Canon GL2 to HD upgrade?? For Family stuff at DVinfo.net

Greg Peters · January 27th, 2008, 09:33 PM

Here is my timeline in cameras..
TRV950
TRV900
Canon GL1
Canon GL2

I was going through and transferring years of DV tapes today.
All family and kids stuff.
Out of all the cameras the Gl2 is the best, looks ok indoors.

I am thinking of upgrading to a HD format.
I currently do NOT have anything else HD.
Not my TV or PC monitor
But since this is family stuff, years from now we will all have HD or better.

Will I go down in quality by going to HD? Low Light performance?
Maybe just get a better DV non-HD type camera? Something better in low light?

Any suggestions??

Pedanes Bol · January 27th, 2008, 10:08 PM

Canon HV20 or HV30.

Tom Alexander · January 27th, 2008, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pedanes Bol

Canon HV20 or HV30.

I agree, HV20. Video quality will improve but you will suffer in low light compared to the GL2.

Greg Peters · January 27th, 2008, 10:20 PM

I don't want to get any worse with the low light stuff
Half of my shooting is indoors.

If I don't go with HD, I was looking at the AG-DVX100B

Chris Harris · January 28th, 2008, 01:02 AM

To be honest, if you aren't ready to go HD at this point, I wouldn't bother upgrading. The GL2 is a fantastic SD camera, and aside from missing out on true widescreen, which is pretty important these days, I just don't think it's worth upgrading to another SD camera.

I don't think you'll regret buying an HV20. It's really not that bad in low light at all. Although you might miss the amazing form-factor of the GL2, the video quality will be so much better, especially when you do end up getting an HDTV.

Tom Hardwick · January 28th, 2008, 03:12 AM

You had a TRV950 before the 900 Greg?
Anyway, I too side with the HV20/30 recommendations. You could always add an on-camera LED lamp, because if you were thinking real low-light, then you should dismiss the DVX and get the VX2100.

But all that 4:3 SD stuff has had its day. You can shoot HDV in the little HV Canon, downconvert for your editing and DVD making, yet have all the masters on the shelf in HD and all the films on your TV in 16:9.

The HV will replay all your old tapes just fine and there's just time to sell your 4:3 kit - go to it.

tom.

Greg Peters · January 28th, 2008, 07:43 AM

I bought the TRV950 cause it was newer. But the TRV900 was better in low light so I bought that one second.
I did not know enough about the models.

Instead of the HV20 or HV30 what about the XH A1?
Is the low light better on that camera compared to the GL2?

Tom Hardwick · January 28th, 2008, 08:59 AM

XH-A1 every time if you like having full manual control over ND filters, shutter speeds, apertures, focus and w/bal. All with easy to get at switches.

Can't tell you if the XH-A1 will match the GL2, but it has bigger 1"3 chips so even if they're HD and have tiny pixels, I'd guess it would be the equal of the GL. And it's a much newer camera of course, so tha gain-up amps should be a lot quieter - meaning you can go to +12 dB without wincing at the grain.

tom.

Robin Hall · January 28th, 2008, 03:19 PM

IF You can Go For The XH_A1 I would hardily recomend it, if you are comfortable with your GL2 , you will love the A1 the DVX100 is a great camera but still SD. Haveing used all 3 I would look seriously at the A1 as an upgrade. Even 16X9 SD off the A1 Looks very nice indeed.

January 27th, 2008, 09:33 PM	#1
Greg Peters Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 67	Canon GL2 to HD upgrade?? For Family stuff Here is my timeline in cameras.. TRV950 TRV900 Canon GL1 Canon GL2 I was going through and transferring years of DV tapes today. All family and kids stuff. Out of all the cameras the Gl2 is the best, looks ok indoors. I am thinking of upgrading to a HD format. I currently do NOT have anything else HD. Not my TV or PC monitor But since this is family stuff, years from now we will all have HD or better. Will I go down in quality by going to HD? Low Light performance? Maybe just get a better DV non-HD type camera? Something better in low light? Any suggestions??

January 27th, 2008, 10:08 PM	#2
Pedanes Bol Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Boston MA Posts: 167	Canon HV20 or HV30.

January 27th, 2008, 10:20 PM	#4
Greg Peters Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 67	I don't want to get any worse with the low light stuff Half of my shooting is indoors. If I don't go with HD, I was looking at the AG-DVX100B

January 28th, 2008, 01:02 AM	#5
Chris Harris Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: San Francisco, California Posts: 487	To be honest, if you aren't ready to go HD at this point, I wouldn't bother upgrading. The GL2 is a fantastic SD camera, and aside from missing out on true widescreen, which is pretty important these days, I just don't think it's worth upgrading to another SD camera. I don't think you'll regret buying an HV20. It's really not that bad in low light at all. Although you might miss the amazing form-factor of the GL2, the video quality will be so much better, especially when you do end up getting an HDTV.

January 28th, 2008, 03:12 AM	#6
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	You had a TRV950 before the 900 Greg? Anyway, I too side with the HV20/30 recommendations. You could always add an on-camera LED lamp, because if you were thinking real low-light, then you should dismiss the DVX and get the VX2100. But all that 4:3 SD stuff has had its day. You can shoot HDV in the little HV Canon, downconvert for your editing and DVD making, yet have all the masters on the shelf in HD and all the films on your TV in 16:9. The HV will replay all your old tapes just fine and there's just time to sell your 4:3 kit - go to it. tom.

January 28th, 2008, 07:43 AM	#7
Greg Peters Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 67	I bought the TRV950 cause it was newer. But the TRV900 was better in low light so I bought that one second. I did not know enough about the models. Instead of the HV20 or HV30 what about the XH A1? Is the low light better on that camera compared to the GL2?

January 28th, 2008, 08:59 AM	#8
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	XH-A1 every time if you like having full manual control over ND filters, shutter speeds, apertures, focus and w/bal. All with easy to get at switches. Can't tell you if the XH-A1 will match the GL2, but it has bigger 1"3 chips so even if they're HD and have tiny pixels, I'd guess it would be the equal of the GL. And it's a much newer camera of course, so tha gain-up amps should be a lot quieter - meaning you can go to +12 dB without wincing at the grain. tom.

January 28th, 2008, 03:19 PM	#9
Robin Hall Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: London On Posts: 43	IF You can Go For The XH_A1 I would hardily recomend it, if you are comfortable with your GL2 , you will love the A1 the DVX100 is a great camera but still SD. Haveing used all 3 I would look seriously at the A1 as an upgrade. Even 16X9 SD off the A1 Looks very nice indeed.