ZGC has an OpTex Anamorphic adapter for the XL1. However, with the 16x lens you can't zoon through the entire range. Details are on ZGC site http://www.zgc.com/html/anamorphic_attachment.html#xl1 Anamorphic Adapters are available for the GL1/2, PD150 that allow the full zoom range, as Frank said.

let get more specific with the optex 16x9 on the XL .. it only works on a short range of the lens .. they claim 10mm to 25mm ( i say more like 12-20mm) you loose your wide angle and telephoto of the lens .. but if you can work within this range then you have a 16x9 image ...

the BEST anamorphic i've seen on the XL is using the P&S mini 35 adaptor with 35mm anamorphic lens ...

<<<on the XL .. it only works on a short range of the lens .. they claim 10mm to 25mm ( i say more like 12-20mm)<<<

Is this only on the XL1S and not the PD150?



Revolver1010.

The member is writing about the adaptor fot the XL1(s). One has more choices with the PD150 regarding 16:9 adaptors.

I'm sorry, let me re-word that. Is the limited zoom range with the widescreen adaptor only effect the XL1S or does it also affect the PD150? Thanks for all the replies by the way!


Revolver1010.

There are 16:9 anamorphic adapters that zoom through the entire zoom range for the sony PD150, Canon GL1/2 and others. Follow the links and you'll see. Both Century Precision and OpTex have adapters. The adapters are available from 2 of the sponsors, ZGC and Zotz.

Jeff

<<<-- Originally posted by jtdonald : There are 16:9 anamorphic adapters that zoom through the entire zoom range for the sony PD150, Canon GL1/2 and others. >>>


Cool! Thanks again for the info :-)

Hi all,

I am going to purchase a digital camera for a youth group that I work with. I simply would like some input on what to look for in a digital camera. The kids have raised $1000 and I have to keep it around there. I know we won't be able to purchase a great camera for that but I am looking for a camera that will hook up to a brand new comp I built for them and will make little movies. That's another thing. Software? Any suggestions that wouldn't put me out of my budget.

Thanks
B

You might look into the Sony TRV900 (3 chip).

As far as software...Premiere 6.5 was just released. You can buy an ADS Pyro card and Premiere for around $350 bucks.

Or $ 299 for academic version of Final Cut Pro 3, as long as one of your kids is a student of any sort.

<<<-- Originally posted by elusive_kudo : Or $ 299 for academic version of Final Cut Pro 3, as long as one of your kids is a student of any sort. -->>>

This is the way that I was able to get FCP 3. Thank HCC for the assist with this one.

Thanks a ton for the info on the software. I will check both of those out.

Regarding a camera: If I drop $300ish on software that leaves me only $700 bucks or so. I know it's tight but I need to get a camera. I could wait a few more months but maybe the better question would be to ask what I should look for in a camera.

Thanks for being kind to newbie.

B

I would seriously consider a solid, reliable 1-chip camcorder. Currently the best-selling DV camcorder in the U.S. is the Canon ZR45MC.

See http://www.canondv.com/zr02/index.html

For what you're doing, I really doubt that you need a three-chip camcorder. The Canon ZR45MC is easy to use, intuitive, feature packed, and relatively inexpensive, making it perfect for student use. Plus, it offers full manual control of exposure, focus, shutter and white balance which is often a requirement in a learning environment.

The ZR45MC can be purchased from our DV Info Net sponsors (see www.dvinfo.net/sponsors) who are authorized Canon dealers, such as Pro-Tape, ZGC and Zotz Digital. At less than $700, you'll have enough left over for editing software. Hope this helps,

I have a ZR25 that I use for casual and vacation shooting. I can attest to Chris' remarks on the ZR's general value. I don't know how old the "kids" in your group are. But, if they are small children they will find the ZR's light weight and nice industrial more comfortable in their hands than some heavier cameras. The camera's controls are also designed in a very self-evident manner.

Seriously, my ZR does a fine job with most scenes, particularly considering that it's only a small-chip/single-chip camera. It's really a great value.

I don't see why you would need FCP, or Premiere. There are lots of $100 firewire cards that come with simple but efficient video editing software. By no means professional, but the learning curve is probably much eaiser.
I don't know much about software at this level, but I'm sure someone here can recommend something on the entry level scale.
This way would probably be much easier on your budget, and make your life simpler too. Do you really want, or have the time, to learn a professional level editing program?

I also agree a 3-chip camera would be overkill for what you seem to need. Stick with a Canon ZR. Good value for the $$.

Most importantly, if you get a ZR and entry level editing software, you should have $200 left over. Then you have a bit of money for other gear, like the #1 most important piece of equiptment you need, a tripod! And maybe an external mic.

Thanks again.

Dylan...I do appreciate your advice. I will have to check out some of the lower end programs. That said, I have used premier before (while back) and I own my own home recording studio which uses high end recording software (Pro tools, Cubase, etc). Audio is different but it will be easier for me anyway to get it. But, it all might be a mute point. I actually was given Vegas Video 2 last year (buddy of mine loves it for audio/video). I will have to check it out and see if it will do the trick.

You all have been a ton of help.

I'll let ya know what route I will go...

B

NTSC or PAL

Which of the two did you chose, and why. I know the differences, but why you bought it and what you do with it, I would REALLY like to know.


My projects are personally funded, so keeping things away from film transfer is ideal for me. So, NTSC is much more suited for my needs (and being in North America, it's the standard). I hate American having their own standards that differ from the rest of the world (an engineer's nightmare :D )

I chose NTSC because I didn't want to have any hassles with transferring from PAL, or any other "issues" creep up on me and kick me in the wallet later.
I'm not transferring to film, so the 25fps doesn't mean much to me. Also, my final format is VHS, so the extra resolution doesn't offer me much either.
ANd as I was buying a used camera, NTSC was much easier to find localy.

Unless your going to film at some point, it doesn't make sense to use PAL in North America. The slight resolution gain is lost when PAL is converted to NTSC. Most of my work is corporate and even with international sales units, if the company is in NA they want it to play in the boardroom. The other work I do is documentary (North American wildlife, mostly birds) that is intended for either broadcast or sales in NA. Match your format to your market.

Film is an entirely different beast. I think that post house that does the tranfer from DV to film should dictate what video format you use. some prefer PAL, some prefer NTSC.

Jeff

For now, NTSC is probably less hassle over all. In the future as HD starts making inroads, I suspect that HD will become the worldwide standard.

Nathan Gifford

P.S. It has been rumored that when Canon introduces this prosumer cam it will be called the XL_1$

I'd go with NTSC.

I am currently using my PAL XL1 in Japan(NTSC) and it is more trouble than it is worth.

I'm Australian and bought my camera before even considering I would end up in Japan. I missout on a bit of work as my camera is PAL and it is not woth the cost of conversion.

Whether you need PAL or NTSC depends where you live and what you want to do with your footage. I own both types of cams and use both, depending which one's best for what I want to do.

hi,


Im new here. I've been researching this site and others for a little while now to try and find a camera for myself. I plan on making a trilogy of shorts next summer, and I was wondering if people could give me thier opinions on good cameras to go for. Im currently looking at the Pd150 , the Canon XL1s, and maybe the GL-2. I know all the pros and cons of each camera . I just would like some opinions on these cameras from people who are experienced. From stills i have seen i probably enjoy the Pd150's the most, but I also like the way the XL1 looks as well. I basically am looking for a camera i could use for awhile and one that could give me the most options and be able to do the most things when i am filming. I plan on testing all these cams out in a couple of weeks. Thanks a lot,

Hi Splangy,

Welcome. If your looking for flexability and the most options, the XL1s is the winner in my book. But, without knowing the shorts you'll be working on it is really hard to recommend one over the other. Flexability and options come at a price (what doesn't?). Namely, size, weight and cost of support accessories, lights, tripods, cases, additional lenses, adapters, filters, you name it, it costs more for the XL1s. Smaller size and weight may be an advantage in your productions. Interchangable lenses may be an advantage. However, for the things that I do, I'll never consider a camera that does not have interchangable lenses. At times I need ultra wide (1.5mm) to super telephoto (5000mm). The GL2 and the PD150 can't deliver.

Jeff

Hello:

Recently, I was in the same boat as you. I finally decided that the Canon was my favorite over the Sony. Still, one thing I had ruled out during my research was using an old XL1. However, logic eventually hit me. I suddenly realized that I could get an old XL1 and save tons of dough. I could use this dough to enhance my projects. In your case, you'll improve your shorts. If you get an old, good XL1, you can take the extra money and get good lights or props or other things (filters, etc). Remember, its all about story and screen composition. Some extra cash to help your screen composition to look better can go a long way. So, I bought an old, used XL1 from someone (not-so-ironically, from someone on this site). And, I certainly DO NOT regret my decision. Oh yeah, I've looked through the PD150 and XL1. They're both great cameras. The XL1 is flexible for my use (I shoot action, kung-fu-like projects with people). The PD150 looks the same. However, I do like the skin-tones with the XL1. But thats all personal-preference. It depends on your subject. What do your shorts contain/require? That will help you make you're decision.

Regards,

Kyle "Doc" Mitchell

I will back up what Doconomus said about buying an older XL1 and saving tons of dough.

They're all good with pros and cons. Personally, I like the GL2, and VX2000/PD150...for beefy hand-held cams. At this point in time, I'd choose the GL2. But everyone's needs are different.

Hate to be a me-too-er, but I'm in the same position in regards to choosing a new camera. I have had Canon slrs for many years, plus Sony camcorders. I'm making the move from a Sony TRV820 and I've decided to go with the GL-2. There are many options, of course, including (gasp) going with a digital slr but at this stage of my life I think the GL-2 will fit my needs best.
Sandy

you doing the RIGHT thing by testing out all 3 camera's. IMO you can't go wrong with any of the 3. IMAGES are very good on all.
IMO you could shoot a separate scene on each, assemeble the 3 scenes and on a TV i don't think anybody would notice.
you'll have to decide on if you like the layout , handling, image, of one better and of course $$ will come into play at some point.

keep in mind that you are buying more then just a camera. will you be needing extra batt?, tripod?, external mic? , XLR box? , XLR cable?, windscreen ? , filters ? camera case?

Splangy

You want opinions?

As an owner of the xl1s and gl2...I'll tell you that the bigger brother isn't getting much use these days...It's not that the gl2 has rendered the xl1s irrelavant...It's just that the image quality has more "integrity" than the xl1s...excellent detail without having to turn up the sharpness, (in fact I turn it down a little), lower contrast and less glaring highlights. The gl2 is where DV is heading (including future versions of the xl1) and I personally wouldn't invest now in a new xl1s knowing what is probably coming down the pike within a year or so. The lower cost of the gl2 would allow you to get a nice shotgun mic or a wireless system plus a few other accessories that will make a very nice package.

Getting an older xl1 for the same price as a gl2 makes no sense to me whatsoever..the image quality isn't in the same league, and for the most part the level of controls on the gl2 exceeds or equals those on the xl1.

Don't get me wrong, I love my xl1s...It's larger size makes for better hand held work, and it's zoom control is superior...and it's great for interviews and other close-up work. Great sound circuits and controls. Yes, you can change lenses...but honestly the vast majority of us never will. If you were going to be a professional videographer using the camera day-in day-out, I would say go with the xl1s as it simply has a level of control and expandability that is unmatched in prosumer level.

The PD150 is an outstanding camera...but for me the canon frame mode is the deciding factor.

there's my opinions.

Barry

hi,
I will soon be buying a 3ccd camcorder. up until now i was thinking about the xl1s, then the xm2 came out which stopped me in my tracks.

I have heard a lot of bad things about the xl1s, wierd lens, front heavy, not very good picture, over priced. these are just some of the comments that i have been reading.

my plan is to use the camera to shoot short films on. then maybe a feature if its upto the job. But i would also want to use the cam for doing wedding videos and maybe corporates and docos.

Would my customers be put off if i turned up with an xm2 even though its capable of producing great results?. Is the xl1s any better than the xm2, i.e is it worth spending the xtra money. (baring in mind that i dont have the cash to buy the manual lens or pro viewfinder)

I would invest in an xlr adapter and pro microphone which ever cam i get.

any advice would be appreciated.

regards

tony webber

Welcome Tony,
You'll hear "a lot of bad things" about every camera...and nearly everything else in life, for that matter. The key is to qualify the source of such information before accepting it. Look around this community, and others, and you'll quickly see that many of the tough stories often (but not always) come from folks who've not (yet) taken time to learn to use their camera equipement as well as they have their computer. Remarks from experienced users and professionals tend to be informative in style rather than deragatory or inflammatory. The fact is that XL1s is a tremendously flexible digital video platform for a prosumer budget. (Spoken as someone who has used one since its introduction as its predecessor before that.) No, it's certainly not perfect. But for its low price it's damn good and amply adequate for most of its owners' purposes. But it does take practice, just like any other tool.

But enough of that.

If you're considering a GL2 (or XM2) you should spend some time over at our GL2 forum to get a feeling for what the early adopters are seeing. It's a very active area right now. Similarly, spend some time in the XL1 forum for a backgrounding on that platform.

Will it be acceptable to your clients? How would we know that? If you asked us whether or not the GL2 can produce professional results rivaling much more expensive equipment the answer would be a resounding "Yes". But, as with any other camera, only in the hands of an experienced professional. If your clients expect you to show up with $50,000 shoulder bricks and a grip crew then, yes, they'll probably be disappointed to see you show up with an XM2 in a shoulder bag.

Which camera should YOU buy? Again, only you can make that decision based on what your goals and needs will be. Gather as much info as possible, try to get shooting time with each and take your best shot. If your budget is as limited as you indicated the XM2 might be the most practical choice available to you regardless of characteristics.

Most importantly, however, don't get yourself into analysis paralysis. Get a camera (any camera) and start getting some practice with shooting, lighting and sound coverage. Which camera you choose between these two is trivial when compared to the amound of experience you gain shooting. (Not to mention just having fun with one of these wonderful pieces of equipment.)

Regarding your clients, sell your RESULTS, not your means. Present yourself professionally and honestly. Clients who have bought into YOU will tend to be better, longer-lasting clients (assuming that you can deliver top-quality results, of course).

I'm sure a smaller 3 chip cam like the GL2 will impress people, especially if you get it all dressed up (Beachtek, Sennheiser ME66/K6, large hood, brace, etc etc).

I whole heartedly agree with Ken. Worthwhile clients will not decide to use you based upon what camera you own, it is your reel that motivates them to consider you "worthy" and whether or not you are capable of creating the certain "look" they have in mind. For those potential clients who do not have any idea of what they want, having a good portfolio/ reel that shows not just one, but various different looks is handy. I would suggest that for your particular situation, having a camera that is capable of creating not just one, but various different looks is key. Both the GL2/XM2 and XL1S are capable of this. The XL1S takes it further with a more complete set of lens, audio and viewfinder options. Considering that you want to start off in shooting weddings, I would suggest that you may need the flip-out LCD panel found on the XM2. You may prefer to take the camera off of your shoulder to obtain a more "low-profile" stance and "blend in" with the wedding party. The XM2's more neutral grey color scheme is less noticeable than that of the XL1S. Weight may be a consideration for you as well, the XM2 is significantly lighter. Factor in your potentially limited budget and the additional items that you will need to complete your overall package - such as wireless mics, shotgun mic kit, audio adaptor, a couple of good headphones, video light kit (you may appreciate the new VL3 video light which works on the XM2, but not the XL1S), cases, grip gear, tape stock, batteries, cables and adaptors, field monitor, backup camera?, etc. You may not have the luxury of picking between the two - in your situation, you just may appreciate the more affordable XM2 and what it can do. It is certainly an excellent camera to begin with and to grow into.

I also agree with Ken that you will hear both positive and negative comments about any camera. To those who you have heard say that the picture on the XL1S is "not very good", I would say "rubbish!!!",,, it has an excellent image and a wonderful look. I have seen many high profile video segments and award-winning shorts and projects which were created with the XL1(S). One of my personal favorite shorts, which has received much praise at the 2002 Sundance Film Festival, is "Anna's Being Stalked" by Scott Pendergrast and Gabriel Rhodes of Stalker Films [ http://www.stalkerfilms.net/site.html ]. This DV short looks excellent and when I saw it projected at the NY DV Show, it looked a lot like film! This DV short was shot with the older XL1 (not the newer XL1S) using the 3X Wide Angle lens. It just reminds one of the fact that it is not just the camera that creates the quality image you are seeking, it is the talent behind the lens that does so.

Tony, you stated that you will also be using your new camera "for doing wedding videos and maybe corporates and docos". In this case, the XM2 is more than adequate! Recently at the WEVA (Wedding Event and Videographers Association) Expo in Las Vegas, the Canon booth was swamped with people interested in the new GL2, in addition to the XL1S.

Please do keep in touch,

- don

cheers for your replys guys. I have just heard a few stories about clients saying "you must be an amateur because you dont have a big camera" etc.

But you are all right, its the end product that counts, not the camera you used,

So in your humble opinons would i benefit from getting a pd150, to get the better viewfinder and built in xlrs.

has anyone used the viewfinder for focusing on the xm2? how is it?

regards

tony webber

You really need to test the cams to see which you will like. The PD150 is a really nice rig, but as far as I know, it cost much more than the XM2. I believe the difference in price will allow you to purchase things like wireless mics and an XLR adapter.

Again almost all the of the 3 chippers available are pretty darn good. So do not over analyze because the differences are small. If you try before you buy you will indeed make an educated choice.

Hi Tony,

Not everyone perceives the viewfinder on the PD150 as any better than the viewfinder on the GL2. Certainly, when Sony first introduced the PD150 to the market, they did quite a good job at hyping up this feature. I'm not implying that this B&W EVF is not any good, because it is. It is not a high quality CRT like the B&W viewfinder on the XL1S (made by Ikegami) though, the Sony B&W EVF is still an LCD with the color dropped. The GL2 internal EVF is significantly brighter and sharper than the older GL1 and the color LCD EVF on the XL1(S). It comes down to what you prefer really. Many people these days prefer to see color and to be able to compose in color. The color EVF on the GL2 is bright and sharp enough to allow you to do this quite well. Also, a big plus with the GL2 (and the XL1S) is that you can completely turn on/ off all of the data display by the push of a button in both the flip-out LCD and the internal EVF. This is very nice, as it gives you the feeling that you are looking through the lens much more than with a cluttered EVF display.

As far as the built-in XLR's, remember that you are paying for that feature and that not everyone likes the feel of two XLR connectors sitting on top of the lens - this makes the PD150 feel front-heavy to many people. I actually prefer to use a BeachTek adaptor (or Studio One XLR-PRO) mounted to the bottom center "sweet spot" of the camera. You can certainly do this with the GL2. This gives a nicer feel and helps to steady the handycam a little bit more, by adding this weight to the bottom of the camera instead of on top of the lens. A big plus of using an audio adaptor this way is that you get big, analog volume knobs (which the PD150 does not have) and ground/ hum removal switches.

I hear most PD150 users say they replace the mic on the PD with a better shotgun mic, such as the Sennheiser ME64 or 66. This is what I do on occasions when I shoot with a PD150. I do shoot with the PD150, at times, when I am hired by a client who provides their own gear. I personally prefer the Sennheiser ME66 when it comes to picking up dialogue from the camera (I prefer using a soundman even more so). If I am in a very tight or "dead-sounding" room, I may reach for the ME64 instead, which has a slightly wider pickup pattern and affords you a little more room tone. The PD150 mic is more of an ambience mic to me, however, it is only monophonic. When it comes to ambience, I much prefer getting it in stereo vs. mono, and the XL1S/GL2 mics are very good at recording stereo. The preamps are very robust too and the limiter is quite good, especially on the XL1S.

Cost of an audio adaptor and Sennheiser ME64 or 66, mic shockmount combined: around $650, sometimes less, depending upon who you buy from. You will get better dialogue pickup this way and a more balanced feel on the camera by putting the weight on the bottom where it belongs.

The GL2 offers a full 30fps "progressive scan" Frame Mode (25fps on XM2) while the PD150 is limited to 15fps Progressive Scan which most people see that as too strobey, useable more for grabbing stills only. On the GL2, many DV filmmakers love the look of Frame Mode, as well as the still images you can grab from tape and the 1.7megapixel progressively-scanned stills with the SD card.

The GL2 lens is also a very high quality, Flourite coated lens with an outstanding 20X Optical zoom. The PD150 offers 12X Optical zoom.

I must say that overall, I prefer what you can achieve on the XL1S with the 16X Manual Servo lens much more than what you can do with a PD150. I also like what you can do on the newer GL2, which has the same image setup control as the XL1S.

- don

hi Don,

So for what i want to do with it, the xm2 is probably the best option for me (in your opinion).?

This is probably a daft question but how much difference would having 1/3 inch chips make to reducing the depth of field?

If i was to go for the xm2 would you recommend using a beechtek adapter rather than the ma300? Do the volume knobs on the beech tek override the xm2's manual audio controls. or would i have to adjust both them and the beechtek knobs?

Any ideas what the libec LH650 tripod is like?

And finally, have you heard any comments on the audio technica at815 and at835 shotgun mikes?

regards

tony

<<-- Tony: If i was to go for the xm2 would you recommend using a beechtek adapter rather than the ma300? Do the volume knobs on the beech tek override the xm2's manual audio controls. or would i have to adjust both them and the beechtek knobs? -->>

I've not used the MA300 but have looked at it. I -have- used a BeachTek unit many times. The MA300 is certainly better-integrated with the XM2's audio circuitry (through the Super Shoe or whatever they're calling that interface). But it represents two hazards in my eyes. First, it's plastic and features a high stress point at the shoe fitting. XLR cables are not light and, being cables, can tend to get tugged. Even with careful pig-tailing I just can't imagine the MA300 being a long-term survivor acessory.

Second, mechanical stress aside, the MA300 basically introduces the awkward deesign that has plagued Sony's PD150 throughout its life. It places cables at the top-front of the camera, precisely where they would be most unwelcome.

So, in my opinion, my BeachTek will continue to provide XLR functionality to my GL2. It's a sturdy, metal casing that places the cable weight and dial-fiddling at the bottom-rear of the camera where it belongs. Look at the Studio One unit also, a close competitor to the BeachTek.

Sorry for the back-to-back post but I just have one comment on the viewfinder issue you noted.

The PD150 does, indeed, have a better viewfinder system than the GL2. Specifically, it features a high-res b&w viewfinder in the eyepiece and a color lcd flip-out panel. A full-frame high-res b&w viewfinder can be a real advantage for manually snapping critical focus. I use a b&w head on my XL1s for certain types of shooting and it's nice to have. But I generally only use it when I'm also using my 14x manual lens. On the GL2 it would be of, perhaps, marginal value since the lens is built-in (like the PD150's) and its focus is servo-driven. It's just as easy to zoom-in, snap focus and then re-frame the shot on the GL2.

(Background note: Sony develped the PD150 with the VX2000 as its core technology. The b&w viewfinder and the XLR ports were amenities that Sony added to the PD150 to encourage big cam pros to use a small camera, since these are features of nearly all big cams. Of course they also added the DVCAM format.)

So I suppose what I'm saying is that Nathan's suggestion to try both cameras is the best suggestion we can offer to you.

Just a question for Ken Tanaka

"..my BeachTek will continue to provide XLR functionality to my GL2. It's a sturdy, metal casing that places the cable weight and dial-fiddling at the bottom-rear of the camera where it belongs...."

Interesting point, my only concern/question how sturdy is the minijack plug that connects the beachtek to the the GL2.?

Can you still use the manual controls on the GL2 as well as the beachtek?

I would be really interested in seeking the schematic for the accessory shoe to learn what the different pins are for. Might be able to make a very low profile connector to fit the accesory shoe. Bypass the minjack plug suck some phantom power. If you really wanted to be cheeky I am sure that the mini light that canon sells would draw the phantom power so you might be able to get the light to work and also hijack the audio ch1 and ch2 without power and plug into a beachtek/studio one.

ken,

are there any other alternatives to the beechtek?

tony

Yes. Studio 1 has a comparable unit. See http://www.studio1productions.com/

Re: BeachTek

Yes, both the level controls on the BeachTek as well as those on the GL2 are active. The dials on the BeachTek control the level of each XLR channel, as you'd expect. The dials on the GL2 control the levels coming into the camera.

Hello, NEWBIE Alert! YOU should have used the search! OK OK OK
I'm looking to get a new DV camcorder. It will be used to video tape downhill mountain biking and other crazy stuff. I've used some Sony's and JVC home camera's and it's time for a better camera! The GL2 looks good any other I should look at?
Also can you plug a external camera into the GL2? Running a helmet camera is a plus.

When you plug another camera into the GL2, it becomes a DV recording deck, and if this is something you're going to do a lot, then you might want to consider an inexpensive 1-chip consumer DV camcorder like the Canon ZR40 for the "use it as a deck" purpose.

Your two main camera manufacturer choices down in the prosumer / high-end consumer range are Canon and Sony, because they're the only ones which will let you do zoom and focus "the right way," remotely from the tripod handle. If you're mostly handheld, this may not be a big deal.

The different manufacturers have different color signatures to their video. For instance a lot of folks like Canon because the video is warmer and softer than your usual harsh, cold video.

The important thing is to try before you buy. The right camera for you is the one that feels right in your hands, and whose video looks best to you on a proper video monitor.

In the 3-chip DV camcorder world, you should look at the Sony TRV950, Sony VX2000, Canon GL2, and what's the Panasonic model Frank Granovski likes so much? MX3000 or something like that I think. Hope this helps,

Hello,

I plan to shoot a video while rafting Class V whitewater and would appreciate any recommendations for a suitable mini-DV camera. The model I'm looking for must meet the following criteria:


1. 3 CCDs

2. compact design, easily held and operated with one hand

3. has a dedicated waterproof (to at least 15ft/ 5m) housing accessory made by a competent third party

4. cam alone is under $2500 U.S.

Thanks,

Mark

The first cam that comes to mind is the 1 CCD cam from Canon, the Optura 200MC.

The second cam that comes to mind is the MX5000 through Tim:

www.dvfreak.com/pana_mx5.htm

Both these cams offer high quality video, and have an optical image stabilizer.

You may also want to check out the GL2, but it'll cost over $2500 US after you bought an extra, larger battery for it and a waterproof case. It also has an optical stabilizer (and a nice big 20X zoom). But I presume you wouldn't need this kind of zoom, and you might even want to look into a wide angle adaptor (lens attachment).

Tim can also get you the waterproof case for the MX5000 (and wide angle), but this will push up the price (of course).

If I had to pick one, I'd pick from these 3 excellent cams, but I'd lean towards the 200MC. A fellow I know has shot lots of good white water footage with his 2 Elura cams (the old one with the optical stabilizer), and now also uses a GL2.

1) The 200MC is a small, single chip upright
2) The MX5000 is a small, triple chip hand-held
3) The GL2 is a larger, triple chip hand-held, yet easy to hold (with one hand).

Check with the dealers/sponsers of this site for where to buy either the Canon Optura 200MC or GL2.

Tim for the MX5000 is another good choice.

My choice would be the Optura 200MC. If you want, I can re-direct a spec review article I have.

granit@imag.net (my e-mail)

Frank,

I like the GL2 and came close to buying one this summer, but its size might well present problems for the purpose stated above.

The Optura 200mc does have Optical Image Stabilization, but has only one CCD and is otherwise a downgrade of sorts from previous models, e.g., smaller CCD, smaller lens, Canon got rid of progressive scan on most if not all of the consumer DV cams for reasons unknown. if you feel otherwise I'd love to see the review you mentioned.

The whole Panasonic MX-5000 quagmire: I've now seen the nasty debate on DV.com concerning the grey market situation that US residents like myself must deal with in order to buy one of these intriguing cams. Not being able to play with one before pruchasing is a major negative for me.

Thanks,

Mark

If Chris don't mind me redirecting, Rick!! had a thread on this over at the Justeditors.com forum.
He'd put a video of himself whitewater canoeing.

Peter