHA1, and i want the footage to look as close to 35mm as possible. what would i need? a 35mm adapter?
Click to expand...
You're going to need more than a video camera and lens
adaptor to get the look of 35mm film. But that camera
and a 35mm adaptor will get you closer, if that's what's
most important to you.

if yall had 5 grand, what camera would you buy, and what accessories to make it look like 35mm film???
Click to expand...

I would (and did) buy the JVC HM100, a Sennheiser ME66, a
boom and a Lowell/Omni light kit. That, in itself, won't make
your movie look like 35mm film - but that's not really what's
important. If you have an excellent script, great actors, perfect
audio and editing that will be MUCH more important than
looking like 35mm film.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay, I'm stumped. What the heck is a 35mm adapter for the XH-A1? Are we talking 35mm film or 35mm lens, aburke09? One refers to the width of the film stock, the other to the length of a prime lens.

If you mean a screw-on wide-angle adapter for the A1, I fail to see how that will make your footage look like 35mm film. The A1 already has a pretty wide angle setting on it's zoom. Adding even more would distort the image, which I suppose is fine if you're going for that early Peter Jackson/Sam Raimi look, but it hardly screams "35mm film".

A good lens is a good lens. If you can afford a camera with a universal lens mount and a set of good quality prime lenses to go with it, then that obviously is the way to go. You'll nearly always get a little bit crisper image with a prime versus a zoom. Just make sure you have enough left over to get everything else you need, like directorik listed above.

That isn't going to make it look like 35mm film, though. In fact, nothing will make video footage look like 35mm film, IMHO. It's like painting an orange the color red in order to make it look like an apple; it doesn't look like an apple, just an orange painted red. The best you can hope for is to make the video look less like video.

Technically, there are a number of steps you can take to do this:

1. Light and shoot "film-style". If you don't know what this means I can't explain it here, but I'm sure there are plenty of books/web sites about it.

2. Record your footage in HD at 24p (or 24f with the XH-A1). This introduces a 2:3 pulldown which mimics the 24fps film rate to 30fps video standard used when film is transferred to video. You're actually lowering the quality of the footage in order to give the impression of higher quality -- ironic, eh?

3. In post, increase your contrast and decrease your saturation.

Again, will this look like 35mm film? Nope. But it will look less like video.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
2001 Productions said:
Okay, I'm stumped. What the heck is a 35mm adapter for the XH-A1? Are we talking 35mm film or 35mm lens, aburke09? One refers to the width of the film stock, the other to the length of a prime lens.

If you mean a screw-on wide-angle adapter for the A1, I fail to see how that will make your footage look like 35mm film. The A1 already has a pretty wide angle setting on it's zoom. Adding even more would distort the image, which I suppose is fine if you're going for that early Peter Jackson/Sam Raimi look, but it hardly screams "35mm film".

A good lens is a good lens. If you can afford a camera with a universal lens mount and a set of good quality prime lenses to go with it, then that obviously is the way to go. You'll nearly always get a little bit crisper image with a prime versus a zoom. Just make sure you have enough left over to get everything else you need, like directorik listed above.

That isn't going to make it look like 35mm film, though. In fact, nothing will make video footage look like 35mm film, IMHO. It's like painting an orange the color red in order to make it look like an apple; it doesn't look like an apple, just an orange painted red. The best you can hope for is to make the video look less like video.

Technically, there are a number of steps you can take to do this:

1. Light and shoot "film-style". If you don't know what this means I can't explain it here, but I'm sure there are plenty of books/web sites about it.

2. Record your footage in HD at 24p (or 24f with the XH-A1). This introduces a 2:3 pulldown which mimics the 24fps film rate to 30fps video standard used when film is transferred to video. You're actually lowering the quality of the footage in order to give the impression of higher quality -- ironic, eh?

3. In post, increase your contrast and decrease your saturation.

Again, will this look like 35mm film? Nope. But it will look less like video.
Click to expand...

I went down the 35mm adapter info trail a while back.. check out...

http://kerrymedianetwork.wordpress.com/2008/06/14/letus-extreme-35mm-adapter/
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's pretty wild. Never knew there was such a thing. Thanks for that.

Seems a little cumbersome, though. Easier to just get a lens-mountable camera in the first place, if you've got the money.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
2001 Productions said:
That's pretty wild. Never knew there was such a thing. Thanks for that.

Seems a little cumbersome, though. Easier to just get a lens-mountable camera in the first place, if you've got the money.
Click to expand...

There is an entire subculture on DIY 35mm adapters. Everything from a couple of lens caps and a piece of saran wrap, to DIY projects that rival the Letuce in the link above....very cool
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
2001 Productions said:
That's pretty wild. Never knew there was such a thing. Thanks for that.

Seems a little cumbersome, though. Easier to just get a lens-mountable camera in the first place, if you've got the money.
Click to expand...

With just about any camera with a retail <$10K you won't get the lauded and currently somewhat over-used DOF characteristics on an interchangeable lens video cam that you do with the adapters.

This is my understanding of adapters, anyone with more knowledge please school me. :D

People get confused on the definition of "35mm film look" because when someone says that what they really mean is "This device will give you the same depth of field characteristics for a given focal length at a given aperture that you will get on a 35mm film camera." It's about film plane size (sensor size). Video camera sensors are generally pretty small and that effects the ability of the operator to manipulate DoF.

Adapters insert a film plane that is the same size as a 35mm frame between the lens and the camera, thus altering the effective DoF options available to the operator.

Red Rock sells instructions + ground glass for making your own adapter for ~$60. Of course you then need to purchase rings for lens mount side and the camera side, I think.

Cumbersome? :yes:
Neat? :yes:

Is it going to automatically make your video look like film? :no:
Is it going to make your movie better just by being connected? :no:

Edit: Interesting video. Did not know about the f5.6 limitation on these.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
so is it easier to use the 35mm adapter with an interchangeable lens system or does it not matter?
can the adapter hook up to the xl-h1a BODY and then attatch the lens to the adapter? or am i fucked and need to buy an extra lens either way?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
The adaptor is needed on a fixed lens camera. You use
the adaptor to add a different (and better) lens in front
of the fixed lens. with an interchangeable lens mount
you don't need to put that better lens in front of the
fixed lens. You remove the stock lens and put on a
better one.

In a way, you are fucked. Because the entire point of the
adapter - and a camera with a removable lens - is to use
an "extra" lens. Good lenses - like Primes - can cost more
than the camera. To get the depth of field most people
mean when they talk about the "film look" comes from a
high end lens. Weather you put that lens in front of a
fixed lens camera using an adaptor, or directly on the body
of the camera with a removable lens, you are fucked and
need to buy (or rent) an extra lens.

When I shoot a feature using my JVC HM700 I rent a set
of DigiPrimes which can run upwards of $8,000 each. I
rented a $40,000 HD zoom lens once - I couldn't afford
to buy that lens.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
but wait, if i am reading correctly then your saying that the adapter is useless. and that a better lens is what creates the better DOP/film look, not a 35mm adapter? if that is what your saying, then what does the 35mm adapter do??
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
With a XL-H1A and a P+S Technik Mini 35 setup, the Mini 35 holds the prime lens and that prime projects an image on a moving "screen" in the Mini 35. between the Mini 35 and the Xl-H1A is a lens that projects the image on the screen in the Mini 35 on to the CCDs in the XL-H1A.
I know that it sounds strange but that is how it works. Once you see and use one you can understand how they work. There is some light loss with wny 35 mm adaptor but it is small price to pay of the look that an adaptor can give you. And you will be using light anyway.
With bigger CCD and CMOS chips will come the day when 35 mm adaptors will not be needed. Its stange working with a $8,000 camera and a $10,000 Mini 35 with a $40,000 to $120,000 prime. Some days we get to "play" with some really cool tools.

Terry
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
So if I want to use a 35mm adapter, either the redrock or letus. Which camera would it be easier/cheaper to attatch to. The XH-A1 with a fixed lens or the Xl-H1A with interchangeable lens system. Or does it matter??? and I'm a little slow but i'll need another lens either way, right???
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
aburke09 said:
So if I want to use a 35mm adapter, either the redrock or letus. Which camera would it be easier/cheaper to attatch to. The XH-A1 with a fixed lens or the Xl-H1A with interchangeable lens system. Or does it matter??? and I'm a little slow but i'll need another lens either way, right???
Click to expand...
Either way, you will need another lens.
camerawletus.jpg


On one hand it's cheaper to have a camera with a lens mount than a fixed lens.
No need for the adaptor - you save money right there. You take off the stock
lens and put on a better lens. But as you know, a camera body with a lens
mount in more expensive than a camera with a fixed lens. So you can buy a
camera with a fixed lens, an adaptor and a lens to put on the adaptor. If the
fixed lens camera and adaptor is cheaper than the camera with the removable
lens then that will be the cheaper way. My one time using a lens adaptor I
found it confusing so I'm not going to call it the easier way. But they clearly
work and work well.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
aburke09 said:
if yall had 5 grand, what camera would you buy, and what accessories to make it look like 35mm film???
Click to expand...

This hasn't been mentioned yet, so I'll throw it out there. You should consider the Canon 7D. The body is $1800. For your budget, you get the camera, a decent lens, and some nice accessories. It's a great setup for narrative filmmaking. It shoots 1080/24p, has a 35mm size sensor (for the DOF you're looking for), shoots to cards, and has full manual controls.

Look on Vimeo for examples of films made with this camera. Here's mine: http://vimeo.com/8145618
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top