EX1R or XF300

For my new camera my research seems to bring me back to the Sony EX1R as being about right for what I am after. Then I had a look at the Canon XF300 and it has made me a bit undecided.

Two reasons why the Canon appeals, though I'm not sure how big a deal each is.
1) Uses CF cards so way cheaper than SxS on the Sony. The SDHC adaptor for the Sony might work as a lot of what I have read seems to indicate very little issues using the adaptor.
2) Canon support. I am a current Gold level CPN member and as such get very fast repair and service.

I notice that Sony is doing a promoting for a free copy of Vegas 10 which would go down well with starting me new business. One less thing to buy.

Anyone got hands on experience of the difference between the EX1R and XF300? At only about £300-400 difference it's quite hard to choose.

Andy S
 
The XF300 is pretty new. I have only seen a couple samples from their 4:2:2 50mbit codec and it looks pretty nice. (Canon, why is this not in some of your *other* cameras, hint hint). On paper the Canon has a superior codec to the Sony, although I would really have to dig through the specs to find other significant points of difference. I've never experienced their new codec in a post workflow, but I know Sony's works without a hitch. I imagine the new Canon MXF wrapper is just fine though.

Free Vegas, meh. Great program, but that is kind of like buying one of those VW Jetta's a few years ago because it came with a free bike. :lol: Get the camera you are most into, regardless of the purchase spiffs.

I am a firm believer in leveraging existing assets and rewarding vendors that treat you right. If you are already a happy Canon customer (and carrying a paid support plan or some such) then see if a local shop will let you test drive the 300. If you enjoy working with it, go for it.
 
I am a firm believer in leveraging existing assets and rewarding vendors that treat you right. If you are already a happy Canon customer (and carrying a paid support plan or some such) then see if a local shop will let you test drive the 300. If you enjoy working with it, go for it.
Good point. I know when the brought out the 1DmkIV they let CPN members test one free of charge. They might do the same with the XF300.
What are the major differences to the XF300 and 305 other than the SD HDI connection. SD HDI is not an issue for me.

How much difference is there likely to be between the EX1R and XF300 in low light given the smaller sensor of the XF300? Being a photographer smaller sensor is usually a big no go for low light but maybe it's different with this.
 
Good point. I know when the brought out the 1DmkIV they let CPN members test one free of charge. They might do the same with the XF300.
What are the major differences to the XF300 and 305 other than the SD HDI connection. SD HDI is not an issue for me.

How much difference is there likely to be between the EX1R and XF300 in low light given the smaller sensor of the XF300? Being a photographer smaller sensor is usually a big no go for low light but maybe it's different with this.

Interesting questions, I'd have to scour the specs page to see if there are bigger differences between the 300 and 305, but I bet the HD-SDI connection is the major difference. EX1r has one of those, fwiw.

Let me get back to you on the low light thing. Can't believe I didn't notice the difference in sensor size. My gut feeling is that you're on the right track there. I don't generally run the EX1r without some amount of lighting, so not much practical experience. I can say that we run it at -3db gain as much as humanly possible. Anything greater than 0 gain on the Sony starts to look pretty ugly, IMHO.

Edit: I'm not sure the low light performance can be answered on paper. They pump the settings to completely unreasonable territory to give their min illumination spec. Sort of useless. Have you had any luck looking for test footage from the XF300? Here are the digits anyway:

Canon:
Full AUTO mode: 4.5 lux (Shutter speed 1/60, Gain +21dB); Manual mode: 0.8 lux (Shutter speed 1/4, Gain +33dB), (when 60i is selected)

Sony:

0.14 lx (typical) (1920 x 1080/59.94i mode, F1.9, +18 dB gain, with 64-frame accumulation)

Like anyone is going run 33db of gain. :lol:

Last edit, I promise. :D

The only difference between the 300/305 that I can discern is in fact Gen-lock in (bnc), Time-code in/out (bnc), and HD-SDI out (bnc). If you are certain never to need those three things, then save the $1300usd difference in msrp. LD

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consu...61258&compare=0901e0248012fbaf&pageKeyCode=65

I'd really love to see these side by side. Sony seems to have more latitude in the sensor, while Canon will keep more of it in the 4:2:2 50mbit codec.
 
Last edited:
I'll see what I can find for actual test footage. I did see some but it looked like a pretty poorly done test.

The other thing I am seeing a lot is people saying how good the 422 50Mbps codec is in the XF300 and the fact that it is BBC approved. As I want to produce my own things and I am fine with good HD quality rather than needing something that is cutting edge and will wow the BBC then maybe it's not really a big issue for me.
 
Just searched briefly on vimeo and found this:

http://vimeo.com/12946529

About to watch it. I'd say the codec is the Canon's strength. 'BBC approved' may seem pie in the sky for the moment, but in terms of stretching the investment something to think about. Actually that clip was too short and something suspicious about the way the "side by side" one doesn't match the earlier footage one at a time.

Either way, lots of stuff on Vimeo shot with both cameras. This one is longer, and he rolls through the gain settings in low light. Probably more useful to you.

http://vimeo.com/13453736
 
Last edited:
The more research I do on the XF300 the more contradictory it gets. Some people are saying it's good in low light, some are saying it's noticeably worse then the EX1R.

If there was a bit more of a price difference I would go with the EX1R but it's so relatively small I just don't know. I like the look of the EX3 but that's about another £1000 on the EX1R.
 
The more research I do on the XF300 the more contradictory it gets. Some people are saying it's good in low light, some are saying it's noticeably worse then the EX1R.

If there was a bit more of a price difference I would go with the EX1R but it's so relatively small I just don't know. I like the look of the EX3 but that's about another £1000 on the EX1R.

I don´t know the Canon but meanwhile I´m pretty familiar with the EX1 and can assure you that it is a great peace of gear which should fit most peoples needs for documentary and imagefilm stuff.

Furthermore the guy who did this Vimeo test is in my opinion deadwrong about the sharpness. If you look closely at the grass and the sand you´ll see that there is much more detail in the Sony than the Canon. What he did is mistaking contrast (which can be easiliy added in post doing basic stuff like levels- and gammacorrection or even in camera by picture profile) for sharpness.
 
Sorry to bring back an old thread but I am still super undecided on which of the two would be best for my needs.
I should have said above that I plan to shoot aviation cockpit and flying subjects as well as travel/city stuff. The aviation would be similar to this guys work http://vimeo.com/8814427 just so you have an idea of what I am on about.

I can see many plus and minus points to both cameras.

Sony EX1R -

Plus
Proven format and codec
Free copy of Vegas 10
Better in low light
Slightly cheaper

Canon XF300

Plus
4:2:2 codec could be good future proofing
CF cards much cheaper than SxS
Much larger zoom at 20x (EX1R 14x)
Slightly wider angle than EX1R
Better support as I am a current Canon Pro Services member


So there are many things for each. The long zoom and the wider angle of the Canon is interesting and could be useful for filming planes in flight and also the cockpit stuff might be easier with the wider angle.

Low light quality of the Canon is a concern though I've not tested either so can only go on reviews etc. Is the Canon actaully bad in low light or just that it's a bit worse than the EX1R? I would use my current 1DmkIV VDSLR so city work and the main use of the video in low light would be cockpit filming at night.

Another consideration is how well would they both work alongside my Canon 1DmkIV video footage? Would the Canon video camera be much easier to get looking the same as the 1D footage when used in the same production? I could see me using footage from both the 1D and the video camera in the same production quite a bit so ease of working together is a potential issue.

Any comments on the above and also in relation to the previous posts in this thread would be very useful indeed.

Cheers,

Andy S
 
The extra light gathering ability of the Canon lens is an interesting point. I am not really after something that is all but noise free, I am just after something that will produce video in low light that is of an acceptable quality for what I want to do with it. Most of the time I expect to be shooting in good light.

The other point in the article about shallow DOF is not an issue for me at ALL with a camcorder. When I need to do shallow DOF I would be able to use my 1DmkIV. I imagine both the EX1R and XF300 can get pretty shallow DOF anyway.

Andy S
 
Back
Top