Stepping up to a GL1, need input at DVinfo.net

Long Nguyen · September 4th, 2005, 09:00 PM

I'm a current owner of the GS-150. I plan to buy a used GL1 from ebay, specifically for it's low light performance. My budget is give or take $500, but if I sell off my GS-150 for around $500 (as I've only owned it for 2 months), then I think I will have enough money for a used GL-1. I'm gonna shoot footage of our school Marching Band during their performances at night and I need the low-light capabilities. Am I heading in the right direction by getting a used GL-1?

Eric Brown · September 4th, 2005, 09:25 PM

You may have to spend a bit more than that for a clean, used unit from Ebay. I sold my GL1 several months ago w/ Beachtek adapter and Canon wide angle adapter for $1250.00.
I think I've seen them go without any accessories for as little as $700.00.
Bear in mind this was months ago so you may want to check. Maybe they're less by now.
My GL1 was okay in low-light. It never really produced a noisy image in the dark, it just wasn't able to see very well. Good little camera, though.

Marco Leavitt · September 5th, 2005, 10:12 AM

The GL1's a nice camera, but it doesn't do that great in low light.

Long Nguyen · September 8th, 2005, 07:59 PM

I see, i might reconsider my serach for a GL1 to something else if the low light isn't as good as I thought.

Jon Londono · November 25th, 2005, 04:45 PM

The GL-1 is your best camera for low light situations for the buck. I've shot with Sony's vx2000 and it compares evenly if not better for the fact that you can control light with three different modes(AV-TV and Manuel.) that price range DO IT. Shoot the parade it in auto mode. But when you get to know the camera better shoot it in AV mode

Don Palomaki · November 26th, 2005, 06:44 AM

Very few camcorders can give a good image in low light. You get nosie in the image, the color is less than accurate or washed out, etc. You can help mattes a bit by using slower shutter speeds if thecamcorder supports them and you can accept the motion artifacts you get (1/30 is about the limit for me, but the GL1 does not support speeds below the standard 1/60). The Sony VX200/VX2001/PD150/PD170 series are arguably the best for poor light, but above your price point by a significant amount.

The GL1 does quite well in low light for its price and age. Keep in mind that used camcorders are a bit of a crap shoot - you may get a good one, or you may get one that has been thoroughly abused or has problem. IF youcan, try it before you buy it.

Mike Donley · November 26th, 2005, 08:54 AM

I agree that you should try a used camera if at all possible. Other than checking that it looks OK, and that all the buttons work. also look for dead pixels. Canon calls them hot pixels. It costs about $655 to fix the problem for a GL1, including tax and shipping.

Dead pixels are not flaws in the LCD. Instead they are flaws in the CCD assembly. I'm not technical enough to explain what that means, other than I think it is the part of the camera that turns light captured in the lens into electronic signals that are then encoded on the tape as the 0's and 1's (computer data). So the CCD is like the film in a camera that is later turned into a negative. The negative is like the tape in a GL1. If there is a flaw in the film there will be a flaw in the negative and there will be a flaw in the picture.

If there is a flaw in the CCD assembly, you will notice a white dot somewhere in the image played back from a GL1 (or other camera) onto a monitor. The dead pixels appear as stationary flaws on the video image, as if there was a huge piece of dust or debris on the lens of the camera. Often there is more than one dead pixel clumped together and the white dot will look very noticeable. However, the dead pixels may be in a part of the image that will not bother you or the viewers of your work (e.g. lower left hand corner of the image).

To me, the issue of dead pixels would be the drawback that would keep me from buying a used camera without being able to examine it and try it out in advance. A $655 repair would make a used camera very a very expensive purchase.

Marco Leavitt · November 26th, 2005, 12:07 PM

Not to be a smart alec or anything, but why not just keep the GS-150 and buy lights with that $500? It's a better a investment.

Don Palomaki · November 27th, 2005, 06:35 AM

Hot pixels are pixels that have a higher than normal dark current, thus they will appear as white spots when there is a dark background. They are most apparent when shooting dark objects in very low light when gain is at the maximum. This is because their "dark current" is added to the current caused by light reaching the CCD and they appear bighter than their neighbors. (Gain cannot tell the difference between dark current and light induced current.) With normal lighting levels, the dark current is much less than the light-induced current and they are not apparent.

The test is the shoot a dark surface in a dark room in auto mode is that gain is at max, then view the image on a decent good monitor. Note that the GL1 manual does make reference to possible hot pixels on page 94, "About the CCD."

Mike Donley · November 27th, 2005, 09:00 AM

Don,
Thanks for the explanation for the term, "hot pixels". Now I understand why Canon refers to them as hot pixels rather than dead pixels.

September 4th, 2005, 09:00 PM	#1
Long Nguyen New Boot Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 7	Stepping up to a GL1, need input I'm a current owner of the GS-150. I plan to buy a used GL1 from ebay, specifically for it's low light performance. My budget is give or take $500, but if I sell off my GS-150 for around $500 (as I've only owned it for 2 months), then I think I will have enough money for a used GL-1. I'm gonna shoot footage of our school Marching Band during their performances at night and I need the low-light capabilities. Am I heading in the right direction by getting a used GL-1? Last edited by Long Nguyen; September 4th, 2005 at 09:02 PM. Reason: mispell

November 26th, 2005, 06:44 AM	#6
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,487	Very few camcorders can give a good image in low light. You get nosie in the image, the color is less than accurate or washed out, etc. You can help mattes a bit by using slower shutter speeds if thecamcorder supports them and you can accept the motion artifacts you get (1/30 is about the limit for me, but the GL1 does not support speeds below the standard 1/60). The Sony VX200/VX2001/PD150/PD170 series are arguably the best for poor light, but above your price point by a significant amount. The GL1 does quite well in low light for its price and age. Keep in mind that used camcorders are a bit of a crap shoot - you may get a good one, or you may get one that has been thoroughly abused or has problem. IF youcan, try it before you buy it. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

November 26th, 2005, 08:54 AM	#7
Mike Donley Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Shreveport, LA Posts: 96	Dead pixels in used video cameras I agree that you should try a used camera if at all possible. Other than checking that it looks OK, and that all the buttons work. also look for dead pixels. Canon calls them hot pixels. It costs about $655 to fix the problem for a GL1, including tax and shipping. Dead pixels are not flaws in the LCD. Instead they are flaws in the CCD assembly. I'm not technical enough to explain what that means, other than I think it is the part of the camera that turns light captured in the lens into electronic signals that are then encoded on the tape as the 0's and 1's (computer data). So the CCD is like the film in a camera that is later turned into a negative. The negative is like the tape in a GL1. If there is a flaw in the film there will be a flaw in the negative and there will be a flaw in the picture. If there is a flaw in the CCD assembly, you will notice a white dot somewhere in the image played back from a GL1 (or other camera) onto a monitor. The dead pixels appear as stationary flaws on the video image, as if there was a huge piece of dust or debris on the lens of the camera. Often there is more than one dead pixel clumped together and the white dot will look very noticeable. However, the dead pixels may be in a part of the image that will not bother you or the viewers of your work (e.g. lower left hand corner of the image). To me, the issue of dead pixels would be the drawback that would keep me from buying a used camera without being able to examine it and try it out in advance. A $655 repair would make a used camera very a very expensive purchase. __________________ Mike Donley

November 27th, 2005, 06:35 AM	#9
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,487	Hot pixels are pixels that have a higher than normal dark current, thus they will appear as white spots when there is a dark background. They are most apparent when shooting dark objects in very low light when gain is at the maximum. This is because their "dark current" is added to the current caused by light reaching the CCD and they appear bighter than their neighbors. (Gain cannot tell the difference between dark current and light induced current.) With normal lighting levels, the dark current is much less than the light-induced current and they are not apparent. The test is the shoot a dark surface in a dark room in auto mode is that gain is at max, then view the image on a decent good monitor. Note that the GL1 manual does make reference to possible hot pixels on page 94, "About the CCD." __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

November 27th, 2005, 09:00 AM	#10
Mike Donley Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Shreveport, LA Posts: 96	Explanation of Hot Pixels Don, Thanks for the explanation for the term, "hot pixels". Now I understand why Canon refers to them as hot pixels rather than dead pixels. __________________ Mike Donley

September 4th, 2005, 09:25 PM	#2
Eric Brown Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Seattle Posts: 427	You may have to spend a bit more than that for a clean, used unit from Ebay. I sold my GL1 several months ago w/ Beachtek adapter and Canon wide angle adapter for $1250.00. I think I've seen them go without any accessories for as little as $700.00. Bear in mind this was months ago so you may want to check. Maybe they're less by now. My GL1 was okay in low-light. It never really produced a noisy image in the dark, it just wasn't able to see very well. Good little camera, though.

September 5th, 2005, 10:12 AM	#3
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	The GL1's a nice camera, but it doesn't do that great in low light.

September 8th, 2005, 07:59 PM	#4
Long Nguyen New Boot Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 7	I see, i might reconsider my serach for a GL1 to something else if the low light isn't as good as I thought.

November 25th, 2005, 04:45 PM	#5
Jon Londono New Boot Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 5	The GL-1 is your best camera for low light situations for the buck. I've shot with Sony's vx2000 and it compares evenly if not better for the fact that you can control light with three different modes(AV-TV and Manuel.) that price range DO IT. Shoot the parade it in auto mode. But when you get to know the camera better shoot it in AV mode

November 26th, 2005, 12:07 PM	#8
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Not to be a smart alec or anything, but why not just keep the GS-150 and buy lights with that $500? It's a better a investment.