Canon XF400 Review + Test Footage

[@reviewthebest]

Nice video, I’m going to purchase either the Canon XF400 or Canon C100 Mark II which one would you purchase and why? Thank you for your time!

[@waimongtv4906]

What about battery life

[@OGFemPat]

They mentioned it in this video

[@PierLu_77]

Hi Gizmo, I like your youtube style a lot, keep on please! I'm not familiar with these camcorders, is the XF400 compatible with larger batteries? I assume since they protude on the back that there should be bigger, thus more capable batteries on the market

[@VideoGizmology]

As far as I know, Canon doesn't make a larger battery for the XF400 than the one that it comes with. Maybe a third party does. So you'll have to purchase multiple batteries or get a rig with a V-mount battery system. Having said that, the XA50 is superior in battery life than the XF400. I recommend the XA50 over the XF400, unless you need 4K/60p. The XA50 doesn't shoot any higher than 4K/30p.

[@hayabusa27]

Can the XF400 use a cold shoe mic DM-100 with the handle removed?

[@CNC-Time-Lapse]

That was an impressive review and I absolutely loved the low light test. Wow, impressive!

[@VideoGizmology]

Thank you!

[@volkerkeck9185]

My jaw was falling down! I did not expect this! it was great!

[@Skating_Squid]

How do you like this camera compared to the UX-180. I’m stuck between buying one of these and could really use some input from someone who owns both. Could you tell me which would be your go to or maybe som pros and cons. I really appreciate the videos they have helped a lot!

[@VideoGizmology]

Advantages for XF400 - best auto-focus, good in low light, economical XF-AVC codec, 4 channel audio, easier to travel with, better user interface, matches other Canon cameras. Advantages for UX-180 - better value for more styles of production, 3G-SDI output, Timecode in/out, not good in low light, but excellent in day exterior, longer zoom lens, more codecs to choose, longer battery life. So if you work on a large variety of video productions, the UX180 is more versatile and better value, especially in multi-cam studios, outdoor events, and jobs where you need to look professional. But if you shoot with other Canons, air travel or travel with backpack of gear like hiking, or if you shoot primarily low light, the XF400 is better.

[@Skating_Squid]

Video Gizmology wow thank you so much this was very valuable information for me! I travel a lot and I also need good low light for shooting inside skating rinks. Thank you again!!

[@TheFandangovideoguy]

I'm so glad I found this video...I want to replace my old Canon XF100 with a better camcorder (I already own a Canon 90D so no DSLR type camera) and the XF400 is an option-not new I know and I also know that is not a successor to the XF100 and that it feels more like a consumer camera but I care about the picture quality in 1080p for sure and the option for 4k. I know that panasonic has some new 4k cameras coming like the HC-X2000 but this one will have a small sensor...did you keep your XF400? do you think it's a good replacement/upgrade over my XF100? I see that you own a XF200. Does the XF400 have much better low light performance? I hate pushing the gain on my XF100-I use LED Lights but I try not to blind guests at weddings and other live events! Thanks for your help!

[@VideoGizmology]

I still own the XF400. I think it's the best 4K camcorder in it's price range, so I highly recommend it over the Panasonic X2000. However, check out the Canon XA50. It does almost everything the XF400 can do, except it's cheaper and smaller. The only big feature the XA50 doesn't have is 4K/60p. If you don't need 4K/60p, I would get the XA50.

[@TheFandangovideoguy]

@@VideoGizmology thanks again...I may have found a used good condition XF400 for about $1,200US which is a good price. I need a good camcorder for some events or portions of weddings even if my Canon 90D gets me some beauty shots. I was sort of looking at the Panny AG-CX350 but it's too expensive and for now I don't have many video contracts...thanks!

[@DuffTV]

Hey how would you say the zoom rocker compares to the XF200/205? Also is it basically as user friendly to use in general as the 205? I'm a 205 user and love it.

[@BrokenToeKnee]

Thanks so much for all the work you put into this review. I have been looking into a solution to record myself riding boosted boards & Onewheels other than the “gopro on a gimbal + selfie stick” method I’m currently using. I’ve considered going the mirrorless + interchangeable lens route as well as the camcorder route. I don’t want to use my 5DMK4 + L glass for fear of damaging my prized gear. So, I really like the camcorder route for it’s simplicity when doing my ‘run & gun’ solo/selfie sports work (of course, setting up each shot on a tripod, taking a run, moving the tripod, taking another run, yadda yadda is a lot of work). I’ve been agonizing over which Canon camcorder to use (I’ve been a Canon user since the Rebel XT came out a 100 years ago 😉 and will probably continue to be a Canon guy for another 100 years). This review makes my decision much easier. Really, about the only thing that causes me to hesitate is a lack of DSLR-like shallow depth of field. But at this price point, it’s a fair trade off. Thanks again. These types of reviews on the 400 are hard to come by.

[@dashkarson121]

i know Im quite randomly asking but do anyone know of a good site to watch newly released tv shows online?

[@Military872]

I am looking for a Camera this size to shoot fast moving Aircraft, would this be ok?

[@VideoGizmology]

Not really. It only has a 15x optical zoom and I'm assuming you'd want more reach to film aircraft. I recommend a camera with at least a 20x optical zoom like Panasonic CX10/X2000/X1500: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fafNi3qLadxpibs

[@synthpopfan]

Thank You for the review. When you had both camera`s connected to the one tripod, what is that bar called that you connected both camera`s to? Where can I buy one? Thank You.

[@VideoGizmology]

It's a Manfrotto 131DDB accessory arm. Here is an affiliate link for it: amzn.to/3d3piKd

[@synthpopfan]

@@VideoGizmology Thank You

[@SiamBoxing]

how would this camera do recording sports such as boxing and mma? would you be able to hook up live stream to youtube with this camera? what would be a cheaper alternative for around £1-1500?

[@VideoGizmology]

The XF400 would be okay with sports, but you probably want a 20x zoom instead of a 15x zoom. A Panasonic CX350 or UX180 would be great for sports. The XF400 is better for weddings or documentary. When it comes to live streaming, it's more important to buy a live streaming device that can attach to any camcorder, such as the Teradek VidiU Pro or buy an HDMI to USB 3 dongle and use your laptop as the streaming interface.

[@SiamBoxing]

@@VideoGizmology thank you for that, is there any other cameras you could recommend for sports that would be half the cost as an entry into this. I like the looks of the teradek in your opinion would that out perform the use of a laptop?

[@VideoGizmology]

If you get an older HD camcorder, you can find a good one at a lower cost. Canon XA series, Canon HF G series, Panasonic UX90. A laptop with strong internet connection is better than a teradek.

[@alksalisakanal7122]

l

[@jomangeee9180]

OK I know nothing about technical stuff, but here is what i observed: 1-In the light, -from a distance- Panasonic had a wider angle- you could see the door on the left vs Canon -from a distance- Panasonic had better defined leaves, and more distinct colors vs Canon -Up close- both had good definition and color, keeping in mind the different placement of the leaves 2-In "dark" I thought it was an unsuccessful test, while Canon had a view of the whole back wall, Panasonic was focused at a dark area above a chair, yet comparing just the ares above the chairs the colors and brightness were practically the same!! Would you repeat the in "dark" test?!

[@agenericaccount3935]

Yeah, new xf400 owner here. Your complaints are my complaints, but your accolades are my accolades too. I had to order a different handle to shift the weight of my mic back. It should help the front heaviness. Anyhow, did you keep the 400 or did you move on to something else, and if so, what?

[@VideoGizmology]

I still own the XF400, but I don't use it that much. I now own a Panasonic CX10 and think it's an improvement in certain areas from the XF400 and I prefer the look. I also tested an Canon XA50 and find that to be a better value than the XF400.

[@HDClown]

@@VideoGizmology What do you like about the CX10 over the XF400? How do you feel the low light compares given the 1/2.5" sensor in Panasonic vs 1" in Canon?

[@VideoGizmology]

I'm working on a video about this soon, but the CX10 has better internal codecs, wifi/livestream capabilities, better zoom lens range, more compact body design, way better battery life, more video picture control (except no Logs), and autofocus is almost as good as the XF400. Low light in the CX10 is an issue. When I compared the CX10 at f/2.8 vs XF400 at f/2.8, the XF400 did better in low light, but not by a lot compared to a larger sensor camera like S35 or full frame. However, the CX10 can up to f/1.8, so a 1/2.5" sensor at f/1.8 is actually just as bright, if not slightly brighter, than a 1" sensor at f/2.8, which is as open as the XF400 can go.

[@HDClown]

@@VideoGizmology I will need to use zoon in my low light situation so I'm probably looking at f/4 Panasonic vs f/4.5 in Canon. At equivalent f-stop, just how much worse is the Panasonic in low light? I've watch a few low light footage samples of the Panasonic on YT that look real good but they don't indicate f-stop or gain in many of them, although I suspect it's wide open and minimal gain. I'd be looking at the X1500 + handle for $2k as opposed to CX10, which is $500 less than XF400. Don't believe there is anything that would be different in the CX10 other than SDI output, ethernet, NDI, and P2 support, none of which I would use. Specs seem to indicate codecs are identical otherwise to X1500/X2000.

[@VideoGizmology]

the CX10 has a few legacy codecs that the X1500/X2000 does not have, but they are otherwise identical in quality and features. I would have purchased the X2000, but I found a good deal on the CX10. Low light of CX10 vs XF400 at equivalent F-stops....to my eye, it's at least a one stop difference, so the XF400 has the edge in low light. The difference is subjective. I don't think it's that big of a difference. Interestingly, the CX10 had more reliable autofocus in low light than the XF400. Once you get into low light, the XF400 can fall apart, but the CX10 remains strong, although heavy grain, and with a 10-bit 422 codec, you can apply a denoise filter and clean up the grain on the CX10 better than you can on the XF400.

[@tonydestefano3380]

The market seems so confusing...do you have a recommendation for a camcorder under $2000? I watch videos about Sony AX700, the Canons (from G60 to XA10 to GX10 etc.) and others...are there any standouts?

[@VideoGizmology]

As of the writing of this comment, the Sony AX53 is the best traditional camcorder for primarily full auto or semi-auto filming under $1k. The Canon XA50 is the best traditional camcorder for full manual/professional filming just under $2k. The following cameras vary in prices under $2k and are decent, but not as well regarded as the previously mentioned cameras: Canon HF G60, Canon HF G50, Sony AX100, Canon XA40.

[@tonydestefano3380]

@@VideoGizmology Thanks for your help!!

[@devungroot9699]

Hey awesome video! I’m debating between getting the Canon XF400 or the Panasonic AG-UX180. I will be using the camera to film outdoor activities such as hunting and fishing. So being able to shoot in low light is key. I can buy the Panasonic used with 137 hours for about $600 cheaper then a new xf400. What would you personally recommend?

[@VideoGizmology]

For outdoor hunting and fishing, I wouldn't recommend either of these cameras. I think they are a little overkill. The UX180 is also quite big and I'm assuming you don't want to carry a big camera into the woods or remote locations. Between these two, the UX180 might be better because of the lens. However, better 4K cameras for hunting would be the Panasonic WXF1, Panasonic VX1, Sony AX53, Canon XA40, Canon G50, Panasonic X1500. If you want more professional because you'll also do on camera interviews, then get the Panasonic X2000 or Canon XA50.

[@devungroot9699]

@@VideoGizmology I really want the 4K 60 and that’s why I’ve decided between these two. The video quality from what I’ve seen is much better the the cannon g40 my friends film with. Size isn’t much of an issue as I’ll have a camera man with me 50% of the time. I’d like the quality to be the highest as I hope to film for television in the next few years

[@devungroot9699]

@@VideoGizmology thanks for the fast reply!

[@Growyourheirlooms]

I may have missed, but does it have clean HDMI out?

[@VideoGizmology]

Yes

[@fccymm]

Have you compared the autofocus between the Canon and Panasonic? We're looking into purchasing one of these cameras for our church for recording our services.

[@VideoGizmology]

From my tests, the Canon XF400 with it's dual pixel technology has better autofocus than the Panasonic UX180. The UX180 is still very good, but Canon has the slight advantage with easier touch autofocus and it's manual focus assist features.

[@chickenman4469]

What do you reccomend for outdoor video recording in low light as well as good zooming. And at least 1080p slow motion. And still shoots good 4k

[@VideoGizmology]

Not sure a camera like that exists that's under $8K. Maybe a Canon EOS-R with an 18-135mm zoom lens and servo zoom accessory? But that's only good for 4K video, then you'll need a Canon 24-70mm or 24-105mm for stills and 1080p video.

[@craigw.scribner6490]

I've always liked your reviews, but Is it possible that your rental GX10 was faulty or had been mistreated by a previous renter and wasn't up to spec? I'd like you to compare a brand new or refurbished GX10 and the XF400. I agree that the GX10 is overpriced, but I've recently seen Canon Factory Refurbished GX10s at B&H Photo for $799.00 with a one year Canon warranty. Now, that seems like a deal! Your thoughts?

[@VideoGizmology]

Yes, it is possible I could have had a lemon. And at the current prices, I think the GX10 is now at a great price point. The one thing still holding me back on getting a GX10 is the XF-AVC 4K codec. It's not in the GX10 as far as I know, which I don't understand, because the XF-AVC 4K codec is on the lower XA50 model, so why not put it in the GX10? So if I end up getting a second camera, it will be the XA50, before the GX10.

[@craigw.scribner6490]

I agree--the GX10 should receive the XF-AVC codec. Thanks and keep up the great reviews! @@VideoGizmology

[@K.Saniaga]

I want to thank you for your review, I was thinking on buying the GX10 because I don't need the XLR but knowing the difference on video quality, the bad battery performance and lack of compatibility with third party models, also nobody talked about the f stop going down so fast when zoom in, I thought it would hold the aperture like the other vixia models like XA30. I use the Sony a6500 and wanted an all-around camera but IMO this camcorder only gives you dual SD recorder, more battery power and ND filter, 4k60p, it doesn't even have full manual controls for the gain, shutter and aperture. I really wanted to buy this camcorder but thanks to your video I'm gonna save some cash. Again, thank you so much.

[@VideoGizmology]

You're welcome! If Canon does a firmware update to the GX10, they might make it as good as the XF400, but who knows if that'll ever happen.

[@K.Saniaga]

@@VideoGizmology I hope so. But now they have the G60 and XA50, I don't see it happening any time soon.

[@weezyg.5724]

Gx10 and XF400 are the same camera just different codecs how is that you have so different results with them???

[@VideoGizmology]

Obviously this a subjective opinion, but to give you context: my original test with the GX10 was in 2017, when the camera was first released with no firmware updates and my tests with the XF400 was two years later and multiple firmware update and bitrates make a slight difference, 150 on the GX10 and 160 on the XF400 in UHD.

[@weezyg.5724]

@@VideoGizmology I see, you should state that on the video, I'm about to get the xf400 and a gx10 for second angle.

[@waimongtv4906]

How long it can shoot continuously in single charge?

[@VideoGizmology]

around 65-90 minutes, depending on record settings, audio phantom power, age of battery

[@PignaGroup]

Why in the LCD the counter goes forward when last clip end, when I begin a new shoot? It should start at zero for each clip... How can I resolved?

[@VideoGizmology]

Unfortunately, you need to manually reset the counter every time you want the new clip to start at 00. Go into the MENU. RECORDING SETUP. #4. INITIAL TIME CODE. Then reset to 00. This is very annoying. I haven't figured a way to customize this setting.

[@ourstunningplanetearth]

Brilliant comparison, XF400 vs HC x1/UX180 which one would you recommend, and why? Thanks in advance :) i'm struggling to choose between them, imo i feel XF400 has better image quality than HC X1 or ux180

[@VideoGizmology]

Just based on image quality, I personally like the XF400, especially with the new C-Log firmware update that has slightly better dynamic range than the UX180. It has 4-channel audio vs 2-channel on the UX180. I also think the XF400 has better autofocus and it's a smaller body if that benefits you. I would choose the XF400 if you shoot documentary or narrative films. The Panasonic UX180 has a more professional body with lots of physical buttons. It has 3G-SDI which is great for live multicam productions. The lens is more versatile at 20x optical 24-480mm, while the XF400 is only 15x at 25.5-382.5mm. And it can shoot DCI 4K, while the XF400 can only go up to 60p/UHD. I would choose the UX180 if you shoot nature, live events, multi-cam, news, or corporate videos.

[@ourstunningplanetearth]

@@VideoGizmology Thanks a lot for your quick response, as you can see on my channel, i shoot travel videos, so based on your feedback i think i would go with xf400.. thanks a ton

[@ourstunningplanetearth]

Thanks for the review.. i finally got my xf405 today. Love the image quality. One quick question. The camera has only PAL format. Is there anyway i can switch between NTSC and PAL

[@ROSE._.3126-m8o]

Xf400 or Sony Nx 200/Nx80..which will give better result in Low light n video quality

[@RemiDav]

Here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/a4jYZWCKabd6o9E

[@videophoto1436]

Hello. Which camcorder is best for low light video?

[@VideoGizmology]

For camcorders, the Canon XF400 has been the best I've tested under $2500 as of mid-July 2019. However, the best low light cameras are DSLRs or mirrorless cameras like the Sony A7 series.

[@videophoto1436]

Thank you so much for your answer.

[@pignachannel]

it seems to me that when I set dynamic stabilization, the camera crops the video. it's possible?

[@VideoGizmology]

Yes, there will be a crop with all Canon cameras that have dynamic stabilization. That's how they achieve stabilization, by cropping in.

[@TheFandangovideoguy]

I want to replace my ageing Canon XF300 and XF100 which I use for long events such as concerts or dance performances and long wedding ceremonies. For anything else I use either a Canon 90D or a Sony a6400 etc but for live events I need the XLR connectors and the long zoom etc-basically what my XF300 gives me but I need better low light and 4k...If I had the money I would go straight for the Canon XF705! overkill I know but looks good...I'm glad I found your video comparing the XF400 (which is NOT in the same league as the semi-pro XF300!) and the Panny 180 but I still don't feel they are really worth buying to replace what I have. Perhaps I expect too much? any constructive comments would be much appreciated! Thanks for posting the video

[@VideoGizmology]

If you're asking for good low light, 4K, AND a long zoom, that will be expensive. So either save up for a Canon XF705 or C200 with long zoom lenses or make compromises. You might want to look into a Panasonic CX350. It's similar to the XF705 in many ways, but it's more affordable and higher rated than the XF705. The three advantages the XF705 has over the CX350 are a better compressed 4K codec, C-Log profile, and it looks like a more professional body design and features.

[@anonymissed3611]

@@VideoGizmology xf705 seems to have same optical zoom range as xf400. Does have more digital tele modes, so it seems.

[@sglivetv]

Thanks for all the comparison footage. I'm very surprised by the low-light performance out of Canon's 1" sensor. Looked like it soundly beat the EOS R in the last test.

[@VideoGizmology]

The XF400 was a little better in low light in my specific test, but keep in mind I was using a slow lens on the EOS R, with a faster lens, the EOS R will be better in low light.

[@sglivetv]

@@VideoGizmology Thanks for clarifying. Still, the XF400 is quite remarkable.

[@stevepalmer8938]

Are you going to do a compare with the new released Canon XA55/50. Which to buy? Hmmmm. Thanks for the detailed review!

[@VideoGizmology]

I might. The Canon XA50/55 appears to be very similar to the XF400. However, I'm also very curious how the XF400 compares to the XF705.

[@stevepalmer8938]

@@VideoGizmologyWell looking at the specs, it looks like Canon just repackaged the XF400 & called it an XA50? Just like with their DSLRs, they are no longer innovating. Just repackaging old stuff? Which is sad. So, why should I spend more for the new released XA55/50, When I could Just buy an XF400 for less? Would like too hear your input, if you are able to test out / review the XA50. Thanks for the input.. Take care.

[@VideoGizmology]

The XA50/55 is the little brother to the XF400, it's not better than it. It appears that the only differences between the cameras are no 60p 4k or 4:2:2 in the XA50/55. The LCD and body are also smaller than the XF400. So if you can find the XF400 cheaper than the XA50, get the XF400, on paper, it has more professional specs.

[@stevepalmer8938]

@@VideoGizmologyok thanks, need a Good quality camcorder for Live streaming / broadcast of religous services & recording of events. The C100-300 series are too expensive to get All the accessories you need, etc. I have the Canon Vixia R72, which is a good little camcorder. But very limited on options. Lol. Thanks again for your input. Very much appreciated! Take care & All the best. Look fwd to more reviews.

[@BONLEV]

thank you for this long and detailed review! Still looking to buy a new camcorder but still don't know which one.I film a lot of stage shows so normally I need the 20x zoom. The panasonic HC-X1 (= UX180 minus SDI) is still the highest on my wish list. I didn't see any quality difference between the XF400 and UX180 in your test. The colors are different. Maybe the XF400 is better in low light? You didn't test that. keep up the good work!

[@VideoGizmology]

I did test the UX180 in low light. If you watch the section where I compare the XF400 to the Canon EOS-R, I shot with the UX180 to show my camera setup in the same low lighting conditions. The gain was turned up all the way and it's aperture was wide open, so you can see how bad the gain looks in low light. In my testing, the XF400 is better in low light than the UX180, but if you are filming a stage show, which should have stage lighting, you should be fine with either camera.

[@johnsovcom]

I have a pair of 405s for shooting stage shows, they are great in low light

[@ShazammtheProducer]

great video but the charger is that big because it powers the camera and charges the battery when not in use

[@VideoGizmology]

The AC adapter both powers the camera and charges the battery when not in use.

[@ShazammtheProducer]

@@VideoGizmology thats what I just said lol

[@myyutu2011]

I am also a new owner of XF-400 - so far C2 and C3 clips looks noisy for me even in a day time. If somebody would review raw clips from my camera - it will be greatly appreciated. I would like to know - I do something wrong or my camera is defective.

[@ShutTheMuckUp]

You have to overexpose when using C2 or C3. With C3, your exposure should be two marks past the middle point.

[@ACSports]

Do you think the XF400 is still a good purchase?

[@VideoGizmology]

I actually recommend the Canon XA50 over the XF400, unless you need 60p/4K UHD. The XA50 does almost everything the XF400 can, but it's smaller and cheaper.

[@ForeverYoung007]

@@VideoGizmology Have you compared the video quality between the XA50 and XF400 to see which is better?

[@VideoGizmology]

Yes, I have. I still haven't finished editing that review between those two cameras, but I do not see any noticeable difference, unless you need UHD/60p, which the XA50 cannot do. Maybe if you put each clip under a microscope, you will see a difference, but I cannot tell. So if you don't need UHD/60p, I don't see a reason to buy the XF400, when the XA50 is the same quality.

[@ForeverYoung007]

@@VideoGizmology If you have the option to buy either at around the same price, I suppose the XF400 could be a better buy? BTW, thank you for replying and also doing these reviews. Not many people review camcorders. I have used both camcorders and now dslrs/mirrorless but I miss my camcorders for overall run n gun, form factor and simplicity!

[@VideoGizmology]

@@ForeverYoung007 If I had the option to buy either at the same price, I'd still choose the XA50, unless I really needed UHD/60p. The XF400 has a better LCD screen, but nothing else about it is better than the XA50, IMO. The XA50 is smaller, shoots the same image quality at every codec and frame rate (except UHD/60p), and has better battery life. That's something no one talks about. You can get twice the battery life using the same exact battery in the XA50 that you can in the XF400. The XF400 is too power hungry, doesn't matter what internal settings either.

[@Military872]

The XF200, sure looks a good design compared to the 400

[@SouthIndia]

a BIG THUMBS for showing this video.

[@goal7779]

Thanks👍🏻

[@gotscottgreen]

I own the XF400 and GX10, picture quality is identical....they don't look any different.

[@VideoGizmology]

my subjective reference was judging the GX10 back when it was released in 2017 with no firmware updates compared to years later with the XF400 with multiple firmware updates, plus the XF-AVC codec at 160Mb/s vs the GX10's 150 Mb/s.

[@gotscottgreen]

@@VideoGizmology I have used 2 GX10's and 1 XF400 multiple times for multicam and using the 150Mb/s I see no difference. I have NOT used the 160Mb/s on the XF400. I also use these for IMAG and LiveStreaming into vVmix for many shoots and see nothing different coming off the sensor via HDMI. They are really nice work horses for my productions and cut it pretty nicely with Panasonic GH4 and GH5's with some color correction. Thanks for the reviews mate!

[@McDjMagicAndrey]

@@gotscottgreen I want to buy a GX10 in 2023, is it still worth it? or rather reach for something else?

[@friendsstudio3289]

Canon camera world low quality camera my two canon camera 70D and canon XF400 main board damage in under 1 year in this case canon camera not for good camera in world, Form nepal

[@doorran]

hundreD.