On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 16:36:14 +0800, "Nathan" wrote:

>Canon XL-1 vs GL-1
>
>How does the image quality for both motion & still capture
>compare between these 2 cameras. Is the new "Fluorite Lens"
>better than the XL-1 camera, producing better images??
>
>The XL-1, besides having interchangeable lens and a more
>"PRO" look, any better than the GL-1??

I assume you have visited my web site (under "I babble", the
camcorder comparison article, with frame grabs from several
mini-DV camcorders and comments on the motion-video and
sound characteristics)... Boiled down: the XL-1 has the best
sound and sound recording versatility of all tried, with
good picture quality (not the very best...), in a largish
package with some important controls difficult to use; the
GL-1 package is nice, the lens and image are quite sharp
(but of the 3-chip camcorders tried, the picture had the
most stair-stepping and over-sharpening artifacts), and
sound that I would rate poor (very colored, with a "nasal"
sound + bass hump - OK if you like "sizzle-boom"
audio...;-). I would look at the VX-1000, the TRV-900,
and even the Panasonic AG-EZ30U as alternatives, with the
choice based on what characteristics you consider most
important (no camcorder "has it all", but for the price,
the TRV-900 may still come the closest for the most
people...). BTW, I would not try to use any video camera
for any but web-use stills - the resolution is insufficient
for good prints (a mid-line digital still camera will very
noticeably outperform any video camera for still use).