Practical differences between Canon 1014 XL-S and 1014 AZ?

Post by **Mike P** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:40 pm

Hi all. I've recently stumbled across this forum and it's just what I've been looking for for a while.

I'm looking at getting a Canon 1014 to add to my arsenal, I was just wondering what the concensus is on the practical differences between the XL-S and AZ (not the obvious sound recording capability). specifically:

Is there any noticable difference in image quality between the 2 cameras?

Both cameras have variable shutter angle - is there a difference?

Any other practical 'real world' observations on reliability and useability between them?

Basically, are the differences worth paying the quite high the premium for the XL-S?

Thanks in advance for all comments

Post by **Patrick** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:01 pm

There are a few differences between these two models in addition to the obvious sound capabilities of the XL-S. The AZ has a slightly longer focal length at the tele end of the zoom (but only a few mm) so probably not enough to make a noticeable difference in magnifcation. By contrast, the XL-S has a slightly shorter focal length at the wide setting of the zoom but there's only a difference of 1mm here. Both cameras have variable shutters but I believe that the XL-S does have a larger shutter opening angle for low light filming.

The XL-S also has a built in interval timer for time lapse whereas the AZ does not. An accessory interval timer can be obtained for the AZ but this is a slightly rare item. Don't quote me on this but I thought I recall reading that the built in interval timer of the XL-S has limited fixed settings. I have the accessory timer for the AZ and it is quite versatile - you can set any interval time you please from 1 second up to 1 minute. One of the greatest features of the AZ, in my opinion, is the top speed of 54fps which produces beautifully smooth, steady slow motion footage that looks like poetry in motion. The XL-S lacks this feature - the fastest speed that you will find on the XL-S is 36fps. However, the XL-S does have a 9fps setting which the AZ lacks. If I were you, I would decide what sort of filming I was planning to do and this will determine which features would suit you best. For example, if you were planning to do a fair bit of low light filming, go for the XL-S. If you are interesting in filming sports (particularly sports analysis) go with the AZ.

Post by **morales72** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:07 pm

Apart from the differnces well documented by Patrick above, I have them both and I can say that I prefer AZ image better. Sometimes I find the xls too soft but as usual it depends on your personal needs. If you want to shoot sync, you should take into account camera noise, probably less on the xls, to me they are both noisy. I would consider the time lapse thing (1,5,20 and 60 seconds fixed) and the low light capabilities from the XLS. If I had to sell one, that would be the XLS, for sure.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,

Morales

Post by **ossioskari** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:48 pm

hmm.. when i bought my 814 xl-s, i remember that at one point i was bidding for az as well but later quit as i found something i didn't like in the specs. now i just can't remember what it was...

maybe it was the variable shutter: xl-s has selectable 150' to 220', but az "variable to 150'" (super8wiki).

or maybe it was the interval timer xl-s has (which actually sucks compared to nizo's stepless one).

54fps surely is good, you'll miss that if you don't have another camera with higher speed.

these points were already made, though.

Post by **Mike P** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:49 pm

good info from all - many thanks.

In terms of what sort of shooting I'll be doing, I'm really looking for a reliable workhorse I can use in a range of scenarios. I have a Nizo Pro which is good for timelapse and 54fps already, and I don't really shoot sync sound so noise isn't too much of an issue.

The variable shutter on the XL-S is potentially really useful as I shoot a lot of stuff on the fly. How many stops does it give you?

The 2 most important issues for me are sharpness of image and reliability. I sometimes find my Nizo a bit soft, and I'm having metering issues with it.

It's interesting that you find the AZ sharper, Morales.

Thanks again for all the info.

Post by **morales72** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:05 pm

I got them from the same ebay seller and I started with the xls because I thought is was going to be better, but when I developed my forst tri-x with the AZ y was amazed by the result. I even shot in very low light conditions (rock concert) and still got a decent image. Of course, the xls is more ergonomic and cool. IMHO, you should get the AZ and if you have the big bucks go for the xls. You won't be disapointed with none of them. Believe it or not, my favorite camera nowadays is a 1968 Bauer C Royal, thanks to super8man, who opened my eyes to anamorphic filming. Really good sharp lens, see my avatar!

Hope this helps.

Best regards,

Morales

Post by **bakanosaru** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:19 pm

I don't think the variable shutter on the XL-S is really useful like it would be on the AZ. The XL-S only has the two positions lowlight (220) and brightlight (150) whereas the AZ has steps down from 150(?) so you can get that very crisp staccatto look.

Post by **morales72** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:31 pm

bakanosaru wrote:I don't think the variable shutter on the XL-S is really useful like it would be on the AZ. The XL-S only has the two positions lowlight (220) and brightlight (150) whereas the AZ has steps down from 150(?) so you can get that very crisp staccatto look.

Totally agree with this. I like that "saving private ryan" effect.

Post by **T-Scan** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:38 pm

The 1014E can step down to a 90 and 45 degree shutter. I too like the 54fps. I own a 1014E for it's purposes, and also an 814XL-S for low light and sound sync. They each have their unique qualities, just depends on what you need most. For outdoor shooting, the 1014E is better with a long zoom and narrow shutter options for faster films. The 814XL-S is better indoors for low light... its quiter and runs at 24fps pretty accurate, smaller than the 1014XL-S.

Post by **Sasounet** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:51 am

An other difference is the "almost" frame accurate footage counter of the 1014AZ versus the cheap one on the 1014XLS, Not very important I agree...

Post by **marc** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:39 am

morales72 wrote:Sometimes I find the xls too soft but as usual it depends on your personal needs.

A 220 degree shutter angle will definitely yield a softer image compared to a 150 degree shutter angle with all other factors being equal. This is most apparent with objects in motion.

Website · Post by **Andersens Tears** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:02 pm

I thought I would put in a word for the XL-S as I absolutely love mine. I have a Nizo Pro, but have found little use for it since picking up my 1014XL-S. I have found this camera to be the best all round performer Ã¢â‚¬â€œ I seem to remember it being voted the best Ã¢â‚¬ËœRun and GunÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ Super 8 camera? Can anyone find the quote for this?

It is built like a tank and feels so solid. I have found the light meter to be very accurate and I love the warm images you get with the lens Ã¢â‚¬â€œ I also think the resolution of the images produced with this piece of glass to be very good Ã¢â‚¬â€œ I personally feel it to be much better than the results produced by my Nizo Pro.

I find I normally get a full extra F stop with the XL shutter.

The price gap between the AZ and the XL-S is narrowing Ã¢â‚¬â€œ last week a mint AZ went for Ã‚Â£265 on eBay where an absolute mint and boxed XL-S with original receipt paperwork etc went for a poultry Ã‚Â£250 a day or so later. Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Not saying that it is a good thing for a camera to have had little use and having lain in a box for some 25 years Ã¢â‚¬â€œ perhaps a camera that is in full working condition and used regularly up until only recently would be preferable?

Be careful though as some sellers think they can get away with asking nearly twice that much for an XL-S even in a well worn condition. The price difference between the 814XL-S and the 1014XL-S is also quite large when you take into account the minor differences!

Sorry if this sounds a bit garbled Ã¢â‚¬â€œ had to write very quickly!

Good luck Ã¢â‚¬â€œ whichever cam you decide to go with. The AZ is also fantastic!

All the best Ã¢â‚¬ËœTears

Post by **Mike P** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:14 pm

This is great stuff - really useful. Thanks everyone!

It sounds like the AZ will be perfick. Well, either camera would be good, but it sounds like I don't need to to spend the extra for what I need from it. I should have the money together soon after I've sold some stuff off, so if there's a nice 1014 AZ on ebay in a couple of weeks time, leave it alone - it's mine!!

cheers,
Mike

Post by **filmbuff** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:24 pm

Patrick wrote: Don't quote me on this but I thought I recall reading that the built in interval timer of the XL-S has limited fixed settings. I have the accessory timer for the AZ and it is quite versatile - you can set any interval time you please from 1 second up to 1 minute.

Doesn't the XL-S have the same "remote" socket so that you could use the accessory timer just the same on either camera?

Post by **T-Scan** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:13 pm

filmbuff wrote:
Patrick wrote: Don't quote me on this but I thought I recall reading that the built in interval timer of the XL-S has limited fixed settings. I have the accessory timer for the AZ and it is quite versatile - you can set any interval time you please from 1 second up to 1 minute.
Doesn't the XL-S have the same "remote" socket so that you could use the accessory timer just the same on either camera?

Actually yes. Those little canon timers are hard to find, but I have a couple and they work on my XL-S too. But I suppose other timers may work as well.