On 18 Aug 2002 06:46:58 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:

>d_ruether@hotmail.com (Neuman - Ruether) writes:
>> It appears the major differences are in size/weight and
>> low-light range (though there are other differences).
>> If the larger form of the VX2000 is not important to you,
>> I would choose that one.

>I'm not that impressed with the 950--it's caught the virulent disease
>of trying to be a camcorder and still cam at the same time, combining
>the disadvantages of both.
>
>Do you have any thoughts about the GL2 as compared with the TRV900 or
>VX2000? It's somewhere between the two of them in size, right?

Not really - the GL2 is much closer in both form and
size to the VX2000 than to the TRV950. If low-light
range is not important, I would not dismiss the
TRV950. I have not tried the GL2 or TRV950, but the
URLs in this post of mine (and my comments on them)
may be useful(?).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[...comparing GL2, TRV900, TRV950, PD150...]
>http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3018
>
>Steve McDonald

Thanks - this is an interesting review. A few comments:
The comparisons appear to have been well-done. I would
like to see also comparison shots made of a street scene,
both on a sunny-clear day, and on a grey day, and of a
natural-light head-shot (to see the color rendering of
familiar subjects). From what is shown, it appears that
the GL2 corrects both the color bias of the GL1, and the
excessive contrast. With standard, unaltered settings and
DWB used, it appears to me that the PD150 picture (the
VX2000 has the same picture characteristics) is a tad
sharper (but with less oversharpening), with more neutral
color, and with more color range shown (in the horse
example) - but the GL2 picture looks better than that of
the XL1s (and considerably better than that of the GL1,
from what I remember of it [see:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm
and www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/vid_pict_characts.htm,
click on the "key" to see what cameras were used for
the image examples]). From the comments in the review,
it appears the PD150/VX2000 still has the better low-light
picture and range, also. Given that the price of a GL2
is roughly the same as that of a VX2000, the latter
appears to remain a somewhat better value in terms of
picture quality... BTW, less definitive than the review
pointed out by SMcD, but still interesting, are the
comments and comparisons at:
http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/trv950/trv950.html
http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/trv950/images1.html
DR
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The excessive sharpening of the GL2 compared with
the sharper Sony cameras still bugs me (and reducing
it reduces the appearance of sharpness...). This
oversharpening is also likely to exaggerate motion
artifacts in addition to causing outlining of
contrasting subject parts, as it did with the GL1
(but I have not yet seen motion video examples from
it).