Here is the question:

In descending order (from about $10,000) which DV cameras are the best for shooting near film quality? I already have an awesome video editing workstation and am now shopping for a camera. I'm leaning toward the Canon XL2 but I'm wondering if I may be able to do better for $10,000 or less.

Please be aware that I by no means think that an expensive camera is going to automatically make me a star, I realize that the camera is only a tool and skill is the more important factor. I just don't want to be dreaming of upgrading six months after the purchase.

Thank you for any advice you guys can offer in selecting a good camera.

I saw the DVX100 with cinegamma on versus off and the colors with cinegamma on definitely makes video look better. However, I'm guessing you could achieve very similar results in post production through color correction (curves + boosting saturation).

Other than that, I don't think your camera will do that much to make it look more like film. Some allow you to shoot 24p, but I find the difference to be incredibly subtle and some people argue 30p looks better.

Some cameras have real 16:9 CCDs. If your target format is 4:3 then just add black bars for the letterboxing, and gaffer tape on your camera's LCD.

Some cameras let you pull focus... the XL1/XL2 accepts manual lenses with focus marks. Other cameras have servo zooms which don't have focus marks, although the DVX100 has focus markings in the LCD.

Shallow depth of field: Cameras with large CCDs (i.e. 2/3" CCDs on the Panasonic DVC200) and fast lenses (larger aperture) with long focal lengths can give you shallower depth of field. It may not be enough for you however and you might want to look into the mini35 adapter.

2- Other factors are much more important than the camera for achieving a film look.
A- Lighting. You need a talented DOP and lights. This is likely the most important factor.
B- Post processing / color correction. Nowadays you can make your footage look a lot better through color correction (and the tools don't cost much). Vegas for example is excellent at color correction if you figure out how to use the tools in it.
C- Art direction, costume design, make-up. On low budgets this may be a bit difficult.

Those three things IMO greatly overshadow which camera you have. You could get like a DVC30 (cinegamma, optional XLR adapter, 1/4" CCDs) and spend the rest of the money on lights and on production budgets.

Thank you Glenn, I appreciate your time and help.

When I speak of the film look, I realize that it is achieved by a combination of many factors and not the camera alone.

I know when it comes to art, a talented person can make a masterpiece out of recycled trash, while a person lacking talent can spend thousands of dollars on fancy art supplies and with them produce work that befits a four year old.

I'm just looking to get the best equipment for my money. I certainly don't want to waste my money on bells & whistles I don't need, but on the other hand, I want as many pro features as I need to be able to produce professional work. When it comes to the tool we are using, I don't want it to be a big limiting factor to what I want to accomplish.

Do you know if there is a current thread or perhaps an article on the web that compares side by side the features of the best cameras in the $3,000 to $10,000 price range? It took me a month of research to learn what features I needed and where to get the best bang for my buck, before purchasing my video editing computer. I was hoping some of you had already done a lot of the homework and could make some informed recommendations so I can dedicate my energies to the study and practice of all those other factors that go into the making of good movies.

Thanks,
Michael

There's lots of posts here if you do a search.

Also check out the following, a comparison between the Sony PD150 and the Panasonic DVX100:
http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/review_dvx_pd150.html

You can see that you can achieve really good results with the DVX100- provided you have a talented cinematographer, time, and a talented crew.

In order to reap the benefits of the DVX100, you need an excellent cinematographer who understands how to light and compose. You also need the time and talented crew to achieve high production value down the line. I look forward to more cameras as the major manufacturers begin to implement 24p on more cameras. The bounds between the dreams we have and the films we can achieve are no longer monetary but based purely on raw talent.

WHAT’S IT FOR? - Wildlife videography within the range of 50 to 100 metres
LIGHTING ? - Bright daylight usually sun-lit
BACKGROUNDs?- (1)Cliff ledges & rockfaces - browns & yellows (2) Sky blue & grey

Brand/........... Optical Zoom/ Autofocus*/ VideoImageQuality*

Sony PDX10 ........ x 12 ........ _____ * .......... ______*
Pan. AG-DVC30 ... x 16 ......... _____ * .......... ______*
Canon GL2 .......... x 20 ......... _____ * ......... ______*

Question 1
*Would anyone with experience of any of these camcorders outdoors at long distances please rate autofocus (full optical zoom) & video image quality … 1 < 10;
1 = slow/poor;
5 = quick/good
10 = instant/film quality
? = no experience under specified conditions

Question 2
Which other camcorder for this purpose for about $2500 would you recommend?

BM

See feedback in this thread (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36727) -- thanks,

Thank you Chris.

It was that thread that led me to the DVC30. I am still hoping for opinions based on well-lit outdoor experience at long distances?

BM

Better news!

OK I'm a slow learner but eventually I typed "wildlife" into the DVInfo search box and up came a string of useful threads.

Thanks in particular to all who commented under thread - "Still Photos: Anyone really use this feature?" Most helpful re Canon GL2. And I've several more threads there to learn from.

Onwards!

BM

I don't know what kind of "wildlife" experience you have but bright sunlight and 50-100 yards shots are not really the norm for most larger animals. Most animals are active at dusk and dawn when they go feeding (low light) and unless they are domesticated they won't "want" you within half a mile of them (and they will know you're coming long before you know they're there). So with that in mind I would recommend an XL2 or even an XL1s with an adapter to accommodate the EOS lens system and pick up some really fast telephoto lenses.
I have done some wildlife photography and even with my array of tele lenses ranging from 300mm f2.8 - 600mm f4.0 I still found myself wishing for more at times, especially if I used a tele extender like a 1.5 or 2X on top of that. Keeping your distance (obviously closer than a half mile though, haha) will allow you to get better more natural shots as well as more quantity because animals are not as spooked when you stay a greater distance away. Keep in mind that when you put a 35mm lens on a mini-DV camera like the XL1 there is a multiplier factor so you can take a common lens like the 80-200mm f2.8 and it works out to something like a 500-1400mm (I don't remember the exact conversion but I think it's around 7 for that camera) so that would be REALLY SWEET for wildlife.

If I were doing wildlife, that would be the ONLY option I would consider even if it meant I had to wait a little longer to save money. It's just too sweet a setup.

Thank you Rhett for lifting the curtain on wildlife videography.

In fact I only have eyes for large raptors in slow flight and after 20 years birdwatching I've found 2 sites where I can get a tripod within 75 yards of vultures and eagles gliding into and around favourite roosts and perches right through the day in spring and autumn (feeding or nesting not involved.) The birds have become accustomed to passing traffic and have had nothing to fear from guns for 60 years at least.

Are the XL1 & XL2 that much better than the GL2 given that the target has a wingspan of 3 yards and it's the full image hovering in slow flight/hanging in the wind that I want to video? But you're probably spot on because while I want the full wingspan I do want to move in and out to reveal plumage detail and that's where your lenses may pay off. To nail this point down please confirm that the GL2's x20 will not video quality images of such detail at 75 yards whereas the XL1 or XL2 + which lens(?) will. What about the Sony HDR-FX1 + lenses(?) ?

Don't go away now and leave me in mid-air! The wind might drop.

BM

The quality of the XL over the GL is quite noticeable because of the larger chips. The other advantage is that the XL's have interchangeable lenses and neither the GL nor the FX1 do.
I don't know if you shoot 35mm film (still photography) but Canon EOS lenses will fit the XL's with a special adapter. That's where it really makes sense. (if you already have the still lenses) I remember reading about a sports photographer who slapped a 1200mm f5.6 on an XL1 and he said he could read a hand written note on notebook paper from something like 1-2 miles away! That's just CRAZY!! Of course, few can afford a lens like that but it really gives you an idea of what is possible with that camera setup. (the Canon web site claims 24mm-17,280mm in 35mm film equivalent!)
If all you're going to do is wildlife it would be a worthy investment. Even if you got the XL2 (or XL1s) with the 20x lens and saved for the adapter and some lenses. You can probably even rent the adapter and lens but I'm not sure how it works in your part of the world.

There is an area near Denver, Colorado I used to shoot Bald Eagles and it's a similar setup. It was hard to get many shots inside 75 yards (with most being well over 100). The standard 20X lens is somewhere around a 50mm-1000mm equivalent so it might just do you well for a start.

Thank you Rhett.

It's taken me a while to verify that you're right and CNET Review is wrong ... the FX1 does NOT have interchangeability lens facility. Your suggestions re using my present lens (Sigma 75-300) are also very helpful.

How can I begin to understand the rules of magnification? Example: what is the effect of using 75-300 at full zoom on XL2? Why might that be any better than using it on XL1s? Another example: What do Canon mean when they claim 24mm - 17,280mm in 35mm film equivalent? (I'm at pre-school level on this having enjoyed nothing more complex than 8 x 30 binocs for super distance viewing).

What's the next step up in lens from 75-300 and what brand of lens and brand of adaptor do you recommend?

Brendan

Finally I can post! I've been browsing the forum for over a week now looking for any information I could get on the prosumer range of cameras. I have made the decision to get a camera but I'm unsure of what I should be going for. I'm finding man differing opinions on these and other boards. It's hard to find the right threads that ask the questions I want answered.

My needs are as follows (possibly too demanding for the price range but...)
Can film low light/night shots well
Can film well indoors with or without light
Can film well outdoors
The image quality must be good/cinematic or close to cinematic as possible.

What I intend on doing with the camera is mostly indie films, shorts and possibly some paid work (commercials and the like).
Right now I have a ZR90 and it simply doesn't cut it by an means.

Unfortunately for me, there are not many (if any) specialty camera shops in my area that I can test high-end cameras in. My price range is around 5000$.

I hada ZR60 and it didnt cut it for me..so i went and bought an older studio camera off ebay...900.00....and can connet the svideo out to record on a mini dv camera. Great quality and a low price.

Canon just released 3 new Elura camcorders that use a new 1.33mp CCD- check them out....they should be a step-up from the old Elura and ZR series camcorders.

I don't see the Elura series cutting it either. I'm looking for a pretty major step up from the disappointing image quality and night capabilities of the ZR90.

Is that $5,000 CDN? How much in USD?

Your list seems to fit a PD-170 or VX-2100. Is high quality 16:9 important? The PDX-10 is a good value and does excellent 16:9, but about 2.5 f-stops slower than the VX-2100, so not ideal at night. But the PD-170/VX-2100 only do cropped and stretched 16:9 which isn't so great. Is the DVX-100a out of your price range?

I don't think the DVX100a is out of my price range. Infact, it's one of the cameras I am considering but I'm not sure how it performs in an assortment of lighting situations.
5000$ USD is what I meant. I believe 5000$ CDN is about 4200$ USD.

A good 16:9 isn't really necessary and that can presumably be done in post if i felt so inclined to have a film in widescreen :)

I'm looking for a camera that can perform well in most lighting situations while still being stock. I know it's a lot to ask for with a limited amount of money but I suppose I'm still naive enough to think it's possible to make a good looking movie with a stock 5000$ camera.

The hard and fast answers:

The PD170/VX2100 are best in low light.

The DVX100A offers the most cinematic image, but is not as good in lower light levels as the PD/VX series.

If you can deal with turning on a few lights, and have some setup time, the DVX100a is probably your best bet.

Yeah, I've been leaning towards the DVX100a, thanks for the help!

I know you're looking for a cam that can go its own without lights, but your work won't look cinematic without them.

Put aside $1000 for a small lighting kit (Britek makes decent quality smaller/less expensive sets), and try to get get the best cam you can after that. DVX100(A) if you can still afoord it.

Good point Jesse. I'd rather have a ZR90 and a light kit, than a DVX100 without one.

Guys I want to buy a used Shoulder camera using it for ENG. I have 2,500 to spend what kind of camera can I get for that price or under? I was looking at a JVC GYDV5000, but there too new to find used under that price.

I would appreciate any help whatsoever!

I don't know anything about ENG cam's so don't take my advice, but I think 2500 dollars is a little bit too short for an ENG cam.
Maybe you'd better pick up a good 1/3 minidv cam?

Good luck.

You can find many JVC500's on Ebay in that range. Do your 'due diligence' however with the sellers AND the camera.

The 500 is a very good solid camera but the is NO LCD and it will only use full size tapes. Trade offs!

The 5000 has come down in price with the advent of the 5100 but it will be a long time before you'll find a 5000 in your price range.

Good luck and happy shopping!

Don

Ya,
Thanks. My GL2 takes GREAT pictures, i mean for a 2,000 dollar camera it autta. Its just that it has some drawbacks but i guess for myself being 21 and broke its good for now. I t has no XLR inputs but I can allways buy a beachteck. Also places to mount the wireless mic parts and lights, cant use pro lights which kinda suck but there are allways alternatives.

here is my 2cts. dv500 is good for it price but they seem to have this problem with tape get jam. when this happen, the only way to get the tape out is to open up the whole right side of the casing. with the dv5000, they have a manual eject knob by the side of the camera to over come this problem.
one question, does your job really call for a shoulder mount camera since most of the newer dv camera can perform almost to par?

ed

<<<-- Originally posted by Don Bloom : You can find many JVC500's on Ebay in that range. Do your 'due diligence' however with the sellers AND the camera.

The 500 is a very good solid camera but the is NO LCD and it will only use full size tapes. Trade offs!

The 5000 has come down in price with the advent of the 5100 but it will be a long time before you'll find a 5000 in your price range.

Good luck and happy shopping!

Don -->>>

Don, the 500 only takes mini-DV tapes.

Mike,
MY BAD!!!!

Sorry, I was thinking about the Panny 200 while writing that. See, should never try to do 2 things at once. Thanks for the clarification!
(o) (o)
|
\_____/

Don

Panasonic sells the DVC60 which is shoulder mount and within your price range. 1/4" CCDs, XLR inputs

Hi, I was just looking through prices at B&H, and I noticed something--a few rather cheap JVC 1/2 inch CCD cameras. Now, I have a question for this community--if I were to shoot an independent film, which option would be better?

Option 1:
Canon XL2, 24p: 1/3 inch CCDs, native 16:9.

Option 2:
JVC GY-DV5000U: 60i, 1/2 inch CCDs.

Seems like I could get an XL2 for about $4200 at this point. If I went with it, I would probably want the wide angle lens--possibly the manual lens they offer. Either way, this would probably bump the camera up to around $5000-5500. Now, the JVC camera seems to be about $5000, with a $500 rebate being offered. Seems like a better deal, it comes with a Fujinon 14x lens (manual, with focus marks and all that). Seems like the Fujinon lens has a better focal range (7.2-102.2) than the 20x lens that the Canon comes with. Overall, seems like the 1/2 inch CCD camera may actually end up being cheaper, unless there are things I'm not taking into consideration.

Now, I realize that the JVC model doesn't have 24p (but this can be corrected with Magic Bullet) and it doesn't have native 16:9 (at least I don't think)--are the 1/2 inch CCD's worth a purchase over the Canon XL2? I'm just curious, because this is the first time I've looked at cameras that are a step above your typical prosumer product. What does everyone think of this?

Matthew Overstreet

Whether it is "worth it" or it is "better" depends on a lot of things.
Mainly what you are going to use this camera for etc. So elaborate
a bit on what you want to do and which features are important or
not important to you.

For example, have you tested the Magic Bullet conversion from 60i
to 24p? Is it something **YOU** like? Do you already own this
software? Or does it need to be bought as well? Etc. etc.

Well, I guess what I'm getting at is what difference the size of the CCD actually makes? Does it effect resolution and quality? I'm actually not too familiar with cameras aside from mini-dv. This may be a stupid question, but I was also wondering whether a standard DV tape actually has better quality than miniDV. Are they basically the same format? Or, is it just that a standard DV tape runs longer than miniDV. I wasn't sure if standard DV was comparable to beta in any way. I just pretty much want to get the best picture possible, while also keeping my options open for possible film conversion.

Matthew Overstreet

Hi all,

Yes, I am another semi novice trying to decide amongst the current crop of cameras. My goal is to be able to shoot small scale music videos for local bands, weddings and other random bits of footage for multimedia projects. I have been editing video over the last year or so and have decided that I would like to get better footage. I have been reading this BB for about a week and half trying to sort out which camera to buy so now I have some specific questions. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I have duplicated this post in the GL, Optura and Panasonic BB to get opinions from those who use those individual BBs. I hope that's ok. :)

I would like:
-to shoot 16:9 pretty much for everything.
-Some kind of frame mode to mimic the film look.
-Manual control is important.
-To hook up a stereo mic (shotgun?)
-filters (UV, ND, what ever else might be useful)
-fisheye lenses
-wide angle (How does this look in 16:9?)
-maybe a telephoto if the built in zoom is limited.
-Eventual 35MM adapter.
-Time lapse video (not a deal breaker but would be nice)
-Is there a way to shoot time lapse with a Mac (OS X) laptop controlling a video camera? Is there an application for this? How about with a digital still camera?
-Decent low light capability for shooting weddings at dusk or night (hopefully they will be somewhat well lit)


I've narrowed it down to the usual suspects for my price range.
-Panasonic PV-GS400
-The manual for this doesn't say if you can hook up an external stereo mic. I would assume so but....Please let me know. Also, how do you mount the external mic to this camera.
-How do you hook up an external mic and a video light at the same time? (is this possible?)
-Does anyone know what size pixels are on the CCDs?
-Has anyone bought one recently that didn't have the tape transport problem.

-Canon Optura XI
-Does anyone know what size pixels are on the CCDs?
-How do you hook up an external mic and a video light at the same time? (is this possible?)

-Canon GL2
-Does anyone know what size pixels are on the CCDs?
-Does anyone shoot with this camera in 4:3 and then crop to 16:9 using that white outline mode? Do you like the results?
This is of course the last day to get the GL2 rebate so I am trying to decide by tonight. Sucks for me. :)

I ask about the pixel size because I have read that they use different pixel size (not sure about this though, please educate me) and this might play into their comparative resolutions. The GS400 has 1070K x3 (700 effective), the GL has 410K (380k effective with Pixel Shift) and the XI has 2200k (1230k effective). By those numbers, it would seem that the GS400 is the clear winner but...?

Thanks in advance for any insight.

Cheers,
Scott

What's your budget?

(BTW, please never double-post on DV Info.)

Well I really screwed the pooch then 'cause I triple posted. Sorry, I am new. Where should I post to get the best response for a subject like this?

By the way, my budget is about $2k. that's probably the extent of what I can get my wife to let me spend. ;)

Cheers,
Scott

I have the GS400, and do basically the same as you'd like to do, music videos, short films, etc.

16:9 is excellent, very quick and easy manual everything, decent manual picture adjustment (contast, sharpness, color) as well, external stereo mic, no problem, all kinds of filters available (in 43mm, but I'd get a step-up ring to 52mm or 55mm because there are more filters available in those sizes, sometimes cheaper than 43mm, since it's sort of a niche size), fisheye, wide angle, telephoto all available (i have a raynox 0.3x wide angle), no problem in 16:9.

It needs a fair amount of minimum light, but can go pretty far into the gain circuit without noise. Can't do time lapse, but very few cameras can.

Maybe a second hand XL1S from someone from the boards?

You might have a look at the Sony PDX-10 which B&H sells for $1,800 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=252192&is=REG

It won't give you frame mode, but it does include XLR's, a short shotgun mono mike, BW viewfinder, DVCAM recording and excellent 16:9. Wide angle adaptors are inexpensive due to the 37mm filter threads. Visit our forum (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=43) to learn more.

BTW, I removed one of your multiple posts. No problem, but (as Ken says) we discourage cross-posting because it gets confusing for you and others when the same discussion is split across more than one forum. I think the Open DV Discussion forum is the correct place for this sort of thing.

I've moved your thread to our general DV discussion area, Scott. It will get good exposure here. (Most longtime members use Get New to see new posts anyway.)

So of your $2,000 total budget you should basically allocate $1,200-$1,500 for a camera and the rest for audio and/or lighting gear and general accessories (carrying bag, etc.).

I can spend up to $2000 on the camera alone. The extra's (lenses, mics, etc...) I can pick up as I go so they won't be as big of a financial hit.

A used XL1 would be nice but I think it probably overkill for me at this point. Does it do true 16:9?

Mods, thanks for sorting out my posts, sorry for the confusion.

Cheers,
Scott

In that case Boyd's suggestion to consider the PDX-10 is an excellent one.

Joshua,

About the time lapse thing, I noticed that the GL2 did it and thought it would a cool option. I guess I could just press record evey few minutes myself with the GS400 and do time lapse that way.

I have followed your posts on this board as well as the pana BB and am quite interested in your mini35 adapter. I'd like to contact you thru email if that's alright.

Cheers,
Scott

Yes, I did a time lapse this way myself. I recorded a scene during sunset, shooting a few seconds every ten minutes for about an hour and a half. In the end, I used a few of these cliips and did cross-fades for a poor mans timelapse. This was more of a light-lapse, as there wasn't much motion in the scene.

You could always just let a tape run for an hour and put together frames from that. You burn through a tape, but it'd be easy. In fact, most NLEs, if you throw the clip on a timeline and speed it up by some 1000% or whatever is necessary, will just drop out frames, and you're all set. Maybe need to add some blur or ghosting effect to smooth it out.

It would be nice to have in camera, but it's doable in post.

For the record, I'm not marketing an adaptor, just discussing a hypothetical one. I don't know any more than anyone else who reads these boards. :)

Thanks to everyone for their input. I think I am going with the GS400. More effective pixels than the PDX10. Also, is it just me or are there more people that like Canon and panasonic than Sony?
I am most likely going to buy locally so I can return it if that tape transport problem crops up.....unless anyone knows of a good online place that will pay return shipping if they send me a bad one...? I just don't think I should have to pay for return shipping if I'm sent a defective unit, but it seems a bunch of these online places think it's the purchasers problem.

I have one more question regarding 16:9 footage. If I shoot 16:9, can I make a DVD that plays as it should on a widescreen tv and then plays on a 4:3 tv with the black bars on top and bottom? Like a normal retail DVD does...I've only authored a few DVD's at this point and none have been widescreen yet.

Joshua, I will try that with the camera after I get it, thanks! I understand about the adapter....I was mostly interested in your progress and experience since you are working with the camera I plan to buy. Oh I see, I typed "your" adapter, I realyy meant your expeience making one. :) I followed the posts that you participated in with Steve Dinkins and his 35mm experience.

Thanks again everyone!

Cheers,
Scott

I'm sure you will be happy with the GS400. But I've two last thoughts for you.

First, if you have the opportunity to do so, I strongly recommend taking at least a couple of these cameras for a test drive, even if it's just handling them in a store.

Second, pixel counts are largely meaningless with regard to the final footage. Remember, the primary viewing venue for all of these cameras is televisions. In that realm resolution is measured in lines of vertical resolution. To that end, the camera's digital signal processing that translates the raw pixels to scan lines is really the key determinant. Manufacturers play with pixel counts mainly for marketing purposes. So don't be too swayed by that stat.

Have fun with your new camera.

If you properly create an anamorphic DVD then it will do exactly what you want. On a 4:3 TV the DVD player itself will provide the letterboxing. However on a 16:9 screen it will play at full resolution and fill the screen. You'll need to study your software manual to see if your DVD authoring application supports anamorphic 16:9.

The user's DVD player must be properly configured via the menus as well. All the players I've seen default to use with 4:3 screens. So if you have a widescreen TV then you need to go to the system menu on your DVD player and choose the correct option for 16:9 so the player knows your screen type.

BTW, unless I'm mistaken the GS-400 and PDX-10 have CCD's with identical specs - 1/4.7" with 1152x864 pixels. But Ken makes an excellent point about trying the cameras and not buying on specs alone. Let us know how it works out for you.

So I went to the local Camera World and tried out the GS400, the GL2, the HC1000, the XL2 (wow, I wish I could..) and the VX2100. The GS400 was nice but was a lot smaller than I thought it would be. It also felt a little akward in my hands to operate compared to some of the other cameras. I think my fingers are too long.

They did not have the DVC30 or the PDX10. I have to admit that I had previosly just discounted the Sony's across the board because I believe Sony as a brand is always overpriced. You always seem to pay more to have those four letters on your gadget and it may not be better than the stuff that says Panasonic or JVC. Anyway, just my personal opinion. That aside I had to take notice that the Sony XV2100 can be found for just over $2K. Even with all that, I feel as though it may be more camera than I can actually take advantage of. I am thinking that I might just spend less on something like the Optura XI and put about $700 into a "Shooting Video" Class at the NW Film Center in Portland. After I get more comfortable and start shooting video worth watching, I will probably have a whole new crop of Video camera's to choose from and the starter camera can become my "second".

If there are any noobs reading this, take the advice of the experienced people on this BB and try out the cameras in a store. It definetly makes a difference how you think about the cameras.

Cheers,
Scott

Good for you, Scott! So many people get lathered-up for a particular camera and are then either overwhelmed or disappointed when they actually take ownership of it. You were fortunate at being able to actually lay hands on several models.

Your plan sounds like a thoughtful, mature way to ease into the basics of shooting. I suspect you'll be glad you took such an approach a year or two from now. Learning good photographic principles and practices is vastly more significant to the end product than using the most advanced camera. Top-grade cameras can be rented for specific projects for modest amounts. Top-grade talent and skills are harder to get.

If it's of any interest -- I had narrowed my choices to the GL2 and the VX2100 before I finally decided to get the GL2. The 20x zoom and the Canon rebate were the main factors in my final decision.