Canon GL2 vx. Sony VX2100

[Dave Pinchoff]

I know this has been asked 100's of times, but I'm going to ask again.
I have narrowed my search down to these two models.
I would like to hear from users what they like about them, what they don't like, etc.
I have gone and played with them in the store and like both.
I know the Sony wins in low light.
What do users of these two think about them??

[Graham Bernard]

Haven't used VX 2100.

Bought 2 XM2s - yeah?

Grazie

[Dave Pinchoff]

What do you like and dislike about them??

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Dave you really should tell us first what do you plan to film with them?
More narrative movies or more events and weddings?

[Dave Pinchoff]

Mathieu,
Good idea.
I plan do do most everything with it.
I am going to be filming a lot at home. (Kids)
I plan to shoot some sporting events. (High school basketball, football, etc)
I will probably try to make money filming school events. (Sports, plays, etc)
I am probably going to stay away from weddings, but not sure. (It's a possibility)
I would like to make short films. (Not looking to make a blockbuster, more for fun than anything else)

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

For events I think the sony would be better, because of the low light. It has bigger chips too.

But the GL2/XM2 has a very nice colour rendition, very good fluorite lens with big optical zoom (20x) and I personally (as many others) like the ergonomics of the Canon because it's very handy because of where all the buttons are placed, and it's not all hidden in a menu or something.
For narrative films it would be a bit better maybe.
You also have a fake progressive mode on the GL2 (30p) and 25p on the XM2 (PAL).
And you have a very good 'easy' mode on the GL2/XM2 too.

Maybe, I don't know if that's possible in your case, where you live etcetera, you could go to a store and try both out, or if you know people who have both or one of them. See what you like best.
I like Canon a bit more (I only want to make narrative film), but both are very good cams, and they both have their pro and cons.

[Graham Bernard]

OK! Interesting .. .

I plan do do most everything with it. Eh . . right? Everything?

I am going to be filming a lot at home. (Kids) XM2 is small and powerful. Get the Wide Angle lens - it is a must in tight corners! The XM2 is small enough to look like a real consumer camera.

I plan to shoot some sporting events. (High school basketball, football, etc) XM2 external colours and adjusts are gorgeous; You got one 0.9ND on board, apart from reduxing the IRIS you may want to contemplate a series of filters, not necessary, but will expand your techniques and getting BLUE skies!

I will probably try to make money filming school events. (Sports, plays, etc) OK, school events .. hmm .. AUDIO will be king here ( or even hear! ) you do have the XM2s superb AUDIO controls and monitors - 2 dials one for EACH channel! If low light then you are gonna have to accept some gain grain. Then again IF the stage is being lit you get loads to play with - until things go moody! The audio on this camera is astonishing - well I think so. I;ve had Sony buffs comment "positively" on my audio.

I am probably going to stay away from weddings, but not sure. (It's a possibility) - Weddings are great fun! The only issue I had with my XM2 was low, and above low light. But by the time the disco had knocked in - hey! DISCO lights! Failing that you slap on a 20/30 watt and light up them faces!

I would like to make short films. (Not looking to make a blockbuster, more for fun than anything else) OK .. now this IS the serious bit .. pay attention at the back there!!! The XM2 for me has soooo stretched my abilities that I can now get half decent shallow DoF - not like the movies but quite acceptable; I can dial in most everything manual and get some kool footage;

The XM2 will stretch your abilities: BUT what it doesn't have is native 16:9 . . I repeat, it doesn't have a native 16:9, the chip is for 4:3 .. Sooooo if you are thinking of experimenting with TRUE 16:9 I'd plump for a 16:9 chip . ..

. .and finally .. . sorry . .. . this is the real thorny one . . . .. .

There has to be a XM2HD coming soon . .PLEASE Mr Canon!?!?! Now, if this hits the shops then I can't imagine it NOT having native 16:9 - it'd be nutz not to. This being the case you got 16:9 PLUS all that razor sharp footage too!

Sooooo.... to stretch out your indecision further, there is the spectre of HD and all that is needing to make THAT happen. can you wait till then? Could you pick up a cheapo 2nd-hand authentic XM2 for the moment? Yah never knows!

Hope this hasn't confuzed you further?

Grazie

[Dave Pinchoff]

Thanks for the replies. Very helpful.
I guess I have to take that back, I don't plan on doing EVERYTHING with it.
I plan on using it for a lot of different purposes. (The ones I stated.)
I know the successor to the GL2 is rumored, but it has been for 3 years now. I could wait until the NAB, but I'm sure if a new one comes out it would be closer to $3000 anyway.
In any case, do you think I would be ok with football/basketball games??
I know plays and stage productions can have some low light, but do think it could handle that??
I'm sure it would be great at home, so I'm not worried abou that.

[Graham Bernard]

Hire each . and find out for yourself! - Best I can come up with.

G

[Dave Pinchoff]

Darn you and your good advice.
I thought of buying both and keeping the one I like better, but I was trying to avoid that.

[Steve Olds]

I own a GL2 and love it. Yes it is not an HD and yes it is not $3000.00 either. With the $250.00 rebate that came with it I got a good deal. I do a little everything. couple of family weddings.. that came out good!,fishing trips to Canada, outdoor vids of wildlife deer,turkey and some hunts. High School Graduation and many other family events. Yes low light may not be thebest but low light is going to give you crappy footage what ever camera you use. But people overlook I think is the photo option you have with the GL2.

I did not buy the GL2 for the photo but works great I have a lot of good photos with the 1.7 MP. If you were going to do a lot of indoor yes maybe you would want a better low light camera if you are in it for the money, but the weddings I did had plenty of light. Maybe a big wedding with candle lit church with low lights and alot of oher glits maybe a GL2 won't work. But a 20x lens, auido control, price , easy to use mode ,manual mode great color and footage I would buy another. I have some good photos send an email and you can have a look.. Good Luck Steve

[Alan Craven]

I've just replaced a five year old XM1 which died in the antipodes (must be that reversed gravity which makes the water go the wrong way down the plug-hole) with a new XM2, and it is amazing!

No native 16:9, I admit, but most of the folk who view my works have 4:3 TVs: so what!

The extra pixels on the CCD mean that you can use some of the digital zoom without loss of resolution; the autofocus is faster, and more accurate; the low light performance in incomparably better; etc.;etc.

There might be an XM3 this year, maybe next; it may have native 16:9, it may be HD; but two things are certain, it will be a LOT dearer, and I have my new XM2 now, not this year, next year, maybe.

Oh dear! Reading this I think Graham must be infectious - I hope it is not the bird flu!


Edit: Third paragraph - should read "without unacceptable loss"

[Dave Pinchoff]

Thanks for the replies everyone.
What do think would be an example of when the low light footage starts to get grainy??
Say a 10x10 room with one 100 watt bulb, one 60 watt bulb, two of these bulbs, etc.

[Graham Bernard]

In these conditions? Without an on-camera light? I'd be at .. . hold on . .just experimenting . .. brb














. .yup, 100w 10x10 couple 60watts . . I'm at 6db with the zoom on wide and the IRIS wide open I get the exposure scale pointer kinda midway to 1/3.

G

[Chris Barcellos]

See this post and thread for more discussion.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...643#post428643