On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:58:06 -0500, "Dirk J. Bakker" wrote:

>Nappy,
>
>It's nice to hear that there is a positive side to XL1 ownership. I
>have a feeling that these fowl once they've made up their mind are not
>about to have anyone knock them off their perch. Much less get confused
>by the facts.
>
>I notice one salient point that seems to get caught in their craw is the
>"look" of the camera. And somehow, because of this prejudice anyone
>having acquired one can not possibly be serious about their
>hobby/craft/job. This skewed "logic" seems to take the turn that since
>there IS another camera (more sensible, after all, it was what they
>chose once) then anything they see no need for in their work is
>superfluous and therefore suspect. Their feathers do get ruffled with
>the slightest amount of wind.
>
>Funny them birds.

[Ah, I know better, but the temptation is just too great...;-]
It appears to me that it is ***ALWAYS*** the "Canon-lovers"
who bring up the looks issue, as a "positive" attribute of
the XL-1. The supposed detractors could care less what the
camera looks like, but it is often the "sold" who mention it
as at least part of the buying decision... Funny, too, when
solid issues of performance and control are raised, the
arguments is always turned toward XL-1 "versatility",
though few ever take advantage of it... And it is the
"Canon-lovers" who spring immediately to the defense of
the "poor, maligned" XL-1, though they rarely, if ever,
spring to the defense of any other camcorder when its
shortcomings are noted - while the owners of other models
generally simply acknowledge the shortcomings of their
cameras instead of offering preposterous arguments...;-)
This behavior on the part of "Canon-lovers" is readily
and often observable on these video NGs, yet what you
report is not...;-)

Funny, them thar "Canon-birds"...;-)