On Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:35:15 GMT, (Joe S) wrote:

>I'm looking for a camera priced between 1200 and $2000 dollars. I hear
>the GL1 has the same quality video as the XL1. I also hear the TRV900
>is very similar to the VX2000 (but for the low light ability), but I
>like the lower weight of the TRV900.
>How does the GL1 compare with the sony brands?
>I'm looking for a high quality camera that is versatile. I shoot
>educational videos, sports, and events.

So, how is it you have escaped finding:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm
www.bealcorner.com ? ;-)
And, those long, long threads here and on the other
video NGs concerning the relative merits of these
cameras...???!!! ;-) (Try www.dejanews.com...;-)
Bottom line: if you do not need the lens
interchangeability of the XL-1 (most don't, even
if they think they do...;-), the extra-long lens
of the GL-1, the "frame-mode" of the Canons (less
useful than one might think...;-), then the Sony
cameras generally produce better-images-for-price.
As for the above, the GL-1 image quality is
noticeably inferior to that of the XL-1, which is
roughly similar in image-quality to that of the
TRV900, which is noticeably inferior to that of
the VX2000... The VX2000, at a few hundred more
than your budget, is well worth the price; the
TRV900, at well under the top end of your budget
(but remember the need for batteries, mics,
lens-converters, etc.) should serve well enough
for most purposes. No camera is perfect, and none
is unuseable, but among those you named there is
a discernable order. Also, if possible, shoot
footage for yourself with the cameras of interest...

(Thus starts yet another "discussion" of Canon vs.
Sony, no-doubt...!;-)