Canon XF300/305 approved for BBC productions

According to Canon, the BBC has been added to the list of approved HD cameras for shooting entire programs. This is a coup for Canon and marks the first 1/3" sensor entry into that list. Perhaps now, we'll see housing manufacturers take notice of the Canon cameras.

http://www.canon-europe.com/About_Us/Press..._and_XF300.aspx

Haven't Gates been making housings for Canon cameras??? I'm waiting for Sony to bring out the F3 (turbo?) with 50/100mbps 4:2:2 in built that will shoot down Canon's thunder (enter evil laugh)

Dive safe

DeanB

I was recently discussing with a BBC producer about the possibility of using the XF300/305 on an upcoming project and it was pointed out to me that the BBC requirement for HD underwater shooting is actually 100mbps, not the 50mbps that is allowed on topside shooting. Therefore for underwater work the XF300/305 is still considered SD, not HD and subject to the same 25% content restriction.

Regardless of the above other broadcasters are far less spec geeks so I'd love to get one of these cameras underwater and I still can't quite believe that no one has announced a housing for it.

Cheers, Simon

I forgot to add that I was also told that the Nanoflash 'love in' is more or less over due to persistent technical issues and they are now looking for in-camera capture at those bitrates without the use of external capture devices.

Cheers, Simon

I forgot to add that I was also told that the Nanoflash 'love in' is more or less over due to persistent technical issues and they are now looking for in-camera capture at those bitrates without the use of external capture devices.

 

Cheers, Simon

That is interesting about Nano, also interesting about underwater being 100mb's. Hopefully this will spur the F3 to allow increased bit rates.

I forgot to add that I was also told that the Nanoflash 'love in' is more or less over due to persistent technical issues and they are now looking for in-camera capture at those bitrates without the use of external capture devices.

 

Cheers, Simon

Hello bud,

Maybe it was the gear that company had/hired??? Since we spoke about this I've trawled the internet forums asking various companies and freelancers who use Nano with EX1/3's, and have done for a while, and they haven't had or even heard of problems??? In fact some were 'very' surprised and asked me for details so they could try and help out, which I obviously could not give... Hopefully this is an isolated incident?

Dive safe

DeanB

Hello bud,

 

Maybe it was the gear that company had/hired??? Since we spoke about this I've trawled the internet forums asking various companies and freelancers who use Nano with EX1/3's, and have done for a while, and they haven't had or even heard of problems??? In fact some were 'very' surprised and asked me for details so they could try and help out, which I obviously could not give... Hopefully this is an isolated incident?

 

Dive safe

 

DeanB

Maybe mate, just passing on what I was told. I do know that if that project moves forward (with the BBC) then it will be without relying on the use of Nano's. They will still use them, but from what I've gathered they wont rely on them for main acquisition cameras for HD content (ie you can't use an EX1/3 with Nano for 100% of HD content as at least 75% would need to be from an in-camera bitrate of 50mbps topside/100mpbs underwater). It was the first I'd heard of problems with Nanos and I've never seen a mention of it anywhere else either.

Cheers, Simon

Maybe mate, just passing on what I was told. I do know that if that project moves forward (with the BBC) then it will be without relying on the use of Nano's. They will still use them, but from what I've gathered they wont rely on them for main acquisition cameras for HD content (ie you can't use an EX1/3 with Nano for 100% of HD content as at least 75% would need to be from an in-camera bitrate of 50mbps topside/100mpbs underwater). It was the first I'd heard of problems with Nanos and I've never seen a mention of it anywhere else either.

 

Cheers, Simon

Yeah it's not on their HD acquisition 'hit list' ... Oh well back to the drawing board

Dive safe

DeanB

I forgot to add that I was also told that the Nanoflash 'love in' is more or less over due to persistent technical issues and they are now looking for in-camera capture at those bitrates without the use of external capture devices.

 

Cheers, Simon

Also forgot to mention that, a few years back, I was speaking to a Beeb producer and he told me that they were not going to except the Sony Z1 (when it first came out) because, apparently, it didn't have 'timecode' on it and this was obviously a major prob... I wrote about it here and it was pointed out that actually it DID!!!... I then relayed this to the producer who looked further into it, Et voila, timecode found, Z1 used ... It goes to show that sometimes its the people not the machine...

Dive safe

DeanB

It goes to show that sometimes its the people not the machine...

So true, so true!

So true, so true!

And to think of al those Z1's used because of this passed on info... Maybe Sony should thank me and send me an F3

Dive safe

DeanB

Simon, FYI I wanted to make sure I was right before blabbing but I've just received confirmation from Auntie Beeb that the requirements for underwater is 100 mbps for intraframe and 50 mbps for MPEG2, which is what the XF3xx series shoots.