Check out

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/PhotoAlbum8.html

Hope to finish it up and post the movie soon. I am impressed with the film like image quality of this cam.

Great -- thanks for sharing this. Please keep us advised of any additions you put up.

Very nice shots! Good work. I look forward to seeing the clips.

What were your CP settings. Just standard factory or?

Michael

Another bird shooter! I got some crows sitting on a tree the other day.

A 6 MB MPEG2 movie was just posted, the first of a series of 6 movies all around 6 MB each. The movie seems to run fine on my Apple web page, but if any problems let me know.

I am pretty sure I used "TV" and not "CP" for these movies. I clicked exposure down anywhere from 1 to 3 clicks. Hope I didn't over do it.

DISCLAIMER: None of the ducks in this video were harmed in any way, nor were any given drugs to make them fall sleep on cue, which you may see in the next clip.

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/iMovieTheater12.html

Deleted post

hmmm... i'm running Win ME and couldn't view either clip. :^( I don't seem to have any trouble with other imovie clips.... I was looking forward to seeing yours - loved your stills last night and was looking forward to seeing the GL2 in action.

-jenn (newbie eyeing the GL2)

Jendietz, does your movie player play MPEG2? If not you might be able to download an update for it. Personally I have PowerDVD player from Cyberlink:

gocyberlink.com

This player is phenomenal in my opinion, and wheras my Windows Media Player runs the movie very jerky at full screen, PowerDVD has no problem at all.

I think that's the link. I have it on my PC laptop, wherein I created the file, transfered it to my Mac Powerbook 667 DVI laptop, then uploaded it. Since I have Quicktime 6 and the upgraded MPEG2 player codec, the movie runs fine on either my Powerbook or my PC laptop which runs with Windows 2000.

Sorry you could not view it; perhaps I will upload a .mov version if you or others have problems. I think MPEG2 at 740x480 looks better though. By right clicking on the MPEG2 movie on the web page once it is fully viewable I can save it to the hard drive and run it full screen.

Here is the free download for PowerDVD:

http://www.gocyberlink.com/english/download/dl_file.jsp?dl_id=1

I looked at your still images and I have the feeling that the photo shot on your memory card is much better quality than the ones you took in frame mode. Am I right in my observation???????

I would say yes. However the photo mode is nothing I would ever use in a professional sense, like a wedding shoot. I have a 2.1 megapixel Sony F-55 digital camera, and there is no comparo; the Sony pics blow the GL1 pics away. I think the GL2 cam mode could have been better. In any case it was not a deciding factor in purchasing the GL2. I think it is to me a bell and whistle I would barely use, like the digital effects of the cam. You know, I need to at least check those digital effects out, but I am really no interested...the video quality is proving to be worth the investment and that is all I was really concerned about from the beginning. The only reason I posted frame captures is to let folks get an idea of the cams potential in video, not photographic quality. Because if the cam does that well in video frame capture, you know the video itself has got to be worth checking out. So my opinion is if you are looking for good digital photographs then buy a digital camera. I bring my F-55 to weddings and take group shots of the wedding party right along with the photographer after the wedding, running my camcorder and doing slow zooms on the group at the same time. I incorporate both digital pics and camcorder shots, editing on iMovie, showing them as the credits are rolling up the screen at the end of my wedding video with the appropriate dubbed music, and customers love it. "My husband almost cried at the end of the video" and $50 tips are all the evidence I need to know that the digital camera and the camcorder can work hand in hand successfully.

Hope this helps!

I agree that the photo quality is not te reason for buying a GL2 however it is a nice option if it works for website applications. Concerning digital still cameras I prefer a Canon G3 or S45 in the compact class.

Back to the GL2. Reading all treads I concluded that the GL2 is 0.5 to at most 1 stop less light sensitive than the VX2000 and that the audio quality is a bit better than the VX2000. The GL2 has a few better option like more zoom, l/r separated audio controll and full progressive scan/movie frame. Otherwise they are almost identical. The GL2 being a bit cheaper and having no metal body. Am I right ??

I can't disagree with what you are saying so far. I am impressed with the high quality workmanship of the unit, though it be plastic it is quite sturdy and solid. The LCD door is more fragile than the GL1 unit, but is still capable ; I have no real complaint there also. Light sensitivity is what I need to test next, but I can only compare it to my GL1, since I have no experience with the VX2000, but have 2 GL1 cams on hand. For some I imagine the VX2000 would be a better choice as far as light sensitivity, but it all depends what you want your cam for. I would feel handicapped without a 20x zoom, being used to my GL1 cams. And with a decent video image at up to 40x digital, the GL2 is the way to go for me; the VX2000 would leave me wanting more. I will post a short clip at 40x zoom on my next upload if I can get the laptop to work. Apple has a ways to go with their web server and OS 10.2

Ah that would be nice if you upload a video at 40* zoom. I also heard that the "optical image stabilisation" of the GL2 does a better job than the one on the VX2000 and Sony camcorders in general. Is this true?

Why is the LCD screen/door of the GL2 more fragile as the one on the GL1????? In one thread I read that because the body is made from plastic it makes sounds during handeling and those sounds are picked up by the mic. Is this true?

Actually I can not wait to buy a GL2 as soon as possible but I have to wait for another few months and save some money.

By the way where do you live?

buddy1065-

When your iMovie is download (using Mac G4, OS 10.2.1) the movie won't play. It shows a broken quicktime icon. Right click doesn't work either. I tried 3 different browsers and still no go (explorer, netscape and Chimera).

Jeff

Looks like I have a lot of work ahead of me. Since no one is reporting being able to succesfully view any of the movies I shall repost them in Quicktime format. Jeff, it could be that you cannot play MPEG2 movies on your system. All these movies download fine and play fullscreen once I save them to hard disk. It is because I have upgraded my QT 6 player to play MPEG2. Have you? Anyway since there are problems I will try to get .mov clips posted before the day ends. Thanks for the info, Jeff. Darn; just posted the 40x zoom clip too. Thought I had all of my ducks in a row...

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/iMovieTheater12.html

I tried saving to disk, but right click does nothing. The option to save never pops up. Good pun by the way. I also am using quicktime 6 with MPG2 option.

Jeff

Jeff, try downloading

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/iMovieTheater12.html

It is now in .mov format.

Enjoy, more to come.

Movie downloads and right click works. Thanks for your efforts and very nice footage.

Jeff

It's more then a stop! The VX2000 also has a very bright image. I have owned a PD150 and two VX2000's. So I know how that camera works. I have said this since day one using those cameras that they can see in the dark. But the one thing that the VX2000 does not have, is frame mode. Sony just won't do it on those cams. To bad.

As to plastic. Not true. Michael Cutler in Irvine Canon says the GL2 has a magnesium alloy body covered in a plastic shell. So did the GL1. This is probably why I heard so many camera dropping stories and the thing just kept on ticking.

I have photographed a bunch of pictures for DVinfo gallery that shows off the GL2. I did the same for the VX2000 in the VX2000 gallery on this site. The GL2 pics are do to be up shortly!

Michael Pappas

<<<-- Originally posted by Odessadream : I agree that the photo quality is not te reason for buying a GL2 however it is a nice option if it works for website applications. Concerning digital still cameras I prefer a Canon G3 or S45 in the compact class.

Back to the GL2. Reading all treads I concluded that the GL2 is 0.5 to at most 1 stop less light sensitive than the VX2000 and that the audio quality is a bit better than the VX2000. The GL2 has a few better option like more zoom, l/r separated audio controll and full progressive scan/movie frame. Otherwise they are almost identical. The GL2 being a bit cheaper and having no metal body. Am I right ?? -->>>

This may be the last clip for a while:

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/iMovieTheater13.html

It is about 7.5 MB 640x480 Sorenson 3 codec compressed. There is a scene showing a flock of ibis at 40x digital zoom. Guess you will have to imagine what the uncompressed footage looks like. All I can say is WOW.

I have deleted all the MPEG2 clips so that leaves only two .mov clips on my web page.

When it comes to documentary film like quality, I find the GL2 is just "ducky".
However I do think it needs good lighting and is not the see in the dark cam the VX reportedly is.

One more thing; 720x480 .mov full quality Quicktime files look rather heavily aliased on my laptop when they are run, especially when there is movement, unless I use the frame mode. After exporting to tape however the video looks great when shown on a TV monitor.

Just a note on the vx2k vs gl2 low light thing...canon rates the gl2 at 6 lux (down to .37 lux with slower shutter speeds)...Sony rates the vx2k at 4 lux...so we're looking at 1/2 stop difference given they are using the same standards.

Barry

What about the audio quality of the VX2000. I know they fixed the "HISS" problem in the manual gain controll mode of the PD150 but Sony did not fix this problem for the VX2000. So how thus the audio of the VX2000 compare to the GL2 in both auto and manual mode?????

Thanks Barry for your reaction on the comment of Michael Pappas
on the low light performance of the GL2 vs the VX2000. This settles this argument ones and for all :-)

First I will address this lux stuff. Spec ratings mean nothing from manufacture to manufacture. Real world tests and results mean all! The VX2000/Pd150 uses a Hyperhad ccd that not only is more sensitive in low light, it has a brighter image on color in low light. This is simply the way it is. Now the GL2 is a lot better then the GL1 was. It's close to the VX2000, but the VX2000 leads.

As to audio, the VX2000 does have more noise then the PD150. But if you matched the right Mic it sounded good. The GL2 so far appears to be excellent in the audio area. I like the side vu meters and the viewfinder display meters.

<<<-- Originally posted by Odessadream : What about the audio quality of the VX2000. I know they fixed the "HISS" problem in the manual gain controll mode of the PD150 but Sony did not fix this problem for the VX2000. So how thus the audio of the VX2000 compare to the GL2 in both auto and manual mode????? -->>>

You said : " I have owned a PD150 and two VX2000's"


What happened??????? Why did you get rid of them?

Maybe the VX2000 is a bit better in low light however it does not compensate the features/option the Canon GL2 has. So for ME the GL2 will be a better purchase. Unfortunately the GL2 is not yet available in The Netherlands.

Chris Hurd said one time at dinner that I change cameras like he changes shirts. He is correct. But this benefits everyone else since I have a good insight on how they perform!

The VX2000/Pd150 is a great camera. The GL1, XL1 (which I owned before the VX2000) was not as clean as the 2000/pd150 and the XL1 was not as sharp as the GL1. The Xl1 was as clean as the VX2000 though! The VX2000/PD150 was the sharpest of the cameras, so that's the one I went with. I got the PD150 when it first came out, but felt the extras were not worth an extra $1200. So I sold it for what I paid and got a vx2000. It's performance went unmatched in it's price range. Then the GL2 came out with it's higher rez ccd's making it a contender. Mix that with frame mode and it's a winner.

Frame mode is the biggest of the reasons. I got sick of converting the 60i footage. With frame mode it's all right there. If something comes out better. I will get that. You might be saying why not get the Pana/24p minidv. Well, I don't think the camera is worth $3800 to me. $1400 more then the gl2. I am also waiting for someone else to compete with Panasonic. You know someone will. Then maybe another upgrade is to come.

Michael Pappas

The list of cameras I have owned.

Hitachi B/W video camera - 1981 I was 12 years old.
Panasonic PK-957 -1985
JVC -1985 can't remember the model.
Sony Broadcast camera M2 3 tube saticon. -1986
Sony V-9 8mm camcorder. First camcorder for me. -1988
Sony ED-betacam 2 ccd removable lens camera. -1990
VX1000 -1996
AG-EZ1 - 1997
XL1 - December 1997
GL1 - 1998
PD-150 -2000
VX2000 -2000
Optura Pi-2001
GL2-2002



<<<-- Originally posted by Odessadream : You said : " I have owned a PD150 and two VX2000's"


What happened??????? Why did you get rid of them?

Maybe the VX2000 is a bit better in low light however it does not compensate the features/option the Canon GL2 has. So for ME the GL2 will be a better purchase. Unfortunately the GL2 is not yet available in The Netherlands. -->>>