I've had about 3 weeks to play with the new Canon Gl2, and I thought this was a good time to offer my impressions about the camera, and also to give you the details of a comparison test I made utilizing the Gl2, the XL1s and the Sony PD150. I will be providing Chris with still images from the comparison for inclusion in a future article on the Son of Watchdog Page.

I'm an owner of a Gl1 and Xl1s, so I know these cameras intimately. The PD150 was borrowed from a friend of a friend, and I have to say that in the few hours I spent working with it, it is a formidable camera indeed, so I'm glad that somebody here at dvinfo suggested that I include it in the trials. Because of the limited time I had with the PD150, it is only being used here in direct image quality comparisons. Occasionally, I will include a comment about the GL1 as referenced to an improved feature on the Gl2, but otherwise I will limit my comments to the gl2, xl1s and the PD150. Except where noted, all cameras were set to factory default, and exposures were made in manual mode. In most cases the white balance used was the default Daylight setting on each camera.

Three image quality comparisons were made.

High Contrast line resolution.
While photographing test charts can provide some useful comparative information, my experience with Dv is that the compression and 720x480 file size quite often become a limiting factor that makes any conclusion based on a LOT of subjective evaluation. Utilizing a 1956 EIA resolution chart, the gl2 "maybe" showed a slight improvement in horizontal resolution over the xl1s, but maybe is the important word. Using, another chart of my construction utilizing line groupings varying in 5% increments, the xl1s, GL2 and PD150 all resolved the exact same set of lines. Other information on the chart showed that the xl1s was less sharp overall, with the gl2 and PD150 running neck and neck--higher contrast things look sharper on the PD150, lower contrast areas were sharper on the gl2. The gl2 image also suggests a slightly lower overall contrast than the other cameras. The pd150 and gl2 exhibited slightly more noise than the xl1s in the neutral areas of the test chart. Overall, the color balance of the gl2 was slightly more neutral than the pd150. The xl1s was marked by a strong red shift, especially in the highlights. One interesting thing of note is that the PD150 rendered the chart slightly taller than the Canon cameras. (I'll check to see which camera is more accurate, but my hunch is that it is the Sony).

Still life
For the reasons stated above, I am suspect of any information generated from a typical line resolution regime, at least as it is relevant to the DV format. In my opinion, the proof is in the puddin'.....unless you photograph black and white lines for a living. In this test I photographed a small still life that contained items of a relatively neutral color range, and moderate amounts detail. In this test again, the xl1s stood apart from the other camera's with it's softer "almost out of focus" look and reddish color shift. The Gl2 appeared slightly sharper than the PD150, although this appeared to be as a result of higher electronic "sharpening". Actual resolution of the two cameras appears to be about the same.

The Gl2 excelled above the other two cameras in its ability to render highlight detail. In the still life test, the cameras were matched by monitoring the zebra stripes in a particular area of the scene, the gl2 showed significantly more range in that highlight even when its exposure was increased by nearly a full stop. I believe this is the most significant improvement in the camera, when compared to the gl1 and xl1s, and is responsible for giving the gl2 more film like look than it's predecessors. The PD150 rates a close second in this respect. Still images for the above comparisons can be found at
http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/PhotoAlbum5.html

Skintones
I photographed my friend Brian Lawler doing a mock Apple "Switch" testimonial using the three cameras simultaneously. The PD150 produced what I thought was the most pleasing skintone, with the gl2 slightly less warm. Again, the gl2 image looked somewhat "sharpened", but otherwise was a very close match for the PD150. The xl1s picture again showed excess red and softness. The cameras were matched with a zebra pattern on brian's silver hair. Here the xl1s showed a glaring difference in the highlight area, one that is so great that I plan to redo the test to make sure. You can see the film at
http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/iMovieTheater3.html

About 1/3 of the way through you will see a clip that is glaringly different...that is the xl1s....(the sorenson 3 codec has magnified the differences and problems significantly, so take what you see and divide by three) My apologies for the sound..

(Continued in Next post)

(continued from previous post)

Sensitivity
The sensitivity of the GL2 became something of a question mark as I put it through a variety of tests. With all cameras set to 1/60 of a second and 0 gain, The Gl2 required an aperture ranging from .7 to 1.7 stops larger than the xl1s, depending on the lighting situation, to reach an equavalent zebra pattern in the highlights. (the difference with the pd150 was even greater). What confuses me is the inconsistency of this variance, but my guess is that is has something to do with the GL2's lower contrast, and it's improved highlight rendering that allows the exposure to vary somewhat (in comparison with the other cameras) depending on the overall contrast of the scene.

This lowered sensitivity is not necessarily a bad thing. In the still life test with the PD150, the GL2 f-stop was 3.2 versus the sony's at 6.8. In this situation the gl2 with it's smaller chip appeared sharper, and had lower (and thus more controllable) depth of field than the larger chip pd150.

One of the first things I noticed when I hooked up the gl2 to a monitor in my studio, was that the Gl2 showed quite a bit of noise when I pointed at moderately lit, or darker areas of my studio. As I worked with the camera more over the coming weeks, I came to realize a couple of things.

1) that this noise wasn't necessarily more than what I have experienced with my other canon cameras...it was just sharper (and a bit finer), and that by adjusting the sharpness setting on the gl2 downward a notch or two this noise could be minimized or eliminated. In brightly lit situations, the GL2's noise level is almost invisible, and on par with the xl1s and the pd150.
2) When I registered this first impression, the camera settings I was using were AV exposure mode and f4-5.6 Due to the lower sensitivity of the camera, I was forcing it to increase the gain quicker than the xl1s or gl1 would. In low light situations, I would recommend using the Manual exposure mode, or at a minimum, avoiding the AV mode to minimize this problem.

Low Light Imaging
(as I only had the PD-150 on loan for a few hours. This portion of the comparison only Includes the xl1s and gl2.)
In the lowest light situations the gl2 is about 1/2 stop less sensitive than the the xl1s...not bad considering the smaller chips. However, in a low light scene where both cameras were able to achieve proper exposure at 0 db of gain, the Gl2 proved to be significantly sharper, albeit significantly noisier than the xl1s. As a test I tried to make the images in this low light situation match. This was achieved by turning the Sharpness on the xl1s up 2 notches, AND at the same time turning the gl2's sharpness down 3 notches.

Another significant difference between the gl2 and xl1s in low light was the oft-reported autofocus "hunting" when using the standard 16x IS-II lens. The scene I shot should have been an easy one for either camera to handle, with some very high contrast objects in the foreground, and a small area of undefined underlit texture behind them in the corner of the frame. The Gl2's focus was rock solid, whereas the xl1 varied between a small "hunt" between the foreground objects, and then (with the camera still locked down) switching to a full on "war party" alternating focus between the foreground and that small block of texture in the background.

Indeed, I have a strong preference for the lens on the gl2 over the xl1s. It is extremely sharp, and the focus ring has significantly more drag than the xl1s lens (and the gl1 as well), which makes it focus more like a traditional (non-servo) lens. When focusing, the sharp point "snaps" into place just like it should. It also has a slightly longer zoom range, and the addition of the wd-58 wide angle attachment produces some of the most delicate, film like images I have yet to experience with a video camera.

Color
The gl2 produces the most neutral image of the 3 cameras when set at default, with a daylight white balance. The xl1s is significantly more saturated and red, where as the PD150 was slightly warm. The Gl2 perhaps suffers a little in the area of saturation, as I was unable to match even the default setting of the xl1s with increases in color gain and phase on the GL2. In fact, the xl1s seems a little over saturated to me, but I think the color range of the gl2 is a bit limited.

Digital Zoom
Due to the higher resolution chips in the gl2, the digital zoom performs exceptionally well up to 40x, with no apparent loss of resolution. Once you enter the 100x portion of the range, pixelization becomes more and more apparent, although I have to say, I like how it looks at 100x...sort of a grainy, blown up "Americas most wanted" surveilance-cam look.

ViewFinders
The eyepiece viewfinder is a substantial improvement over the gl1 and xl1s. While smaller in size, it is much brighter and sharper. With the xl1s, I find that I am only comfortable when focusing if I'm using an external monitor. While some of this is due to the xl1's lower sharpness, the gl2's viewfinder makes it easy to focus in-camera. The flip-out LCD is another story. While it has greater resolution than the gl1's lcd, it is plagued with poor color (bluish), and low contrast, making if very difficult to judge the look of your footage. I find that if I try to use the LCD to judge exposure (without zebras), I am consistently underexposing by a stop or more. By contrast, the gl1's flip-out was just the opposite, somewhat contrasty and higher in saturation, but I always felt I could trust the overall look of it, and in fact, I rarely had a problem judging exposure on the gl1.

Autofocus
The gl2 autofocus is excellent, although somewhat slower than the gl1, and xl1s. Typically it is rock solid, almost completely devoid of the hunting that plagues the xl1s ( and in low light the gl1). When switching focus from a nearby object to something in the distance, the Gl2 can be very slow to react. Something tells me that this attribute is related to its ability to hold focus, and that Canon has chosen the lesser of two evils. I, for one, think that they made the right choice here, one that I wish they would have made on the xl1s.

Frame Mode
Implementation of the frame mode seems similar to the XL1s. The Gl1 had less of the motion artifacts you see on the newer cameras, but I feel the Gl2s version is a little less choppy. The Gl2 seems to have less of a sharpness loss (ie almost none) in frame mode than the Gl1 or Xl1s.

Controls
Users of the GL1 will find that most things are where they expect them, although when I first got the camera, I was at a loss to find the Exposure Mode dial. Canon has chosen to make this a menu item (luckily with a separate entrance). It is relatively easy to use, but I have to say I miss the dial. Otherwise the controls all seem to make sense. The menu and exposure scroll wheels have changed to a spring loaded toggle type switch. Again, I liked the earlier version better, but the toggles work just fine. The frame mode has also been moved into the menus, which for the purposes of my tests was a bit of a pain. In common use, you probably wouldn't switch between modes often, but I wish Canon had made it available through the custom key.

There are a few areas of the GL2 I have yet to try out...like the clearscan, and the new digital still feature of the camera. I also haven't done any significant testing of the sound. The mic appears to have a similar quality to the one on the gl1. The voice mode does seem to filter out some of the background, but is in no way a replacement for a good shotgun mic. Hopefully I can add to this in the coming weeks.

Conclusion
The new Canon Gl2 is an outstanding camera that I think builds on the best attributes of the GL1, and also in several ways represents a significant improvement over the Xl1s. In the image quality tests conducted with the Gl2, XL1s and PD150, the images from the Gl2 were superb, and virtually interchangeable with the PD150 in terms of contrast, detail, and sharpness. In casual filming under a variety of situations, the Gl2 produced extremely delicate, film-like imagery. Its increased resolution makes even zoomed out wide-view footage look good. The increased range in the highlights gives this camera a much less harsh look, even under bright sun. It's weaknesses are apparent: more noise in moderate to low light situations, and lower overall saturation and sensitivity, but these deficiencies are not fatal by any means, in most cases, fixable with in-camera controls.

The same should be said about the Xl1s, while it's apparent lack of sharpness, higher contrast and reddish color balance were dramatically apparent in comparison to the other cameras, it should be noted, that using sharpness, setup and color controls built into the camera, the Xl1s is certainly capable of outstanding images (although one wonders why the camera wasn't tuned properly in the first place). Additionally, there are many features on the XL1s that make it an exceptional choice, from its expandability, easy access controls, larger form factor, better zoom function etc.

In many ways I think the Gl2 is important in what it might foretell for future versions of the XL series. 1/3 inch chips with 410k or better resolution I think is something that is needed for the XL cameras to continue to compete with the PD150 and other new cameras from Panasonic and JVC.

Thats all for now...I will try to add a few more still photos to my web site in the coming days.

Barry

thanks for that Barry finally someone who's written a solid review. I'm waiting for the camera here in the UK and I really wanted to know how it comapared to the likes of the XL1s and the VX2000. Your review has reinforced my decision to buy this camera.

Do I understand correctly that you used the "daylight" setting for XL1s white balance rather than actually white balancing for the lighting used for the test?

Don

You are correct. In conducting the comparison, I was trying to eliminate, as much as possible, any subjective input by leaving cameras at certain default settings, and my feeling was that the daylight default was the most standardized way of comparing the cameras. Another method would have been to custom white balance each of the camera's, and perhaps that can happen in the future.

Our tests were completed using mid afternoon (3-4pm) sunlight filtered through white ripstop nylon. The still life also includes a mini mole 1k, with a full blue daylight correction filter as the key light. We checked the gl2's white balance in this set-up and it was visually identical to the daylight preset.

Barry

Thanks, that was worthwhile reading. My question is not very technical I'm afraid. For me, the look of the XL1(s), particularly for interviews, is superior to the PD-150. Do you think the GL-2 would outperform the other two in this regard? Subjectively speaking, which camera has the best look?

Barry,

As usual, you are a great contributor. Thanks for the review, and hopefully, you will post more info, tips and tricks as you get more friendly with your GL2!

Thanks again!

michael.

Thanks Barry

Appreciate the review. If you have a chance, please do it after a manual white balance, or in auto white balance mode. Arguably the most likely methods of camcorder use. Sounds like the presets may not be the same on the two Canons. I trust there were no filters on any of the camcorders.

Great overview Barry. Thanks.

I'm puzzled by your mention of the somewhat limited color range of the GL2.

Canon camcorders have always been known for their rich,
warm color palettes. To think that the GL2's might be hobbled in comparison
makes me cautious as I'm considering a purchase.

Is this a problem that Canon is looking to rectify via a firmware update (if such a method is possible)?

Or, is it correctable via, say, the color controls in Final Cut Pro 3?

Thanks for that Barry. It seems from what you said in the review that you think that the GL2 is more of a camera for "film look" than say the Xl1s, and so if you were buying for mainly movie making, would you go with the GL2 over the Xl1s? Assuming you could live without the interchangable lenses and just use adapters.

Most people I've heard of doing DV films use PD150's but they're just too expensive..:)

Barry,
This was a terrific review of the GL-2 and it was very generous of you to take the time share it with us. Really.

Barry, I take it that the movie is in the order PD150, Gl2, Xl1s...repeat?

[edit] Ignore that - just noticed the text on that movie page..gl2, pd150, xl1s.. :)

Yeah the PD150 does give nice skin tone results but I was impressed with the Gl2's handling of it also.

Very nice job Barry, well written and to the point. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to learn from your experiences.

Jeff

Here are my thoughts on everyones questions

>>>>>For me, the look of the XL1(s), particularly for interviews, is superior to the PD-150. Do you think the GL-2 would outperform the other two in this regard? Subjectively speaking, which camera has the best look?<<<<

Right out of the box, I felt the pd150 looked the best relative to skin tones, however the gl2 is capable of duplicating the look of the either the pd150 or the xl1s, by adjusting color, sharpness, set-up etc...The gl2 was a very close second relative to skintones, but I think its delicate handling of highlights puts it quite even. I would personally choose the gl2 for most things as I'm a Frame Mode cultist, turning down the sharpness a notch or two, and bumping up the set up and color gain slightly. As far as stock microphones, the gl2's is probably too omnidirectional for interviews, the xl1s is somewhat more focused.

>>>>>If you have a chance, please do it after a manual white balance, or in auto white balance mode. Arguably the most likely methods of camcorder use.<<<<<

I did a quick check in the studio, and manual white balancing did improve the xl1s red shift substantially. The Gl2 changed very little, if at all. It appears that the xl1s daylight preset is off significantly. I'll put up a new still with the custom white balance on the xl1s as soon as I can get to it.

>>>>Canon camcorders have always been known for their rich,
warm color palettes. To think that the GL2's might be hobbled in comparison
makes me cautious as I'm considering a purchase.<<<<

Overall I think the color on the Gl2 is fine, and in fact, more natural looking than the xl1s. In casual shooting around the yard, I really don't notice any lack of color in the image. What I was referring to was that the color gain control is very subtle, and didn't allow me to "oversaturate" the image..which usually you wouldn't want to do anyway...


Thanks again for everyone's kind comments and questions....I'm off on a shoot today, but as soon as I can I'll put up a few more stills.

Barry

Great start at a comparison Barry! I find the XL1s to be slightly oversaturated in the reds as well but it is easily toned down with a manual WB. Just a quick question about a couple of vids on your site. The Uncollected vid was shot on an XL!s correct? Was the JND vid shot on the same camera? Run Kaori Run was shot on an XL!s too? I too have used a GLIDECAM on occasion and prefer a stedicam but cost can be a factor!

After using a PD150 for a cooking show that will go to broadcast, I must say I am impressed by the picture but would you not agree that the XL1s has that overall less harsh video look? Everyone wants the film look these days or at least something comparable to it for a fraction of the cost! What is your PERSONAL camera of choice?
Cheers
JD

Thanks, Barry, for taking the time to do this comparison. Canon should also thank you as it seems I'm not the only one who was convinced to order a GL2 (this morning) based at least somewhat on your reviews!

Anxiously awaiting my GL2.

Nice video, great band.

http://www.jndlive.com/buzz.htm

JD-

Yes, Uncollected was shot on the xl1s, but the JND video was shot on the gl1, with a rather unorthodox lighting situation( this was also before I knew anything about the auto gain control). I think the one on their website plays a little better. (see steve's post). The Run Kaori Run video was shot on the gl1 as well. If you check the "gl2 flicker" thread you'll see that I developed a problem that is evident in the clip, but I really like the smaller camera on the glidecam, so I'm anxious to balance out the gl2 and strap that baby on.

Regarding the PD 150, xl1s issue...Personally I think the picture quality of the pd150 is less harsh than the xl1s...the highlights seem a lot more delicate...but if you mean frame mode versus the PD150's interlaced look...I'm in complete agreement...thats why I own the xl1s.

Personal favorite now--Gl2...future...XL2...I like the smoother zoom, larger form factor, controls, and modularity of the XL series...I just wish they'd fix the lens, the auto focus, and bring the resolution up to snuff.

Barry

Hello everyone...

This is my first posting so I apologize if I'm doing something wrong here (like sending too long a post). I'm new at this.

Here's my problem, I recently purchased a GL2 (after deciding against the TRV950) and I'm pretty happy with it, however, I do have a few questions about it that I can't seem to get anwered by anyone (including Canon).

I'm hoping it is OK to post them here. Barry? Anyone else? If you could help I'd really appreciate it!!!!!

Also, I should say, my altenative is to return the GL2 and buy the VX2000 -- but frankly, the weight difference and the balance (I have small hands and am left-handed) makes me want to like GL2 enough to keep it.

Oh, incidentally, I work in video production but don't always shoot my own stuff.

Ok, here goes with my questions:


1. On the GL2, what is the "E. Lock"? "E. Lock" is what appears in the viewfinder when I use the Exposure wheel on the front left side of the camera.

Yes, I know it changes the exposure of the picture, but what I want to know more specifically is, WHAT is actually changing to make the picture more or less exposed.

For example, by using the exposure wheel, am I actually changing the gain (in other words, adding light electronically)? Or, is it the aperture (or shutter speed or both) perhaps?

Is there a difference between the E. lock in "Auto" and E. lock in "TV" (or "AV")?

And, is the exposure wheel on the GL2 the same as rotating the Exposure wheel on the VX2000 (on the mid-left side of the camera) which seems to indicate a db measurement on the screen?


2. On the VX2000 there is an "AE shift" which allows you to move between Aprature priority, Shutter speed priority, Night time shooing, moving subjects, etc.

On the GL2, when you use "AE," you move up and down (more or less exposure) in .25 increments.

First, do you know if these AE features (on the GL2 and VX2000) are the same or different (and just have the same name)?

Next, do you have any idea what the .25 + or - increments refer to?


3. I too have a question/problem with the less-then-warm color of the Canon. Like an earlier posting, I thought Canons ran a little warm. I'm concerned that the GL2 is a bit cool. I found this to be ESPECIALLY in natural lighting.

Has anyone found this to be a big problem? I definitely prefer warm tones! I'm starting to have a feeling that this will be the deciding factor in which camera I buy.


I have three days to return the GL2, so I'm really hoping smeone can help me!

Thank you, thank you!

-Heidi W.
heidi@post.harvard.edu

Barry,
Thanks for your thoughts. As with alot of artistic pursuits, ones preference of a video picture can be in the eye of the beholder! I have always prefered the picture generated by a high end Ikegami over Sony for broadcast but DV has of course, has thrown alot of us for a loop!

A couple more questions if I may. You touched on a XL2. When? I know you may not have the answer to that question but has anyone heard feedback yet on the successor to the XL1s?

Have you seen the new Panasonic 24p cam yet? I couldnt make it to NAB this year to catch the demo model and Im looking forward to seeing what the pictures look like from that camera.

Cheers
JD

I don't think you'll see an update/replacement until PMA, February, or NAB, April, and that's just a guess on my part. We could be a year and a half away or more. If you see big rebates on the XL1s at Christmas that will be the clue that something may be coming.

Jeff

Hello,

First, I apologize for the double post. I have no idea how this happened.

Second, to Mark Kolodny, others: Have you tried playing with the color adjustments on the GL2? Is there any way to warm up the color, extend the color range, and keep the color looking "real?" Any idea if this will be addressed by Canon, or if it presents a "real" problem?

-Heidi

the Xl2 mention was purely speculation on my part, although the fact that canon has improved the chips on the gl2 would indicate that they will do the same with the higher end model.

Barry

Heidi-

Here are a few answers to your questions.

E.lock. Basically the e. lock overides the meter in the camera, holding an autoexposure setting in place. It's kind of like manual control without knowing what your settings are. Your question is a good one, though, because I've used the e-lock feature for years without really knowing what happens when I start adjusting it. So I checked. It appears that in all auto modes it will remove any existing gain first . In the TV mode it adjusts the aperture first, and then adjusts the gain. In the Av mode it adjusts the shutter first, and then adjusts the gain. In the Auto mode, it appeared to adjust the aperture first.

AE shift essentially applies an exposure compensation to the auto meter reading, while allowing the meter to function normally. The .25 increments are referring to fstops. Although it seems to be undocumented, I think the e. lock increments are the same.

Color
I haven't found the gl2 to run cool, but rather extremely neutral, and slightly lower in saturation (similar to the GL1). I've noticed that in daylight with the white balance on auto, the result is sometimes cool, but the daylight preset gives a very pleasing result.

Now, to adjust the color warmer there are a few things you can do. One is to adjust the color phase in the custom preset menu. (remember to turn the custom preset button ON when you're done making the correction). Another, better way, is to white balance to something with a slight blue tint. There are commercially available cards that allow you to do this, but if you have an inkjet printer, create a fill of 5 or 10 percent blue (will shift the scene slighly yellow) or cyan (slight red shift), print it out, and use that to do custom white balance. It's an old technique that works very well. You might want to bump up the color gain a couple of notches while you're at it. One other method would be to use a warming filter over the lens, just make sure the auto white balance is off.

I typically would prefer a camera with neutral color balance like the gl2, to one that was shifted in a particular direction. Correcting out a color shift can to achieve a neutral balance can be time consuming, so it's great the camera is doing it for you. Shifting the color balance away from neutral (to the warm) is a far more simple thing to do.

When considering your purchase....make sure you play around with the GL2's frame mode, as many consider it to be the one of the most important features, and one that is unavailable on the vx2000.

Barry

Heidi:

I don't own a GL-2--just researching one for possible (probable?) purchase.

Sorry I can't help you out with the color issue--it's a major concern for me and I would hope that Barry's suggestions pan out for you.

Barry:

Thanks for your diligence in answering our questions.

--Mark



<<<-- Originally posted by Heidi Willoughby : Hello,

First, I apologize for the double post. I have no idea how this happened.

Second, to Mark Kolodny, others: Have you tried playing with the color adjustments on the GL2? Is there any way to warm up the color, extend the color range, and keep the color looking "real?" Any idea if this will be addressed by Canon, or if it presents a "real" problem?

-Heidi -->>>

Hello,

Thank you, thank you everyone for all your help and advice! It has been completely and utterly useful!!

I am in the midst of talking with someone at Canon about my questions about E. Lock and AE (interestingly, thus far, I've gotten a range of different answers from different people), and I'll let you all know what I discover once he and I speak again on Monday.

For now, I've pretty much decided to (probably) go with the GL2 IF (and this is a big "IF") I can get used to the cool look of the video.

I've been doing lots of tests with the GL2 vs. the VX2000 in natural light which include changing the white balance and the color. I'm also doing a little looking into filters.

My opinion/observations on color indoors in natural light -- the GL2 is definitely cooler (which I really don't care for), but possibly a little more neutral and (maybe even) possibly, dare I say, a little accurate then the VX2000 (though not as pleasing).

Fortunately, I don't have to return the GL2 until next Thursday (at which time, I may weaken and buy a VX2000). We'll see.

By the way, I, like many of you, have a spouse who is embarrassed to be seen with a "big" videocamera, on the beach. But what the heck...

"Talk" with you soon,
Heidi

Hi, Heidi.

I've had my GL2 for 1.5 days now... are you not able to adjust the temp of the color to your flavor with white balance and custom key? Or is it that you can but would rather it were to your flavor in full auto "easy" mode? Because I can seem to get the whole range with these features.

Also, what is your question on the E. Lock? It seems pretty straight forward and clearly defined in the manual.

I don't know what the AE changes, but it's result is pretty clear: things get darker!

But if you're a photographer (like me) aren't you just using full manual anyway, where you adjust to flavor with your shutter and your aperature?

Best,

Blake

Hi Blake,

Thanks for the post...

I have a few very specific questions (see my above posts) re: E. Lock and AE -- specifically WHAT is being changed that makes the exposure darker? (Is it the aperture? the gain? etc.)

Actually, I also do photography -- and it's because of this that I want to know WHAT is being changed -- so I can better understand how to make the picture(s) that I want.

As for color, yes, I would definitely prefer that my "preferred color tones" were in "Easy" mode. Not that I'll always use it in this mode, but it is nice to have a like-able default. In general, I think the GL2 looks cool (neutral, grey, blue) as opposed to warm which I'm used to, and prefer.

I've been able to change this a bit by white balancing and changing the color gain, etc. (thank you all who helped me along these lines) a bit -- but I'd definitely prefer to just pick up a camera that I don't have to adjust so much.

I want to buy the GL2 (well, actually, I did buy it, but would prefer to keep it vs. return it for the VX2000) but I want to make sure I can get the picture I like...

Have you played with the Sony VX2000? It shoots warmer as is.

Congrats on your purchase.

-Heidi

Hi, Heidi.

Actually, for some reason (alcohol?) I was thinking that when you go into E. Lock you could specify whether you're adjusting shutter or F, but of course that ain't so. I think the reason these sort of "blanket" adjustments don't bother me on this cam is that depth of field seems so limited compared to photo cameras as to almost not be an issue. Further, if I don't like what I see on the LCD I can go full manual for a tweak, just like on my Nikon N90s! Or if you've got a DoF or shutter you want, I can just use one of those modes (I like shutter priority best).

I agree on the color. Rather than shifting warm, though, I'd like as close to neutral as possible, out of the box. Sometimes, especially in doors, there is a little violet shit that needs tweaking.

But if I had a cam that always shifted yellow out of the box I wouldn't dig that either.

I've touched a VX2000 but I've used a PD150 and a friend uses one for his pro projects.

Guess what: though the PD150 is super-easy to control, I think the GL2 makes better looking video! I expected it to be worse than the 150, so I was really amazed at how great it looks, and it's frame mode is something I really love.

Didn't someone on one of these forums do some tests and post what seemed to be getting shifted with those exposure shifting switches.

Looking forward to what you learn from Canon,

Best,

Blake

I did some comparison last night of footage taken recently in the High Sierra with my GL2 and compared it to footage from my previous GL1. The GL2 footage is far and away the most realistic color wise of any cam I have owned. It may be " cooler ", but to my eye it is more true to life over a wide range of colors and contrasts. I couldn't be happier!

Blake (and Heidi)

Yes, if you scroll up a bit you'll see that the e. lock does exactly what you'd hope it would...applying gain as a last resort, and using the exposure mode as a guide as to what to adjust-- thus in aperture priority it adjusts the shutter speed... etc. etc.

As for the easy mode...I think just about every user in this forum will probably back me up in saying "stay out of the green box", as it really limits your abilities with the camera. If you want a camera that you can just pick up and be "warm. Make up custom preset with increased red and a little extra color gain. Set your camera to Auto mode. When you pick it up, just make sure the little "cp" is showing in the viewfinder (if not hit the cust preset button), and you are off to (early-1980's) Spielberg heaven.

Cheers

Barry

Thanks, Barry.

Yeah, I think this was what I was intuitively perceving with the e changes, and the Auto Mode with cp seems like it would be perfect for Heidi's needs.

Thanks again,

<img src="http://members.aol.com/bhaber/bhatsea.jpg">

Blake

Based on Don's recommedation, I conducted a new comparison with the xl1s and the gl2 utilizing a custom white balance. The earlier test was made with a daylight preset, which I believe skewed all of the results for the xl1s, due to its improperly tuned preset. While little changed relative to the Gl2, the xl1s clearly benefitted from the manual white balance. Stills from the test are available at

http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/PhotoAlbum8.html

Using a manual white balance, the Gl2 still produced the most neutral results. The Xl1s chart shows a yellowish white, with slightly red shadow areas. The gl2 chart again shows its greater sharpness, and lower overall contrast. One area of interest is the Gl2's ability to differentiate between shades of bright red, something I had noticed while out in my rose garden last week. You'll notice on the chart how the two saturated red patches run together on the xl1s chart, whereas the gl2 recognizes that one is more magenta than the other. The xl1s did better at reproducing lighter yellow tones.

The skintone test, which utilized a drunk I pulled out of the alley behind my studio, (who just happens to wear the same sunglasses I do), showed the same yellowish bias with the xl1s. While this may look more appealing, it is decidedly less accurate than the gl2 in this case, as my...I mean.. the model's skin is as red as an irishman's on saturday. I've got someone with a more neutral skin color coming by this week and I will post a new still or two.

One more comment from the initial review needs amending. The xl1s color balance was so skewed in the initial tests, that my observations about the GL2's saturation are a little off. While the gl2 is still slightly less saturated than the Xl1s in most situations, it is correctable with 1 or 2 notches of color gain.


The remaining stills on the page, are taken from the clip I put up last week, and I think they all demonstrate one of the primary improvements of the gl2, that being its higher resolution. One of the things I keep noticing as I'm shooting is that the GL2 does a great job at rendering fine detail such as hair, and fine lines, and it does so with less aliasing than other camera's I've used.

These stills were shot in frame mode, auto white balance, and used a custom preset of
-1 sharpness
+1 color gain
+1 setup

This has become my standard set-up for the camera. In situations where skin texture might be a problem, or in lower light situations, I would typically lower the sharpness one more notch.

Thats all for now.

Barry

The more I see pictures from it, the more I am impressed with the little Gl2. The pictures of that street bum were really interesting for a couple of reasons :). As you said the xl1s didn't get a lot of the red in the skin, and also the definition difference between the two cameras was very noticeable and I thought the xl1s was rather poor. I guess if you like that look it's fine but I'm not sure I do to be honest. I assume you can adjust the gl2 softer and the xl1s sharper but I would think starting with high detail would be better cause losing resolution is easy, but trying to gain it would be harder if you don't have it in the first place. Or am I missing something? i.e Is the sharpness increase setting on the xl1s actually optical and not software driven?

I was also quite impressed that you got some really nice depth of field with the Gl2 which is something I'm interested in. Might need to try and source a Pal version from overseas rather than waiting until the end of the year here..


Thanks again Barry.

Hi,

OK, I'm back and if anyone can help, I'd sure appreciate it!

I'm in the final throes of deciding between a GL2 and VX2000.

I would prefer the GL2 BUT, I just can't get used to the color of the video.

I keep finding that no matter what I do/alter, in natural light (inside and outside), the GL2 is quite cool (some call it neutral, I call it blue/grey).

I prefer a slightly warmer look which I keep getting from the VX2000. (Although, I'm also finding the VX2000 to be a bit yellow and green.)

Color aside, I really like the GL2 picture. And in fact, really like the GL2 in general.

I've looked at a lot of color tests (my own, others online) and no one seems to have my same complaint.

So, does anyone out there know what I'm talking about? Do you find the VX2000 to be warmer too? Do you think the GL2 is too cool?

Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but I'd love some other opinions.

Thanks so much!

-Heidi

BTW, I (finally) spoke with Canon today re: details on the AE and Exposure Lock, will post the results of my conversation when I have a minute...

Heidi,

Are you just looking for someone to confirm your observation and help you decide against the GL-2? Your -own- eyes are the final judge.

"I keep finding that no matter what I do/alter, in natural light (inside and outside), the GL2 is quite cool (some call it neutral, I call it blue/grey). "

Sounds like you've already eliminated the GL-2. Done. Stop agonizing over it and move on to other selections.

You might take a look at the XL1s which leans toward a warmer image. Take a look at some of Barry's comparative frames and footage between the XL1s and GL-2.

Hi Heidi. You state that you prefer the GL2 apart from the colour, and then also state that other people haven't had that problem and other test images you've seen do not exhibit this problem. You've either got a faulty gl2, which I doubt or you just need more time to figure it out. If you like it, have faith that you will get some very good images with it. If you just can't bring yourself to do this, then go with the VX2000. Have you checked out barry's images and video that he's posted on this site. It should give you a good idea as to what you can get with the Gl2. Personally I think it's fine and with all the adjustments that you can make you should be able to get the look you want...Hey post process it later if you want.

Cheers
Aaron

Color, like almost everything in this digital era, can be changed. The color temperature of light changes through the day. If the GL2 is perfect in everyway, except the neutral color, then change it. If you white balance the camera with a slightly blue card it will warm the colors. There is a company that makes blue, white balance cards (for the life of me I can't remember who). Is this a perfect system? No, but what is perfect? If the Sony VX2000 is perfect, then buy it. If the Sony isn't, then decided which has the imperfections that you can deal with best. For me, white balance is something I never leave on auto, except in a few rare cases (fireworks, theatrical, clubs etc.).

Jeff

Thank you everyone for your replies.

Incidentally, I should add, I did try all sort of white balancing EXCEPT adding the blue...

Jeff, you said

" For me, white balance is something I never leave on auto, except in a few rare cases (fireworks, theatrical, clubs etc.)."

My problem is, I do lots of shooting where I don't have much time in between when I pick up the camera, turn it on, and shoot.

Do you have the luxury of setting up your shots, or do you find you can white balance really quickly for any kind of quick shooting?

Also, does anyone out there know of the company Jeff is referring to?

Thanks,
H

Here's one company that makes them. (google is an amazing thing)

http://www.warmcards.com/wb101.html

As I posted earlier in the thread, you can make a set of these easily with an inkjet printer, additionally if you do a search of white balancing, you will find discussion of another simple technique using a colored gel. All of these are easy to do in the field, or you can pre-white balance under similar lighting, and hold the setting by turning the standby switch to lock. You can even achieve this (although with less control) by just pointing your camera at a lighter area of a blue sky, and setting a custom white balance.

Barry

I can't say that I find the GL2's picture to be " cool " color wise. I actually think it looks the most realistic of any camera I've owned so far ( less red bleed than the GL1 which was known for its " warm look " ). But I've never done a direct comparison with a VX2000 either. Funny thing about spending so much on a camera - those that spent thier money on a VX2000 say it has the sharpest picture, those that had bought the GL1 say the picture looked " warmer ". Then I read an article by a wedding video outfit that had both cameras. Guess what? Other than in the lowest light, they said the pictures were interchangable! Yes, you probably are spliting hairs!

Heidi,

I do some corporate work that allows me to set up each shot. I also do wildlife work which gives me zero set up a great deal of the time. You never know when the bird will fly off its perch. I can white balance a camera in 10 seconds or less. I'm a creature of habit. I set up the camera the same way every time, so I don't miss a step. When I got my first XL1 I practiced setting up the camera. It helped me learn the controls and my speed improved dramatically as my confidence with the camera grew.

Jeff

Howdy from Texas,

Heidi said: "My problem is, I do lots of shooting where I don't have much time in between when I pick up the camera, turn it on, and shoot."

This is another reason why the GL2 is such a great camera... you can set up the image any way you want, and dial the color, etc. to your satisfaction. You do this one time. Then, whenever you pick up the camera, just press one button to bring up that favorite custom image configuration. It's retained in camera memory, for you to recall whenever you need it, with a single button-press at any time. Hope this helps,

5 mins before reading Chis' post I was doing just that; setting the GL-2's "Custom Preset" button. It's a very nice feature indeed, borrowed from the XL1s.

...is this one on Dirck Halstead's site:

http://dirckhalstead.org/issue0208/cameracorner.htm

Ken, I didn't realize you have a GL2 now.

Chris,
Just got it (from ZGC) this week. Having used a GL-1 since 1999 (and loved it) I was just curious about how the new guy compared. (Read: Too much time on my hands.)

My take, in a jingle, so far : "Evolution not Revolution". The industrial design of the case and (most) controls is more refined. The finish is more tactile and less slippery. The larger eyecup will be very nice to have for bright outdoor shooting. Resolution and color management are definitely improved. I'll have better impressions after shooting the Chicago Air & Water Show this weekend.

The GL-2 will be the new mobile companion to my XL1s. So far the footage between the two seems to match pretty well.

BTW, I also bought that new, tiny on-camera light for the GL-2 (the VL-3). No, you can't really use it to light very much but I still think it's really cool. It plugs directly into the new smart hot shoe (no cables) and runs off of the cam's battery. It also has an "auto" mode that automatically turns it on when the camera needs it. It will make a good "eye light".

Also BTW, the original LightWave Equalizer designed for the GL-1's onboard mic also fits the GL-2's mic, even though the latter is slightly wider and longer.

Hey, on Dirck Halstead's GL-2 review page, it looks like he has an eyecup that's different from both the standard and the large eyecup. It looks similar to a film camera's eyecup. Anyone know the skinny on this item?

Thanks to all of you in this wonderful forum! I waited a long time to decide which camcorder to buy and your tips are great. Promise to send my impression from the GL-2 as soon as I will get it (I’m going to use it for broadband as well).
Zohar

I believe the cup you refer to is a Ikkup Rubber Eyecup. Google returned two sources Adorama http://www.adorama.com/refby.tpl?sku=VHI and Video Smith http://www.videosmith.com/cgi-local/store/commerce.cgi?search_request_button='Next_Page'&product=accessories&page=&item=&cart_id=&keywords=&hits_seen=10 I've been to Video Smith before and didn't recall seeing it. But I checked again, and sure enough it was there $29.95 with an assortment of oddball adapters.

Jeff