On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:45:26 -0400, Niko Warez wrote:

>I heard that Canon has fixed the few bugs with this camera, and also that
>it doesn't have the audio lag while editing that the XL-1 has.
>
>I especially like the fact that you can shoot in 16x9 mode without losing
>the frame rate like the sony trv-900 does.
>
>I have a TRV-900 and I love it, but it just isn't good for 16x9, or
>interlaced mode.
>
>So I am wondering if the Canon L-1 is worth getting.
>I have seen one and the results of it, and thik it is very nice in that
>sense, much better in 16x9 than the sony.
>
>Why aren't any people raving about this GL-1 camera?
>
>NIKO

You can find reviews of many Mini-DV camcorders on
my web page (look under the "I babble" index). I value
most highly the basic features (4x3 video image quality and
overall sound quality) than special-use features (16x9,
still-image capability, PS-mode, etc...) of a camcorder,
and while the GL-1 has particular strengths that place
it above others for particular uses, for general use I found
its basic performance somewhat disappointing overall
compared with most of the other 3-chip camcorders I tried.