hey, i'm thinking buying a 3ccd cam. i've been reading stuff on this site about canon gl2. i'd like to hear from guys who have used this model. What is it in this model that makes it great? or, is there a better model?

i havent seen a video output from this cam. Is there a download somewhere?

also, does the pic quality look "filmlike"?

thanks.

The GL2 is a good cam for what it is (I had a hell of a lot of problems with the GL1 that set me $400 back fixing it, so I've lost a lot of faith in Canon). If I were you I would wait and save up about a $1000 more to go with something like the Panasonic AG-DVX100a (which is a camera in a league of its own), or possibly the Canon XL2 (but that's pretty expensive).

"does the pic quality look 'filmlike?'" - depends on how you look at film. Proper lighting, with careful color correction in post can make it more look like film, but it's digital and it's still recording at 29.97 frames per second, unlike film which is 24 frames a second (this is why I suggest that you consider purchasing the DVX100a or the Xl2 because they can both shoot at 24 frames per second, which makes your footage look a lot more like film.)

The GL2 has an extremely sharp lens, a great 20x optical zoom, reasonably good optical image stabilization, and a full manual set of controls at a decent price. You won't find a good 3CCD camera cheaper (not counting the low end Panas, which are really consumer models).

The DVX100a is a nice camera also and boasts 24p recording, but it's significantly more expensive. Good color correction, posterizing time to 24 fps, + a GL2 can yield similar results.

I have a canon gL2 and it works great for the price. (But it's terrible in low light). It has a plethora of manual features. But, I would save for the dvx100a. (That's what I'm doing) It has, such a nicer film look...It really is in a league of it's own. Plus it captures in progressive not interlaced, which means much better picture quality.

You know what, though? It's still a miniDV camera. The DVX100a is also a nice camera, but I would rather spend the extra money on lighting, sound equipment, and the one thing everyone forgets - competent actors. That'll go a long way towards improving your project, rather than using a DVX100 to shoot the inside of your dorm room then slapping Dave Matthews over it and calling it a project about existential angst (not directed at anyone in particular).

You could also spend the money on a Super 8 camera for less than $100. $900 gets a lot of film.

yeah you could do that Evan, but the DVX100a's quality completely blows Super 8's right out of the water. I'm not denying that money on lighting, sound equipment, and actors are important, but if we hypothetically state that you had all those, and used lets say a Canon GL1/2 to shoot it, it would look nowhere near the DVX100a (or 35mm for that matter, because if you had such money to obtain that proper equipment and those actors, you'd want to make it look the best you could), trust me, I've seen so many comparisons to know that 24p is worth it (especially when you have the essentials of good lighting and acting, etc), and if you have the money, go for it. If not, seriously consider renting it and trying it out. You won't want to go back to 30p or 60i.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Trespasser,

thanks for this. i did do some looking around for AG DVX100A and Its really awesome.The colors stand out very crisp.

i guess, i'll save up to buy that!

its okay

quote:

yeah you could do that Evan, but the DVX100a's quality completely blows Super 8's right out of the water.

Are you sure? S8 shot on a decent Nizo or high-end Canon and Rank telecined looks pretty damn good, and much more filmic than any digital camera, 24p or not. If you estimate resolution based on the grains, S8 is far above 480p, and probably higher than 720p.

I still maintain that achieving a 'film look' with digital video depends much more on lighting, angles, and props/locations than the camera you use. A DVX100a used on crappy, stagy looking sets will not improve the project one bit. OTOH good locations, props, and meticulous lighting can bring good results from mid-range cameras.