New GL2 review -- and ZR series at DVinfo.net

jenndietz · October 17th, 2002, 09:03 PM

this review was just posted at http://www.simplydv.co.uk/Reviews/canon_xm2.html. The reviewer is overall very happy with the cam, but mentions excessive motor and handling noise picked up by the in-camera mic. I hadn't heard that particular compaint before... anybody else?

-jenn

Ken Tanaka · October 17th, 2002, 09:17 PM

No, mine is nearly silent.

Don Palomaki · October 18th, 2002, 06:11 AM

This is a chronic problem for ALL camcorders with built-in mics. The GL series is better than most. It boils down to user/reviewer expectations and unit-to-unit variations.

Serious shooters will use external mics located close to the talent for the best sound.

Keith Luken · October 18th, 2002, 10:21 AM

I don't hear anything on my GL2, actually very quiet, I can hear foot steps on leaves as I walk no cam noise. But if they want a noise, try a Canon ZR cam, the motor noise is horrendous!

Frank Granovski · October 19th, 2002, 02:05 AM

I think that Canon's original ZR was the worst noise maker ever. I also think that it had the worst resolution compared with any other miniDV cam. I don't know why Canon released this model to the unsuspecting public. Mind you, it was yanked really fast...just too bad Canon didn't have a public recall for full refunds.

Keith Luken · October 19th, 2002, 07:15 AM

Well I referred the current ZR line, the 40/45/50. They make so much motor noise. I dont understand how they can do that to the customers. I can't beleive it would be that hard (or expensive) to either better isolate the mic, or chage the pickup pattern to be mostly forward pic up or to even develop some sort of electronic counter measure in the camera that when swithed on will filter out most of the noise.
I also am not overly impressed with the picture quality, but that may be that I am spoiled with my GL2. And I really only bought the ZR45 as a deck to use to import/edit footage on my PC. I do find I use it to take some second shot to fill in on the GL2, makes an interesting kind of second person view look since it is not as clear as the GL2, I edit in wider shot taken with the ZR45 where the resolution is not important, the obvous switch in picture quality kind of makes the viewer see it as a seocnd view point or third person angle. Still experimenting, but maybe some day I will able to afford a second GL2.

Jeff Donald · October 19th, 2002, 08:09 AM

In evaluating consumer equipment (Canon ZR, ZR45) it helps if you keep in mind the intended users and their expectations. As users of prosumer and professional equipment our expectations are much higher.

Single chip consumer cameras will have a noticeable difference over a 3 chip camera. This is not the fault of the manufacture. But rather limitations of the design to meet consumer price points.

The original Canon ZR is a fine early mini DV camera. I know many satisfied (albeit, consumer users) ZR owners, still using their cameras today. If indeed the camera was "yanked really fast" it was due more to the unconventional design rather than any performance limitation.

Jeff

Ken Tanaka · October 19th, 2002, 10:15 AM

I have two ZR25's and think they're excellent for casual and family/vacation shooting. I've not noticed them being "noisy" whatsoever, and I've actually mixed (daylight) footage from them with that from a GL1 with very good results. Personally, I think Canon's ZR line produces better footage than anyone might expect from a small 1-chipper. Manual focus control, manual white balance, very compact and comfortable to hold, inexpensive, etc. So what's not to like. Noisy? Phooey. No, you're not going to shoot a $mil dramatic feature with it...but how many people are -really- doing serious work with their cams? Canon designed this line as a top-notch family cam, not as a filmmaker's cam (although you certainly can do so with it).

Chris Hurd · October 19th, 2002, 10:39 AM

Keep in mind what the ZR series camcorders are about -- they're *entry level.* Key words. The primary characteristic, the number one consideration about the ZR series, is the low price. Then, the ergonomics. Finally, image and audio quality comes after that. Why?

Because that's what the intended consumer market wants... an inexpensive camcorder that's easy to hold. As far as quality goes, heck, it's DV and that's all that matters. The ZR is far superior to VHS-C, 8mm, anything else the public has been buying.

The ZR isn't intended for you guys because you're the three-chip people. You want to use it as a playback deck, fine, it makes a great playback deck. But you really shouldn't complain about the image quality or the audio quality, because it's no worse than any other $600 camcorder (better in fact). You want GL2 or VX2000 quality, then buy a 3-chip camera. Or you want a higher-end better-performing single-chipper, that's what the Elura and Optura series are for.

The money dictates everything, and people want an inexpensive camcorder that's easy to use, and the ZR delivers on those two factors: ergonomics and price. For folks coming from a consumer analog world, and believe me there are a lot of these people, the DV quality that they get from the ZR series is nothing short of amazing from their point of view. It blows them away.

Interesting note: the ZR40 and ZR45MC camcorders were the number one and number two sellers in the United States, for just about the entire summer. These camcorders captured a higher market share than any other model or manufacturer out there. The people that are buying them are perfectly satisfied; if they weren't, word would get around and it would be a dud. As things are right now, the ZR's are flying off the shelves. Just be sure to understand the reasons why: low price and form factor. For the money, the image and audio quality is perfectly adequate, even exceeds the expectations of its intended market. Hope this helps,

Keith Luken · October 19th, 2002, 09:18 PM

I wasn;t really bashing them, I understand they are low/mid consumer cameras, I just can;t beleive people put up witht hat motoer noise. And of course I don;t expect them to be as good as a GL2. But I was a little disspointed , even from a consumer view on some of the image quality. True I have not compared it to anything else directly, but I think they can do something with the motor noise. I guess if you are shooting the kids horsing around, or at a sporting event the ambient noise will drown out the motor. But go to a park and shoot some scenary and the motor comes screaming through. Interestingly my girl friens is not a big videophile nor does she easily pick up on the video quality differneces, other than "oh yeah that looks good", but she sure knows which CAM iused for footage by the motor noise or lack thereof. Sure I bought the ZR45 as a deck and some knock around footage and it is good for that, I just expect more from Canon and also Sony in general becasue I consider them the tops of market place.

Frank Granovski · October 20th, 2002, 01:07 AM

I was mentioning the ZR, the original model. The new ones aren't bad entry level cams. One of the reasons they yanked the ZR was because of the bad engine noise and being picked up while the cam was recording. It's resolution was low, around 360 lines during playback, making a Hi8 cam (analog) more attractive.

October 17th, 2002, 09:03 PM	#1
jenndietz Tourist Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: austin, tx Posts: 3	new GL2 review this review was just posted at http://www.simplydv.co.uk/Reviews/canon_xm2.html. The reviewer is overall very happy with the cam, but mentions excessive motor and handling noise picked up by the in-camera mic. I hadn't heard that particular compaint before... anybody else? -jenn

October 17th, 2002, 09:17 PM	#2
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	No, mine is nearly silent. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

October 19th, 2002, 10:15 AM	#8
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	I have two ZR25's and think they're excellent for casual and family/vacation shooting. I've not noticed them being "noisy" whatsoever, and I've actually mixed (daylight) footage from them with that from a GL1 with very good results. Personally, I think Canon's ZR line produces better footage than anyone might expect from a small 1-chipper. Manual focus control, manual white balance, very compact and comfortable to hold, inexpensive, etc. So what's not to like. Noisy? Phooey. No, you're not going to shoot a $mil dramatic feature with it...but how many people are -really- doing serious work with their cams? Canon designed this line as a top-notch family cam, not as a filmmaker's cam (although you certainly can do so with it). __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

October 19th, 2002, 10:39 AM	#9
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Keep in mind what the ZR series camcorders are about -- they're entry level. Key words. The primary characteristic, the number one consideration about the ZR series, is the low price. Then, the ergonomics. Finally, image and audio quality comes after that. Why? Because that's what the intended consumer market wants... an inexpensive camcorder that's easy to hold. As far as quality goes, heck, it's DV and that's all that matters. The ZR is far superior to VHS-C, 8mm, anything else the public has been buying. The ZR isn't intended for you guys because you're the three-chip people. You want to use it as a playback deck, fine, it makes a great playback deck. But you really shouldn't complain about the image quality or the audio quality, because it's no worse than any other $600 camcorder (better in fact). You want GL2 or VX2000 quality, then buy a 3-chip camera. Or you want a higher-end better-performing single-chipper, that's what the Elura and Optura series are for. The money dictates everything, and people want an inexpensive camcorder that's easy to use, and the ZR delivers on those two factors: ergonomics and price. For folks coming from a consumer analog world, and believe me there are a lot of these people, the DV quality that they get from the ZR series is nothing short of amazing from their point of view. It blows them away. Interesting note: the ZR40 and ZR45MC camcorders were the number one and number two sellers in the United States, for just about the entire summer. These camcorders captured a higher market share than any other model or manufacturer out there. The people that are buying them are perfectly satisfied; if they weren't, word would get around and it would be a dud. As things are right now, the ZR's are flying off the shelves. Just be sure to understand the reasons why: low price and form factor. For the money, the image and audio quality is perfectly adequate, even exceeds the expectations of its intended market. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

October 18th, 2002, 06:11 AM	#3
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,487	This is a chronic problem for ALL camcorders with built-in mics. The GL series is better than most. It boils down to user/reviewer expectations and unit-to-unit variations. Serious shooters will use external mics located close to the talent for the best sound.

October 18th, 2002, 10:21 AM	#4
Keith Luken Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 200	I don't hear anything on my GL2, actually very quiet, I can hear foot steps on leaves as I walk no cam noise. But if they want a noise, try a Canon ZR cam, the motor noise is horrendous!

October 19th, 2002, 02:05 AM	#5
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I think that Canon's original ZR was the worst noise maker ever. I also think that it had the worst resolution compared with any other miniDV cam. I don't know why Canon released this model to the unsuspecting public. Mind you, it was yanked really fast...just too bad Canon didn't have a public recall for full refunds.

October 19th, 2002, 07:15 AM	#6
Keith Luken Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 200	Well I referred the current ZR line, the 40/45/50. They make so much motor noise. I dont understand how they can do that to the customers. I can't beleive it would be that hard (or expensive) to either better isolate the mic, or chage the pickup pattern to be mostly forward pic up or to even develop some sort of electronic counter measure in the camera that when swithed on will filter out most of the noise. I also am not overly impressed with the picture quality, but that may be that I am spoiled with my GL2. And I really only bought the ZR45 as a deck to use to import/edit footage on my PC. I do find I use it to take some second shot to fill in on the GL2, makes an interesting kind of second person view look since it is not as clear as the GL2, I edit in wider shot taken with the ZR45 where the resolution is not important, the obvous switch in picture quality kind of makes the viewer see it as a seocnd view point or third person angle. Still experimenting, but maybe some day I will able to afford a second GL2.

October 19th, 2002, 08:09 AM	#7
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	In evaluating consumer equipment (Canon ZR, ZR45) it helps if you keep in mind the intended users and their expectations. As users of prosumer and professional equipment our expectations are much higher. Single chip consumer cameras will have a noticeable difference over a 3 chip camera. This is not the fault of the manufacture. But rather limitations of the design to meet consumer price points. The original Canon ZR is a fine early mini DV camera. I know many satisfied (albeit, consumer users) ZR owners, still using their cameras today. If indeed the camera was "yanked really fast" it was due more to the unconventional design rather than any performance limitation. Jeff

October 19th, 2002, 09:18 PM	#10
Keith Luken Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 200	I wasn;t really bashing them, I understand they are low/mid consumer cameras, I just can;t beleive people put up witht hat motoer noise. And of course I don;t expect them to be as good as a GL2. But I was a little disspointed , even from a consumer view on some of the image quality. True I have not compared it to anything else directly, but I think they can do something with the motor noise. I guess if you are shooting the kids horsing around, or at a sporting event the ambient noise will drown out the motor. But go to a park and shoot some scenary and the motor comes screaming through. Interestingly my girl friens is not a big videophile nor does she easily pick up on the video quality differneces, other than "oh yeah that looks good", but she sure knows which CAM iused for footage by the motor noise or lack thereof. Sure I bought the ZR45 as a deck and some knock around footage and it is good for that, I just expect more from Canon and also Sony in general becasue I consider them the tops of market place.

October 20th, 2002, 01:07 AM	#11
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I was mentioning the ZR, the original model. The new ones aren't bad entry level cams. One of the reasons they yanked the ZR was because of the bad engine noise and being picked up while the cam was recording. It's resolution was low, around 360 lines during playback, making a Hi8 cam (analog) more attractive.