GL2 vs XM2, Frame Mode and Resolution at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon HDV and DV Camera Systems > Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders > Canon GL Series DV Camcorders

Canon GL Series DV Camcorders
Canon GL2, GL1 and PAL versions XM2, XM1.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 24th, 2004, 08:14 AM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorks UK
Posts: 89
GL2 vs XM2, Frame Mode and Resolution

Hi All,

I've done a quite a few searches, and not found much info about this particular question. I live in the UK, and am shortly getting a Pal XM2 (European GL2). I have read about NTSC GL2 users not liking the resolution loss when using frame mode.

My question is because the Pal XM2 has 720 x 576 resolution, and the GL2 has 720 x 480 (correct?), so when the XM2 use's 'Frame mode', will its increased vertical resolution still result in a superior picture to the GL2.

Also, how different will the difference in frame rate affect the footage in Frame mode between the 25p of the XM2 to the 30p of the GL2 (XM2 more stroby maybe?).

Thanks in advance for any replies,
Dave.
Dave Croft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2004, 01:18 PM   #2
RED Code Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
Frame mode is basically the same algorithm on both camera's,
so the loss is indentical. But, we have more resolution to begin
with so there is more left in the end as well. Whether this
resolution drop is an issue depends on where you want to take
your footage.

Personally I love the slightly softer look (more "filmic") and it
doesn't look like resolution loss at all. It still looks great on TV
etc. If you want to blowup to film (I still haven't heard of a lot
of people doing that here!) then, yes, it *might* be interesting
to stick with the higher resolution of interlaced. But that also
depends on the transfer house that will do the blowup.

Frame mode might also change the way things look etc. Since
we are on 25 fps (or 25p "emulated") which is almost the same
as 24p is using we get a motion signature that more closely
matches the "big movies". But that is also tight in to specific
shutter settings, etc.
__________________

Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com
DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef

Join the DV Challenge | Lady X

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors
Rob Lohman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2004, 02:12 PM   #3
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albany, NY 12210
Posts: 2,650
Along these lines there's something I've always wondered about. As has been noted in here previously, miniDV can't resolve all 720 lines of horizontal resolution. That being the case, does the extra vertical resolution with PAL really buy you anything? Also, when you shoot in frame mode on the XM2, does it shoot 30 fps or 25 fps? I thought I had read that it was 30 fps, but you guys seem to be saying differently.
Marco Leavitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2004, 09:01 PM   #4
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Canberra AUSTRALIA
Posts: 169
XM2 is 25fps in frame mode or interlaced
Andrew Hogan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2004, 05:01 AM   #5
RED Code Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
The PAL version of the GL2, known as the XM2 records ONLY at
25 fps. It is sort of progressive if you switch it to frame mode,
otherwise it is 25fps interlaced or 50 fields per second.

I don't understand one thing about horizontal resolution and
lines all the people always talk about. I only know about digital
resolution and you will get a 720x576 signal. I'm assuming the
lenses on the GL2/XM2 and XL1S are at least good enough for
that.
__________________

Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com
DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef

Join the DV Challenge | Lady X

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors
Rob Lohman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2004, 05:59 AM   #6
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorks UK
Posts: 89
Great Info Guys!

Many thanks to everybody who has replied to my question. I think I'll definitely go with the XM2 when I upgrade from my trv-15.

I'd thought about the dvx100, but it seems very hard to get hold of in Europe or the UK (anyone know any good UK dealers selling the dvx100?) anyway I think I'd miss the 20x zoom and ease of use in an uncontrolled situation. I plan on maybe doing some landscape/nature work so the XM2 is probably the way to go.

Again thanks for replys,
Dave.
Dave Croft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2004, 04:01 AM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
Re: Great Info Guys!

<<<-- Originally posted by Dave Croft : Many thanks to use in an I plan on maybe doing some landscape/nature work so the XM2 is probably the way to go.
-->>>

I will also film in nature/landscape/sunset.

I don't know what to buy:
XM2 or sony VX2000?

(about same price)
Prech Marton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2004, 04:26 AM   #8
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Gwaelod-y-garth, Cardiff, CYMRU/WALES
Posts: 1,215
You may find that the lens on the XM2 is better. It's also longer -20:1

Robin.
Robin Davies-Rollinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2004, 07:44 AM   #9
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
<<<-- You may find that the lens on the XM2 is better. It's also longer -20:1

Robin. -->>>

Yeah, i know.
But what this means? I get crisper, sharper pictures?
And what about colors? Are there rich enough?

(anyway, my digital8 has 25x optical zoom :)
Prech Marton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2004, 08:57 AM   #10
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Gwaelod-y-garth, Cardiff, CYMRU/WALES
Posts: 1,215
The pictures are very crisp.
As for colours, they are as natural as you would expect. Don't forget that you have the option in the set-up menu of adjusting the colour gain and hue to your preference, though I've found that the normal settings on the XM2 are perfectly adequate for most things.

Robin.
Robin Davies-Rollinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2004, 11:38 AM   #11
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorks UK
Posts: 89
I have been very torn between the xm2 and the vx2100 at the moment. I had thought I wanted to go with the XM2 for the 20x zoom, frame mode and okay still mode (stills fine for holiday etc).

But now I think I will go with the sony for its rugged reliability, and 1/3 inch super low light low noise CCD's, as this is a big bonus.

However, i'll probably change my mind again tomorrow ;)

Dave.
Dave Croft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2004, 05:52 PM   #12
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 202
Dave,

If you want to go with the XM2 let me know or check my post as I'm selling my XM2 plus all the goodies I have for it right now.

Cheers
__________________
Catalina Productions
http://www.catalina.co.nz
Joe Lloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2004, 09:24 AM   #13
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 138
Someone once said NTSC stands for Never Twice the Same Colour! Meaning that the colours are a pain in conversions. Pal is better here, as black is black and not a greyish black, and white is white not a dull white. However, from reading these pages it does seem that ntsc users can go to a lower shutter speed without jitteryness. For example 1/50 gives a good picture. But the next level i can drop to is 1/25. This enables you to get a good picture in dark, but unfortunatley the picture is jittery and leaves traces. Ok for effect, but no use at all for proper filming. However i hear ntsc users saying they can go to 1/30 i think? a 1/40 setting may be usefull, but the camera seems unable to do this.
__________________
StMichael
Michael Connor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2004, 09:41 AM   #14
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: hungary
Posts: 462
Michael,

if 1/25 shutter speed is jerky, why would be better the shorter speed (eg 1/30 or 1/40)
I think 1/20 maybe better. Maybe.
1/15 is too low, because it can produce just 15 fps.

NTSC frame mode is better than PAL because it is 30fps, and not 25 like here in Europe.

That's why i don't like really the 24fps film look.
Prech Marton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2004, 09:54 AM   #15
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 138
1/50 is fine. 1/25 is jittery. To go lower still as you suggested just makes it even worse! (ie 1/12!)
What i was saying was that reducing this has a positive effect on the picture in terms of light and what you can actually see. ie 1/6 gives me night vision! But the jittery effect where moving images leave traces is not desirable. I meant that it would be good if we could play with speeds in between the 1/50 jerky 1/25 setting, meaning that maybe 1/34 or 40 may be useful in low light and that the jerkyness may be more bareable. The chances are that no body will ever use the lower settings, except for creative stuff or digital stills. These settings are not available on my xm2. What i was also saying was that it appears that ntsc models can go a little lower than pal models because of the higher frame rate.
__________________
StMichael
Michael Connor is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon HDV and DV Camera Systems > Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders > Canon GL Series DV Camcorders

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network