Comments

Grazie wrote on 11/14/2003, 5:32 AM
Hiyah Emmo!

XM2 here - PAL version . .. I love it! Really! Having said that the cammie is in the Canon Hospital with pixels on playback - yuck!

Okay, that being said:

1 - 20 x OPTICAL zoom is spectacular for framing that far away shot. Used in conjunction with a tripod - no worries.

2 - Optical Image stabilizer I'm not convinced about it!

3 - PICTURE quality is excellent . . have been working with a Sony convert and he really adores the images I can produce from this cammie . . . .

4 - Frame Mode. I haven't experimented much with this as all my stuff by definition needs to be given to the editor of that side of my business "as-is" . . . he does the stuff in post . ..

5 - Feels good in the hand.

6 - Buttons are in the right place for me. The actual balance is good.

7 - White balance is a cinch . . . even for me.

8 - Nice big rubber manual zoom - very responsive and feels like it will give you everything.

9 - Have been some recent issue with the "toggle" zoom going walkabout .. I've experienced this and it is annoying . . .

10 - It's one of the cheapest 3 chippers out there and can hold its own with its big cousin the XL1/s - some say it even gives a better picture.

11 - Menus are accessed from an easy place to get at.

12 - Manual controls are in the right place for me. Manual Exp controls are too easy . . .really!

13 - Once out of Easy Mode, the Manual stuff is ready at hand.

14 - The low cost provides some cash for those must haves! LANC connection; Wide Angle lens -EXCELLENT glass here, the WD58H [ H= Hood ]; LightWave audio "Equalizer" EQ-GL allows the - IMHO - on board ambient stereo mic do its thing in windy conditions - the audio presets aren't good enough; super Port-A-Brace rainjacket is great, just come out - looks really pro; maybe you might wanna go with a V3=3watt close-up light OR the VL10 . . . you need to think about this . . . there is other stuff you can purchase . . Senni mics and the Canon MA300, others go with a Beechtech - yeah?

15 - Low light is a - dark art . . if you haven't got something more than just ambient light in dark areas you will need to get clever with the settings. I understand the Sony will give you more - but to balance this against the extra cost and WHAT you think you maybe shooting . . if it is that important then some form of alternative lighting will need to be considered. You will need to get used to doing Manual focus in these situations . . . you WILL work - yeah?

Don't take my words on this . . here is a brilliant website forum for all this GL2

Working with V4.0d is faultless. No problems.

At the end of the day it is what you fell comfortable with - including your bank manager! I'd get a good relationship going with the cammie shoppe. See what it is like. Not long ago there where rebates on these cammies - don't know if they are still current . . . . DON'T buy second hand OR from dubious websites . . Go with proper Canon dealership . . oh yes . . I bought a large Canon battery . . only to find that you can in fact source Canon-Type batteries for half the cost . .. keep that in mind.

I'm considering getting a "back-up" cammie for exactly the situation I'm in at the moment. That must tell you something!

Grazie
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/14/2003, 6:47 AM
Emmo,
We use the Canon GL 2's currently on the VASST tours, they shoot wonderfully. It's a hard cam to compare to. Audio tools are excellent, color is wonderful, batteries go quickly in this cam, but that's a small thing comparitively. If you don't use the monitor, and shoot through the eyepiece or use an external, batteries go for a long time.
Personally, I don't care for the way it looks using auto modes at any time, I much prefer manual everything. But, in manual modes, it's terrific. One complaint, I wish it could hold white balance in static memory so that when a battery is changed out, it doesn't lose white balance. Sony's hold white balance through a battery changeout. So do the bigger panasonic's.
pb wrote on 11/14/2003, 7:03 AM
I've never tried the GL2 but I did use a GL1 on an Arctic shoot last year. It was overall a better camera than the XL1 low light-wise and I can live with the lens. Videography has run a couple of stories about people using the GL1/2 for documentaries so it is definitely adequate for "serious" work. I concur with the previous poster on its great features. The only showstopper for me with the GL1 was the absence of an external mic input.

Peter
Jimmy_W wrote on 11/14/2003, 7:13 AM
Spot I bought the vegas video on demand. Did you shoot with the gl2?
BTW I love vegas, my gl2 and on demand.
riredale wrote on 11/14/2003, 12:28 PM
The GL-2 is a great camera, but in that category you might take a look at its arch-enemy, the Sony VX-2000.

I bought the VX2k "nearly new" on auction from eBay for $1750. Although I like the GL-2 very much, there were several factors in my decision to get the Sony:

(1) I currrently have a little Sony miniDV camcorder and it has been completely trouble-free. Sony gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling.

(2) The VX-2k is still the champ when it comes to low-light ability, and I do a lot of ambient-light shooting. The new replacement, the VX-2100, is supposed to be even better by one stop. My camera can see things clearly that the naked eye can't, and more importantly, it means that under typical indoor lighting the video is relatively noise-free, which really affects the bitrate for MPEG-2 encoding for DVDs.

(3) You can get a huge battery (950) for the VX2k that can support shooting, LCD and all, for 6 to 9 hours. The battery is big but the compartment on the back of the camera is recessed, so not that much of the battery shows.

(4) The camera case is magnesium, not plastic.

(5) The autofocus is the typical Sony optical mechanism (excellent). With rare exceptions the camera does a better job of getting and keeping sharp focus than I can.

(6) The lens/CCD combination is very sharp, probably still the champ in this price category. The zoom is only 12X, but that's enough for nearly all purposes. There is a selectable 2X/4X digital zoom extension. I have found that the 2X limit is still amazingly good (24X overall). 4X is crap; I have to laugh when I see entry-level camcorders touting "400X" zoom.

(7) The Hot Setup is to use the Canon WD-58 wide-angle lens, since both cameras share the same lens thread diameter, and the Canon is about as good as but half the price of the Sony lens. I don't know why camera manufacturers don't build wider zooms to start with. It could be that they fear some folks will be turned off by the barrel distortion at full wide.

Anyway, if you're a Canon guy, go for the Canon. Both cameras have their advantages.
Catwell wrote on 11/14/2003, 1:00 PM
I have the Canon GL-2 as my home camera and the Sony VXD-2000 at work. I chose the Canon because I am doing tapes of music recitals and I liked the manual audio. I have the Canon Balanced mic XLR adapter and feed a signal from my Mackie 1202 (mic level output) into the GL-2. The audio is quite good but I usually use the Hard Disk recording in my final projects. The Canon is excellant quality as is the Sony. I am happy with both of them. Low light abilities seem better on the Sony but they are very good on the Canon if you take pains with the manual adjustments.
Jessariah67 wrote on 11/14/2003, 1:46 PM
I own a GL1, and when I add a second camera to my rig, it will be a GL2. I've gotten a "look" that I really like with a certain lens filter that I use on everything.

If you want, you can take a look at the video samples on my website. Everything on it was shot with a GL1.

Go Canon!
rique wrote on 11/14/2003, 2:24 PM
I have a GL-1 that produces a nice picture but after about 2 years it developed a dead pixel that now appears on all my footage. Apparently a recurring problem with these Canons and is very expensive to repair. Check out http://www.gl1-411.com for user comments.
emmo2002 wrote on 11/14/2003, 2:54 PM
Thanks for everyone's comments. Once again this forum put my anxiety to rest.

Emmo