GL2 or PVDV953? at DVinfo.net

Marko Zorec · September 22nd, 2003, 06:41 AM

I am buying a camcorder and i have 2 options: canon gl2 and panasonic pvdv953.

Does anyone have these 2 cams in the hands?

I mean - i am surprised of a 20 x zoom of a gl2. Is this really working like i would have 790 mm lens on a still-camera? This must be crazy? Is it?

That thing is very important for me, so i will probably buy canon.

Or does anyone think different?

Sorry on my english...

Thanx...

Marko

Marko Zorec · September 22nd, 2003, 06:44 AM

I am a fan of a cinematic look. I want to make my video look expensive, cinematik like.

Is canons frame-mode the real thing for that?

Thanx...

Steve Nunez · September 22nd, 2003, 02:33 PM

The 20X zoom of the GL2 is indeed for real- it works beautifully- however the Pan 953 is reportedly a sharper image camera but isn't good at low light situations- the GL2 is much better in lower light levels- the Pan also only has a 10X zoom which is about average amongst camcorders- but you can always use a 37mm threaded "tele" lens adapter for close-ups (must use a tripod).....

....the 953 with a tele lens would be a very cost effective way to do some tele-video...let us know if u go with a 953!

Frank Granovski · September 22nd, 2003, 02:57 PM

Depending on what you want to do or need should determine which cam you should go with. Both cams have frame mode, and you get the better 16:9 with the PV-DV953. Yes, the PV-DV953 has a much sharper image, but the GL2 is sharp enough. There are no manual shutter settings below 1/60 with the 953; with the GL2, there is. If you want to shoot a lot of indoor stuff (weddings/funerals, to pay for your purchase), then the GL2 is a no brainer.

Matt McDermitt · September 24th, 2003, 03:00 PM

I was planning on purchasing Panasonics dvx-100 until I saw this little guy... with a much more affordable price. I owned a GL2 and am replacing it after shooting multiple projects, and discovering that the resolution didn't meet my expectations. Would this be a wise decision? Does the "frame mode" differ from that of the GL2's? And how would the picture compare if put side by side with the dvx-100? (besides the 24p of course)!

ANY HELP GREATLY APPRECIATED!!! :) :) :)!

-Matt

Frank Granovski · September 24th, 2003, 06:23 PM

Pana came out with frame mode before Canon did. They probably invented it. Also, with Pana frame mode, both horizontal and vertical res is increased. Progressive scan is even better, because it captures 1 frame with each sweep instead of frame mode's rapid 2 field capture per sweap...and then stuck together.

Greg Savel · September 27th, 2003, 04:53 AM

are we really saying here that the PV-DV953 is JUST AS GOOD (with the exception of low-light capability) as the venerable GL2?

these days you can buy a GL2 for under $2,000.00 with the $250.00 manufacturer rebate from B&H, etc. the pana is $1,229.95..... still $750.00 LESS at the lowest web prices for both.

i guess the question is in saving the money, one certainly loses:
1. low light capability (to some extent)
2. 1/2 the optical zoom

but what ELSE do we really lose?

thanks again

greg

Marko Zorec · September 27th, 2003, 09:10 AM

Hello.

I decided to try out the both of models before buy. But till now i have only an option to try Panasonic in my market in Slovenia...

Panasonic was good, especialy in the frame mode, but i was not satisfied with this CONTINUOS RING for manual focusing... Also there was no F STOPS, only numbers from 0 to 18 for the gain. And the performance was made in the market itself, indoor situation with no additional lights. I think that the colours was not really good, maybe because of Panasonics bad low light performance? Also I was not happy with zoom, it was a bit difficult to change between slow and fast...Audio was very good.

So, i am waiting to try also Canon. I think that it will be my favourite, especially because of 20x optical zoom and better low light performance... I will see...

I want to record some serrius things, no weddings etc. 20x zoom is important for me, because of smaller FIELD OF DEPTH which give the footage more CINEMATIC LOOK. Am I right?

Thank you for further opinions...

Marko Zorec,
Slovenia

Frank Granovski · September 27th, 2003, 01:24 PM

You may want to try this "more CINEMATIC LOOK" before you make a decision. I sometimes shoot birds with my 1 chip (1/3" CCD) from 10X, and only the bird is in focus.

September 22nd, 2003, 06:41 AM	#1
Marko Zorec Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 32	GL2 or PVDV953? I am buying a camcorder and i have 2 options: canon gl2 and panasonic pvdv953. Does anyone have these 2 cams in the hands? I mean - i am surprised of a 20 x zoom of a gl2. Is this really working like i would have 790 mm lens on a still-camera? This must be crazy? Is it? That thing is very important for me, so i will probably buy canon. Or does anyone think different? Sorry on my english... Thanx... Marko

September 22nd, 2003, 06:44 AM	#2
Marko Zorec Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 32	One more thing... I am a fan of a cinematic look. I want to make my video look expensive, cinematik like. Is canons frame-mode the real thing for that? Thanx...

September 22nd, 2003, 02:33 PM	#3
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	The 20X zoom of the GL2 is indeed for real- it works beautifully- however the Pan 953 is reportedly a sharper image camera but isn't good at low light situations- the GL2 is much better in lower light levels- the Pan also only has a 10X zoom which is about average amongst camcorders- but you can always use a 37mm threaded "tele" lens adapter for close-ups (must use a tripod)..... ....the 953 with a tele lens would be a very cost effective way to do some tele-video...let us know if u go with a 953! __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

September 24th, 2003, 03:00 PM	#5
Matt McDermitt New Boot Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 21	Hmmm I was planning on purchasing Panasonics dvx-100 until I saw this little guy... with a much more affordable price. I owned a GL2 and am replacing it after shooting multiple projects, and discovering that the resolution didn't meet my expectations. Would this be a wise decision? Does the "frame mode" differ from that of the GL2's? And how would the picture compare if put side by side with the dvx-100? (besides the 24p of course)! ANY HELP GREATLY APPRECIATED!!! :) :) :)! -Matt

September 27th, 2003, 04:53 AM	#7
Greg Savel Tourist Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 1	what ELSE do we REALLY lose with the panasonic are we really saying here that the PV-DV953 is JUST AS GOOD (with the exception of low-light capability) as the venerable GL2? these days you can buy a GL2 for under $2,000.00 with the $250.00 manufacturer rebate from B&H, etc. the pana is $1,229.95..... still $750.00 LESS at the lowest web prices for both. i guess the question is in saving the money, one certainly loses: 1. low light capability (to some extent) 2. 1/2 the optical zoom but what ELSE do we really lose? thanks again greg __________________ Enjoy the journey, not just the destination.

September 22nd, 2003, 02:57 PM	#4
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Depending on what you want to do or need should determine which cam you should go with. Both cams have frame mode, and you get the better 16:9 with the PV-DV953. Yes, the PV-DV953 has a much sharper image, but the GL2 is sharp enough. There are no manual shutter settings below 1/60 with the 953; with the GL2, there is. If you want to shoot a lot of indoor stuff (weddings/funerals, to pay for your purchase), then the GL2 is a no brainer.

September 24th, 2003, 06:23 PM	#6
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Pana came out with frame mode before Canon did. They probably invented it. Also, with Pana frame mode, both horizontal and vertical res is increased. Progressive scan is even better, because it captures 1 frame with each sweep instead of frame mode's rapid 2 field capture per sweap...and then stuck together.

September 27th, 2003, 09:10 AM	#8
Marko Zorec Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 32	Hello. I decided to try out the both of models before buy. But till now i have only an option to try Panasonic in my market in Slovenia... Panasonic was good, especialy in the frame mode, but i was not satisfied with this CONTINUOS RING for manual focusing... Also there was no F STOPS, only numbers from 0 to 18 for the gain. And the performance was made in the market itself, indoor situation with no additional lights. I think that the colours was not really good, maybe because of Panasonics bad low light performance? Also I was not happy with zoom, it was a bit difficult to change between slow and fast...Audio was very good. So, i am waiting to try also Canon. I think that it will be my favourite, especially because of 20x optical zoom and better low light performance... I will see... I want to record some serrius things, no weddings etc. 20x zoom is important for me, because of smaller FIELD OF DEPTH which give the footage more CINEMATIC LOOK. Am I right? Thank you for further opinions... Marko Zorec, Slovenia

September 27th, 2003, 01:24 PM	#9
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	You may want to try this "more CINEMATIC LOOK" before you make a decision. I sometimes shoot birds with my 1 chip (1/3" CCD) from 10X, and only the bird is in focus.