This whole debate is stupid. You all miss each others points all the
time.

The VX2000 is a newer camera and does have higher performance
specifications. It damn well better have better specs...Sony would
have egg on its face if it did not.

Without bringing the XL-1S into this, I still think that there is a
great deal of merit in suggesting it as a part of a shooting package.
The XL-1 narrows the gap between the XL-1 and VX2000, but still leaves
some technical elements to the VX2000/PD-150. (Resolution is the most
important to my eye.) It does take others though. (Frame mode...audio
recording capability/control, snr.)

For one...many Sony people insist that the image style of the Sony is
better than Canon. Pure aesthetic opinion people. You'll never agree
on that if you differ at the outset. And you SHOULDN'T!!! It is YOUR
aesthetics after all, and you SHOULD pick the camera that matches
better. While I like the Canon look better, the Sony's certainly do
not bother me I find them acceptable. Still don't you think I should
choose Canon whenever practical ?

What I think that the Sony campers miss is the flexibility of the
XL-1. For example I like the XL-1 standard lens, but it is
frustrating. Some Sony folk think their lens controls are
better...bah. They are JUST AS BAD, there may be some subtle
differences but really it is the same crap. I like real manual lenses.
The PD150 can't solve this for me. The XL-1 series CAN.

EOS lenses can make a serious impact in some situations. Nature
shoots, sports, events even. All of these can require your camera to
stand off from what you want to shoot. The EOS lenses deliver a LONG
reach with pure optical quality.

A lot of Sony campers mention that lots of XL-1 owners never use
anything but the standard lens. Well, that is the problem of those
XL-1 owners. Not me. I often use the standard lens, but I also mount
the WA and EOS lenses...I can't wait for the new 16x manual to become
available.

So...now I have stated the "Canon camper" position. Notice I almost
ignore resolution ? Instead I focus on flexibility. I really need it.
I need resolution too. XL-1 resolution is good enough.

The Soviets had a saying, "Never let the best become the enemy of good
enough." Since I am happy with the resolution and look of the XL-1 it
would be stupid to change for a modest resolution enhancement, and
throw away a lot of flexibility I like, want and need.

OTOH, the Sony campers are right...the VX2000/PD-150 has better
resolution and great low light capability. If you like the Sony look
and don't need the flexibility...you would be pretty stupid not to buy
the VX2k.

Finally what are we all arguing about ? How different technically are
these cameras ?

Well lets just say they are a hell of a lot closer than a Hi8 and SVHS
camera are. All of these DV25 based cameras are damn good.

A lot of people don't need or want the flexibility that the XL-1
affords. Some really need every tiny bit of resolution. For example I
recently recommended a VX2000 as a secondary cam for an XL-1 shooter.
They wanted a camera for wide angle shots while they took close ups
with the XL...VX2000 was an easy choice. The extra bit of resolution
can really help with faces that may be 2 inches on a 32inch screen.
You don't need reach or versatility, just good resolution. I know the
VX2000 can be made to match the XL-1 if need be. So...it is worth it,
and I feel it is a better choice than a GL-1 that was being
considered.

Stop arguing about stupid details, and start thinking about your
particular needs. They are both good cameras. Buy one and get going.
The devil is not in the details this time.

As to David Reuther's page. I think the VX2000 is the better camera in
terms of resolution. I think David's page does not make the case very
well. sorry. I also think his page fails to address the camera's
ability to expose properly in low light under controlled conditions. I
also think that there is not a clear delineation between David's
opinions on the page and the facts he has determined. The reader has
to work harder to get the most out of it. David could do better. I
hope that is constructive. David if you care what I say, drop me a
line and I'll tell you more about it...but I want everyone to know
that as much as I have complained I feel David's page is a good
resource.

I really hope this is my last post on this particular issue. Camera
choices are easy for most...go for the best cam at the lowest price.
Most often budget determines this. For many this means the Sony
VX2000. For some others it becomes more complicated. Flexibilty,
budget and tasks can lead you down a different path for almost every
pro user and serious amateur.

--
Alexander Ibrahim
http://www.zenera.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Thu, 01 Nov 2001 08:15:57 GMT, "Alexander Ibrahim" wrote:

>This whole debate is stupid. You all miss each others points all the
>time.
[...rest deleted for brevity, go read it above...]

Hey, you've been writing a couple of darn good posts,
lately! And, surprising as this may be, I agree with
virtually all of it! The only points I disagree with
have mostly to do with your opening statements, above.
The debate had value in that it pointed up differences
in approaches to making decisions (not for its
determination of the "best" camcorder...) - "evidence
and observations, and conclusions logically drawn from
them" vs. "it feels good", "other people say it's good",
"it's (whatever, untestable...)". *This* debate is useful.
Rationality vs. irrationality. BTW, I "got" the others'
points, and often agreed with them (but that, well,
didn't matter much...;-). Anyway, you have summed up
very well the "camcorder vs. camcorder" part of the
discussion, but missed the main event, at least for me.
Also BTW, I take your criticisms of my reviews
(www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm ,
for those interested in the source of such storms ;-)
in the spirit in which they were offered - but I should
point out that I have neither the time to fully polish
the reviews, nor the inclination to "prove" in them
that one camcorder is "better/worse" than another. I
presented the comparison frame-grabs as-is, without much
comment on a lot of specifics that I thought would be
obvious to the viewer (but I guess I have more experience
with seeing image defects than most...;-), with added
descriptions of motion-effects that the frame-grabs
didnt show well, and comments on the sound of the
audio and supplied mics. (I do have considerable
experience in judging lenses and audio gear...) From
these, I drew what appeared to be reasonable conclusions
(and found no camera either "unacceptable" or "perfect").
It would be best for those buying one of the covered
camcorders to see (and hear) actual footage from each
camcorder in "stock" form shot in the same locations
at the same time for comparison, and I offered this,
with no takers! People really would prefer, it appears,
to read about things, than to actually judge the output
for themselves...!;-). Much to my continued surprise,
some people do not accept what I offered for what it
is: ***MY*** comparison, for ***MY*** purposes of
several camcorders - which, having done it, I thought
might also be useful to others...;-) A little story
may sum all this up: just after I first published
the reviews, I got an email from someone who appeared
quite knowledgeable about video and also appeared to
be quite "rational", who wrote something to the
effect, "Thank you producing these thorough,
informative, and useful reviews - which I would like
to refer my friends to who are about to buy camcorders,
but I feel I cannot do this unless you change your
conclusions about the GL-1." !!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm STILL laughing!!!! ;-) WHY would he, or anyone
else, ask for that???? I pointed out the problems
I observed in the GL-1 image and sound that led
directly to the conclusions, to no avail...;-)
Some people see what they want to see, and believe
what they want to believe, regardless of the
evidence, I guess...
Bottom line: take from the reviews what is of value
to you, leave what you don't "like", but then don't
argue with me, using an incomplete understanding
of what I provided. If you want to ignore the
whole thing, please feel free to do so...