On Sat, 10 Feb 2001 00:57:07 GMT, lawrance@mac.com wrote:

>Like the rest of the world, I am in the same boat trying to figure out
>which camera to buy. I am on a Mac and need a compatible
>FireWire camera to use with both iMovie and FCP.

There are (critical...) reviews of both on my web page, at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm

>I am leaning toward the Sony if the color can be manually
>adjusted. From everything I have read, the ONLY thing the Sony is
>lagging behind is, is matching colors in the real world.

??????
Aside from the philosophical conclusion that NO
medium/device/etc. can do that, I find one of the
best aspects of the VX-2000 is its "natural" color
(with hue-bias up two notches, but that's what
such controls are for...) I didn't like the
"everything is orange" look of the GL-1 (in
addition to other "misses" in the picture...).

>From the
>photos I've seen and from what people say, their is a pretty
>constant bluish cast. If these can be corrected with some settings,
>it would be worth playing around with to get it nailed down so that
>all that was needed was a white balance. Does the Sony retain the
>settings or are they reset after the camera is turned off?

They are retained. In addition, I prefer the DWB preset
in day-light. For tungsten, AWB is OK, but I back the
hue-bias down some to reduce orange. Raising the
sharpness a notch shows little ill effect, but adds
a touch of crispness to the image. I generally reduce
the AE-bias some - best sharpness and color is had when
the picture is not too bright, and in stock form, the
VX-2000 picture appears a bit too bright to me...

>Below is a list that I have made that I am hoping to get feedback on
>to figure out if my list is accurate or not. I would greatly appreciate
>your feedback if you have experience with either (or both) of these
>models, please put your 2¢ in!
>
>Here is my "advantages / disadvantages list" (that I have perceived
>from reading) that are swaying my decision:
>
>(in order of relevance)
>
>Sony DCR-VX2000 + [advantages]
>Better in low light.
>Much better internal mic and manual sound control.
>Superior CCD size and pixel count.
>Sharper overall image with more lines of resolution.
>Much better selection of accessories (Sony and after-market)
>Better still photo quality and easier to keep separate.

Yes, to the above...

>16:9 ratio for movie making.

Not of interest to me, so haven't used it...

>Built in color bars for color calibration.
>Seamless integration with other Sony components via LANC

Not used... For me, bottom line is: good picture; good
sound; useable controls. The other stuff is gravy, but
not critical. The VX-2000 does very well what is
important to me.

>Interval recording for time-lapse work.

How to wear out the mechanism faster...

>More digital effects (which I probably won't use on the camera.)

Right...

>Sony - [disadvantages]
>Cold hue.

Easily-cured.

>Has a hard time with red colors.

Not really. It does show more problems with red
than some (bloom), but when the picture controls are
adjusted for my preference, this is no longer a
problem (it is minor to begin with).

>15 fps frame mode.

The "PS" mode is optimized for still-use only - motion
video in this mode looks BAD (but why use it, anyway,
for motion-video - it just spoils smooth motion-rendering).

>Canon GL-1 + [advantages]

>Warmer more accurate colors.

I question this - maybe your TV is set too blue (common).

>Longer optical zoom.
>Second set of controls on handle.
>lower price (by $300)

Yes.

>30 fps frame mode.

Ummm.....;-)

>Better balanced. ?

Maybe - one of my complaints about the VX-2000 is its
handling (I'm going to a shoulder-brace for steadier
video with it...).

>Better image stabilization. ?

Maybe.

>Can share flash with my Canon G1 digital camera.

If you must take photos with a big, low-res camera...;-)

>Canon - [disadvantages]
>Terrible built in mic and no manual audio control.

Yes. I found the sound rather poor in tonal balance,
using the built-in mic.

>Noise or "particles" in low light situations.

It is limited to +12db, saving it from high noise levels,
but also preventing it from recording in low light levels
(the VX-2000 wipes it out here). The VX-2000 shows less
noise, but it is unusually good in this respect.

>Slower auto-focus.

The AF on the VX-2000 is unbelievably good - I have stopped
using manual focus most of the time. I don't remember
the GL-1's AF characteristics.

>Needs editing deck because of Reduced lines of resolution (440)
>in playback.

???? The GL-1 picture is noticeably less sharp than
the VX-2000's, and it is also over-sharpened(!), giving
"halos" on contrasty edges (this can be adjusted, resulting
in even less sharpness, though...). It also shows more
problems with vertical-line stairstepping than other
3-chip camcorders.

>Black stripes on sides of image which may interfere with editing.

Only possibly when the picture edge shows in an effect - and
you may actually like having the black bar there...;-)

>Stair stepping effect on diagonal objects.

All Mini-DV camcorders show stairstepping on moving
near-horizontal lines, but they vary in the amount shown
in other directions (worst being the one-chippers, but
the GL-1 is almost as bad as these).

>Fuzzy images with pixel shift.

Well, maybe not "fuzzy", but not as sharp as some others.
- Advantages for the GL-1: a 20:1 zoom that is also good at
wide stops; relatively low noise near its low-light limit;
handling.
- Otherwise...;-)
- Advantages for the VX-2000: virtually everything,
especially the basics of picture and sound quality.
- Disadvantages: few, but it is for me hard to hold steady
with the lens zoomed long; there are some negative issues
with adding external mics.
With all the above, some people don't see/hear much
difference between the two. I find that amazing, but,
then, as I pointed out in another post, all wine tastes
like vinegar to me...;-)