Guest Chris Wanamaker Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 I read through a lot of the posts on here and I know that there is "no use" for the XL1 or XL1S anymore because of the release of the XL2. Unfortunately, it was a choice between a $1500 hardly used XL1 or staying with hand-held cameras. Needless to say, I would like to start filming some shorts with it, but want to get that "cinematic" feel. What type of lense and lense adapaters do I need to accomplish this feel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gladwell Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 (edited) Chris, I have to disagree. I think the XL1 and XL1s are still viable cameras have have many uses left. It depends on the operator and his limitations! Have you checked out http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=44? Jay Edited September 1, 2005 by Jay Gladwell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 I read through a lot of the posts on here and I know that there is "no use" for the XL1 or XL1S anymore because of the release of the XL2. Unfortunately, it was a choice between a $1500 hardly used XL1 or staying with hand-held cameras. Needless to say, I would like to start filming some shorts with it, but want to get that "cinematic" feel. What type of lense and lense adapaters do I need to accomplish this feel? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The Mini35 adapter lowers the depth of field to that of a 35mm cine camera. Other than that, there's loads of stuff about this in the archives to search for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Brown Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 (edited) I read through a lot of the posts on here and I know that there is "no use" for the XL1 or XL1S anymore because of the release of the XL2. Unfortunately, it was a choice between a $1500 hardly used XL1 or staying with hand-held cameras. Needless to say, I would like to start filming some shorts with it, but want to get that "cinematic" feel. What type of lense and lense adapaters do I need to accomplish this feel? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, it's always great to have the latest and greatest equipment to help us realize out dreams of producing the best product, but the older XL's will get the job done in the hands of talent. "28 Days Later" proved that. But if it is the more "film" like aesthetic you seek, a micro35 adapter http://www.redrockmicro.com/ will help. Just be ready to lose at least a stop and a half of light. Also, the option of shooting 60i and converting to 24p later is always available. http://www.dvfilm.com/maker/. Check through both of these options and weigh the pros and cons of each. Along with composition, lighting, production design and a great script. You'll be on your way. Edited September 2, 2005 by Eric Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 Yeah, it's always great to have the latest and greatest equipment to help us realize out dreams of producing the best product, but the older XL's will get the job done in the hands of talent. "28 Days Later" proved that.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, 28 Days Later was shot on XL2 before it was released. However, I do believe that Open Water was shot on the XL1s. I use the XL1s often and find it gets a great look, however there is alot of post that is involved with it aswell. Just use what you know about shooting film and apply it to your XL1, and it'll look great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Brown Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 (edited) Actually, 28 Days Later was shot on XL2 before it was released. However, I do believe that Open Water was shot on the XL1s. I use the XL1s often and find it gets a great look, however there is alot of post that is involved with it aswell. Just use what you know about shooting film and apply it to your XL1, and it'll look great. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey, Mitch. In response to your post it was definitely the XL1, a PAL version. They used Canon primes with an Optex adapter. For more info check out American Cinematographer July 2003. And Open Water was shot on Sony miniDV, although I forget what model. They (28 days later) probably would have loved to have had the XL2, though for its native 16:9 capabilities. :) Edited September 5, 2005 by Eric Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Hey, Mitch. In response to your post it was definitely the XL1, a PAL version. They used Canon primes with an Optex adapter. For more info check out American Cinematographer July 2003. And Open Water was shot on Sony miniDV, although I forget what model. They (28 days later) probably would have loved to have had the XL2, though for its native 16:9 capabilities. :) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Man, the internet sucks when it comes to finding this trivial information :P Thanks for the truth though :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AshG Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 You can try shooting in 30p and always using a warm white balance. Use the ND filter to control the light and try to use the lens longer (partially zoomed) to create a shallow DOF. ash =o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Paul Bruening Posted September 16, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted September 16, 2005 I use the Tiffen "Film Look" set. It does help a little, but they can reveal their trick when the lens is zoomed wide open. My XL1s is a fine cam and does a good job. If you know your stuff with lighting then you can get dynamite results from it. Nothing can save you from crappy lighting. Not even film. Frankly, most veiwers can't tell the difference from film and video. Their eyes are too untrained to spot it. If you light it well, get solid sound and tell a good story, the veiwer will be pleased with what you've done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gladwell Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 If you light it well, get solid sound and tell a good story, the veiwer will be pleased with what you've done. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How true! I couldn't agree more. Everyone is so hung up on trying to make video look like film, they forget the most important elements and their films are still lacking. Jay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Irwin Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 (edited) Chris, I still have an XL-1, and it still serves me well. I've shot stuff with that camera that people have mistaken for 16mm (viewed on a TV/digi projector). My usual recipe with the XL is -3db gain, Frame Mode on, 16:9, and 1/60 shutter speed. For lenses I just use Canon's XL 16:1 and 3:1 zooms, though I'm thinking about getting that Micro35 adapter. If you light it like you would film and keep the DOF short, you'll be able to make some pretty convincing images on an XL1. Edited September 23, 2005 by Matt Irwin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rinck Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Man, the internet sucks when it comes to finding this trivial information :P Thanks for the truth though :D The article is on the internet... it's the source that's always the question mark. Luckily... at least when it comes to cinematography the ASC is a reliable source: http://www.theasc.com/magazine/july03/sub/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Mc Nally Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Im pretty much positive that the XL1 has the capability to change lenses. I use XL1's, Ive never had to change the lens on it but im pretty sure you can. My advice would to be the same as is mentioned as above, use a longer focal length lense so you can have a shallower depth of feild, and light the scene really well. Also, allthough shooting in 16:9 on an XL1 does degrade the image quality slightly, it does give a sort of "Superficial" film look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Wyatt Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 What does the "Frame" mode on the Canon XL-1S do? The manual provides a very vague and ambigious description of this facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Silverstein Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I think most people recommend shooting on a lower frame rate instead of the frame mode. The frame mode lowers the framerate but doesnt do full 24p. So when I shoot with a xl1 im going to rent I think im going to do it on the preffered frame rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddie bonfanti Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 sometimes shootin with the shutter at 25 helps a bit, it makes it look less videoish for sure...especially in black and white. but as said above there is a lot of post production work, especially in color correction. i guess that i agree when people said if you light it good and get good composition the results will be stunning, no matter what... making video look great is a big achievement!!!!more difficult than film!!! thats my opinion freddy bonfanti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Bass Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Um. . .XL1 only has one frame rate. That's 30fps. The only options on it for a cinematic feel are frame mode (30 frames pseudo-progressive scanned) or using a 1/30 shutter instead of 1/60. They both look about the same, and they both reduce resolution to some degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddie bonfanti Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Um. . .XL1 only has one frame rate. That's 30fps. The only options on it for a cinematic feel are frame mode (30 frames pseudo-progressive scanned) or using a 1/30 shutter instead of 1/60. They both look about the same, and they both reduce resolution to some degree. if not in cinematic mode i am pretty sure you can lower the shutter down at 25 and even more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Bass Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 True, but it's still the same framerate. And sorry if I confused anyone with shutter comments--I'm speaking from an NTSC standpoint. We can't do 1/50 and 1/25, we have 1/60 and 1/30. You can do 1/30 (or whatever) shutter in frame mode as well, but it looks weird. It actually, to me (again, from an NTSC POV) looks interlaced again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Silverstein Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I would get dvfilm maker and turn it into 24 progressive frames instead of 60i. It will probably help drasticly and depending on your budget its a small price to pay only 150 for a simple to use but effective program I downloaded the sample version that burns the logo into it and it works fast and effciently its much faster then magic bullet which I have at home. The only good thing about magic bullet is the look suites that has custom color correction setups that you can choose and customize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Lund Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 ef adapter - 7.2x magnification - $500...... PL mount - 2.6x magnification - $600...... 35mini adapter - no magnification - $8500........... With lens choices, prices, and magnification taken into consideration, the PL is definately the best run for your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now