Repair or replace GL2? at DVinfo.net

Jason Robinson · August 18th, 2009, 06:44 PM

I'm still shooting with two GL2 cams, but my secondary has a bad sensor issue that I need to get looked at by Canon, and depending on the prognosis, I might just get the first HD cam. So would even the HV30 be a better aisle camera (aka second cam op camera) than my GL2? What about low light considerations?

See attached screen shot for example of the problem.

Don Palomaki · August 20th, 2009, 03:50 PM

The GL2 is probably the better camera for shooting, but under most circumstances the HV30 can provide a better image - if you are interested taking advantage of the HD capability or you want wide angle.

I cannot speak to the low light capability of the HV30, but check the forum here covering it for some user reports.

Taky Cheung · August 21st, 2009, 12:20 AM

I would also say... ditch GL2 and get HV30. Even you only export DVD or SD video, shooting in HD then down convert, I still have much pleasing result from HV30 than GL2.

Here's 2 shots from the same wedding using both HV20 and GL2. Then both resize to the same resolution.

LA Color - Wedding Photography and Videography serving Great Los Angeles Areas

Don Palomaki · August 22nd, 2009, 07:21 AM

Taky's comparison images may not be totally fair to the GL2 because at 1024x576, they are higher resolution than SD video which is 720x480 so the GL2 image suffers in an up conversion compared to a down conversion of HDV from 1440x1080. I suspect if both were grabs at SD resolution the difference would not appear as great.

However, it does give an idea as to the better potential of the HDV image.

Taky Cheung · August 22nd, 2009, 10:18 AM

I attached an image from photoshop after resizing both image to 720x480 with 1:1.2 pixel aspect ratio. Noticed the titlebar say "Scaled" because of the 1:1.2 PAR that regular JPEG file won't be able to display

I know photoshop will have a much better downsizing algorithm so it is again not a fair comparison. Since this wedding was so long ago I don't have source AVI/M2T files anymore. I have another comparison shot showing downconvert from HV30 to standard def using both the camera internal down convert and using Adobe Premiere Pro.

Jason Robinson · August 23rd, 2009, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taky Cheung

I attached an image from photoshop after resizing both image to 720x480 with 1:1.2 pixel aspect ratio. Noticed the titlebar say "Scaled" because of the 1:1.2 PAR that regular JPEG file won't be able to display

I know photoshop will have a much better downsizing algorithm so it is again not a fair comparison. Since this wedding was so long ago I don't have source AVI/M2T files anymore. I have another comparison shot showing downconvert from HV30 to standard def using both the camera internal down convert and using Adobe Premiere Pro.

Very compelling evidence for HD I must say (even HDV). Though this shot looks like full sun & outside, which means even my tiny Panasonic GS320 (with its 1/6" CCD sensors) got enough light. So the HV30 probably would get enough light too. But I wonder about anything short of full sun outdoor shooting..

Taky Cheung · August 23rd, 2009, 06:13 PM

HV30 like any consumer cams won't handle low light well. In outdoor, both footage from HV30 and XH-A1 are very similar. However, in indoor dim situation, XH-A1 handles much better. However, you can use the "light trick" on HV30 that AGC won't kick in. You won't get a bright video but you will get a noise free video. You can then adjust the brightness in post.

I don't have my GL2 anymore so I can't do more comparison for you. But from my experience, HV30 works very well when mixing with GL2 (output SD) and XH-A1 (output HD).

It really depends on how much you have to pay to repair your GL2. But it would seems unwise to invest in SD gear these days. HV30 is quite cheap compared to GL2. Stepping into the HD world would be the way to go. If you only do SD video in your business, you will be obsselete soon. I have clients ask for only DVD. I shot with HV30 and XHA1. The quality in the export to DVD is still far better than shooting with my old beloved GL2.

Here's my path to upgrade
- Sony TRV900
- TRV900 + GL2
- two GL2 (sold TRV900)
- two GL2 + HV20
- HV20 + XH-A1 (sold GL2s)
- XH-A1 + two HV30 (sold HV20)
- XH-A1s + XH-A1 + HV30 on merlin (sold HV30)

I also use HV30 as playback deck too.

Taky Cheung · August 23rd, 2009, 06:15 PM

This is a video shot by someone else using HV30 in a dark room with only 1 light bulb. He uses the light trick (or cellphone trick) to lock down the gain/grain.

Acustic on Vimeo

Don Palomaki · August 24th, 2009, 03:58 AM

Quote:

If you only do SD video in your business, you will be obsselete soon. I have clients ask for only DVD.

The only question on the first statement is when, but Blu-Ray has not yet fully caught on - mainly because DVD does still give a good image.

However, DVD is still SD, even if 16x9 image. The question is when will you have to deliver video in a HD format.

Your business, run the numbers.

Jason Robinson · August 24th, 2009, 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Palomaki

The only question on the first statement is when, but Blu-Ray has not yet fully caught on - mainly because DVD does still give a good image.

However, DVD is still SD, even if 16x9 image. The question is when will you have to deliver video in a HD format.

Your business, run the numbers.

And I think I have at least another year of safely operating the wedding Biz in SD only, partly because there are two other companies doign HD already.

However, for my commercial shoots, I've already missed one shoot (and possibly a second) because I'm not able to shoot in HD. So I may purchase a single HMC-150 / A1 for commercial business (and as potential aisle camera for weddings). That would breath new life into the commercial side of things and help ease in the transition to HD 2 years from now.

Though I hate to only buy one cam at a time. That would make matching older HD cams with the latest thing 2 years from now a bit difficult.

Taky Cheung · August 24th, 2009, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Palomaki

The only question on the first statement is when, but Blu-Ray has not yet fully caught on - mainly because DVD does still give a good image.

However, DVD is still SD, even if 16x9 image. The question is when will you have to deliver video in a HD format.

Your business, run the numbers.

Don, I'm not sure why you feel bluray is not fully caught on. I have been shooting and outputing HD since late 2006. It was a tough sell at that time. However, I got people come to me because I offer wedding in BluRay. Now many people have HDTV at home and they have been watching HD channels. When I show potential customers the difference of wedding on DVD and BluRay, they instantly love the HD output.

Not only you are behind between your competitors not shooting HD, you are also risking your business don't even consider upgrading your gear to HD.

And if you still think BluRay is expensive and unaffordable, check these price

TDK Blank BD white inkjet printable, $6.45 each disc
Amazon.com: TDK Blu-ray Disc 20 Count Spindle - 25GB 4X BD-R - White Inkjet Printable [Japanese Import]: Electronics

LG BD Burner $159
Newegg.com - LG Black 6X BD-R 2X BD-RE 16X DVD+R 6X BD-ROM 4MB Cache SATA Internal Blu-ray Burner 6X Blu-ray Disc Burner & HD DVD-ROM Drive Model GGW-H20L - Blu-Ray Burners

Sylvania BD Player $159
Amazon.com: Sylvania NB530SLX Blu-ray Disc Player, Black: Electronics

Don Palomaki · August 24th, 2009, 03:50 PM

Blu-Ray is still somewhat of a niche market, depending on your geographic area. The percentage4 of Blu-Ray households has a way to go to catch up with DVD.
Not saying it will not happen, just that it has a way to go, for purposes of event work.

For commercial work, especially to be broadcast, it is different.

Buying new gear, HD is generally the way to go, for repair, a bit more complex decision process.

Taky Cheung · August 24th, 2009, 03:57 PM

With more and more TV stations going HD and more and more HD channels available, shooting in HD is NOT something in the future. It's now. Even if the broadcast requires standard def work now, shooting in HD can ensure your work be HD ready when needed anytime soon. It's a good investment.

Martyn Hull · August 25th, 2009, 01:10 AM

Well i have to agree with Taky the only way home made dvd looks acceptable for me is through a upscale player but even then blu ray is far superior, i have all my hdv on blue ray only amatuer film i know.

Don Palomaki · August 25th, 2009, 04:40 AM

Not saying HD is not better looking - there is more to the discussion thatn pure image quality.

For personal/hobby use it is a personal decision, driven you your individual budget and "druthers."

For business use, it is driven by the market conditions in your geographical area, and whether or not the additional investment in HD and HD delivery capability can be recovered in a reasonable time, or whether it is best to wait a bit until the market brings prices down and more clients willing to pay for HD.

Although there are exceptions, BD players are still around $200 a pop compared to $40 for DVD (COSTCO prices). The bin of prerecorded media is still mostly DVD,

August 18th, 2009, 06:44 PM	#1
Jason Robinson Trustee Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Boise, Idaho Posts: 1,997	Repair or replace GL2? I'm still shooting with two GL2 cams, but my secondary has a bad sensor issue that I need to get looked at by Canon, and depending on the prognosis, I might just get the first HD cam. So would even the HV30 be a better aisle camera (aka second cam op camera) than my GL2? What about low light considerations? See attached screen shot for example of the problem. Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Jason Robinson; August 19th, 2009 at 12:50 PM.

August 20th, 2009, 03:50 PM	#2
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	The GL2 is probably the better camera for shooting, but under most circumstances the HV30 can provide a better image - if you are interested taking advantage of the HD capability or you want wide angle. I cannot speak to the low light capability of the HV30, but check the forum here covering it for some user reports. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

August 22nd, 2009, 07:21 AM	#4
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	Taky's comparison images may not be totally fair to the GL2 because at 1024x576, they are higher resolution than SD video which is 720x480 so the GL2 image suffers in an up conversion compared to a down conversion of HDV from 1440x1080. I suspect if both were grabs at SD resolution the difference would not appear as great. However, it does give an idea as to the better potential of the HDV image. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

August 22nd, 2009, 10:18 AM	#5
Taky Cheung Inner Circle Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles, USA Posts: 2,114	I attached an image from photoshop after resizing both image to 720x480 with 1:1.2 pixel aspect ratio. Noticed the titlebar say "Scaled" because of the 1:1.2 PAR that regular JPEG file won't be able to display I know photoshop will have a much better downsizing algorithm so it is again not a fair comparison. Since this wedding was so long ago I don't have source AVI/M2T files anymore. I have another comparison shot showing downconvert from HV30 to standard def using both the camera internal down convert and using Adobe Premiere Pro. Attached Thumbnails

August 24th, 2009, 03:50 PM	#12
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	Blu-Ray is still somewhat of a niche market, depending on your geographic area. The percentage4 of Blu-Ray households has a way to go to catch up with DVD. Not saying it will not happen, just that it has a way to go, for purposes of event work. For commercial work, especially to be broadcast, it is different. Buying new gear, HD is generally the way to go, for repair, a bit more complex decision process. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

August 21st, 2009, 12:20 AM	#3
Taky Cheung Inner Circle Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles, USA Posts: 2,114	I would also say... ditch GL2 and get HV30. Even you only export DVD or SD video, shooting in HD then down convert, I still have much pleasing result from HV30 than GL2. Here's 2 shots from the same wedding using both HV20 and GL2. Then both resize to the same resolution. LA Color - Wedding Photography and Videography serving Great Los Angeles Areas

August 23rd, 2009, 06:13 PM	#7
Taky Cheung Inner Circle Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles, USA Posts: 2,114	HV30 like any consumer cams won't handle low light well. In outdoor, both footage from HV30 and XH-A1 are very similar. However, in indoor dim situation, XH-A1 handles much better. However, you can use the "light trick" on HV30 that AGC won't kick in. You won't get a bright video but you will get a noise free video. You can then adjust the brightness in post. I don't have my GL2 anymore so I can't do more comparison for you. But from my experience, HV30 works very well when mixing with GL2 (output SD) and XH-A1 (output HD). It really depends on how much you have to pay to repair your GL2. But it would seems unwise to invest in SD gear these days. HV30 is quite cheap compared to GL2. Stepping into the HD world would be the way to go. If you only do SD video in your business, you will be obsselete soon. I have clients ask for only DVD. I shot with HV30 and XHA1. The quality in the export to DVD is still far better than shooting with my old beloved GL2. Here's my path to upgrade - Sony TRV900 - TRV900 + GL2 - two GL2 (sold TRV900) - two GL2 + HV20 - HV20 + XH-A1 (sold GL2s) - XH-A1 + two HV30 (sold HV20) - XH-A1s + XH-A1 + HV30 on merlin (sold HV30) I also use HV30 as playback deck too.

August 23rd, 2009, 06:15 PM	#8
Taky Cheung Inner Circle Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles, USA Posts: 2,114	This is a video shot by someone else using HV30 in a dark room with only 1 light bulb. He uses the light trick (or cellphone trick) to lock down the gain/grain. Acustic on Vimeo

August 24th, 2009, 03:57 PM	#13
Taky Cheung Inner Circle Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles, USA Posts: 2,114	With more and more TV stations going HD and more and more HD channels available, shooting in HD is NOT something in the future. It's now. Even if the broadcast requires standard def work now, shooting in HD can ensure your work be HD ready when needed anytime soon. It's a good investment.

August 25th, 2009, 01:10 AM	#14
Martyn Hull Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: England Posts: 444	Well i have to agree with Taky the only way home made dvd looks acceptable for me is through a upscale player but even then blu ray is far superior, i have all my hdv on blue ray only amatuer film i know. Last edited by Martyn Hull; August 25th, 2009 at 11:21 AM.

August 25th, 2009, 04:40 AM	#15
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	Not saying HD is not better looking - there is more to the discussion thatn pure image quality. For personal/hobby use it is a personal decision, driven you your individual budget and "druthers." For business use, it is driven by the market conditions in your geographical area, and whether or not the additional investment in HD and HD delivery capability can be recovered in a reasonable time, or whether it is best to wait a bit until the market brings prices down and more clients willing to pay for HD. Although there are exceptions, BD players are still around $200 a pop compared to $40 for DVD (COSTCO prices). The bin of prerecorded media is still mostly DVD, __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com