Magic bullet is more flexible. It gives greater control over the image, not just de-interlace. MB is fairly expensive and it has to render all of it's magic. I timed some renders of sample footage and they averaged around 5 seconds per frame. this was done with a 450 G4 dual processor. One of the newer Macs could probably cut the time at least in half.

If you're after the ultimate look use MB and render. If you need footage right away and can't wait to render, shoot frame mode.

Jeff

Ma-300 Adapter
 

does not provide phantom power, but many mics allow you to power with a "double A" battery inside the mic body like the AT 835b.

The other big deal with the Panasonic is 24p, which if you read some of the other posts is pretty hard to beat for "film" like image quality, at least as far as DV cams go. It's a big jump in price even in the USA, and the GL-2 is a pretty cool little camera.

I guess my thought would be, if you can live with the GL-2 why spend the extra money, if you can't live without the better image step up to the Panasonic. If you sell your camera now you'll still take a hit, unless you can return it and trade up.

I suspect that GL-2's prices will be pretty stable in the used market for quite some time. I started looking at used cameras before I got my GL-2 and for the extra few hundred dollars it just made sense to buy new. So the GL-2 is probably going to hold it's value for a little while longer.

Also check out http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisp...?s=&forumid=47 for more in depth info on the Panasonic
my 2 cents
Mark

It's too late to return it, but I can still sell it. Thanks for your viewpoint. The folks at 2-pop don't seem interested in talking about the GL2 for some reason, so I thought it best to ask in here. The pictures of the two seem a lot closer than the pictures of the Pana and the PD150 are, if that makes any sense. At least it seems this way to my eye.

This may not be your case but more than once I attempted to show my wedding customers their finished tape by plugging the cam into the TV. To my horror the image was pixelated. Only much later did I discover that this was happening because I was placing the cam on top of the TV or too close to the TV. I hope this is your problem. Placing the cam near certain electrical equipment can cause problems, and it doesn't have to be a TV.
But in your case it sounds like your helical scanning heads may have been misaligned.

thanks, but what is scan head misalign? Also it has nothing to do with me sending the avi files back to my DV tape right? I was afraid that was the reason that has damage the playing unit.

yowsiang

If you open the cassette door of your GL2 you may see a big, shiney helical scanning drum, which is tilted. Beside this rotating drum you may see two tilted screws with slots on the top which can be turned to incrementally adjust the tape path as it passes over the drum. If you watch closely as you open the door the screws move in a circular fashion around the drum and position themselves up toward you. This I believe is to wrap the DV tape around the drum so the drum can turn, scanning the tape data.

Months ago I toyed with an old JVC DV cam which was out of warranty. The playback on the cam was scrambled mosaiac just like your cam was. After incrementally turning one or both of the adjustable screws closest to the scanning head the cam played fine. One word of advice: don't try this at home, especially with a DV cam under warranty.

Well I was just talking about the "Magic Bullet"-part (the deinterlacer & deartifacter) not the whole package "Magic Bullet". And the question wasn't about an ultimate look but about the difference of image quality between frame-mode and normal-mode+deinterlace-using-magic-bullet. Without using Look Suite or the rest of the tools.

I'm asking this because the deinterlacer is pretty good since it works using motion detection (as does FieldsKit Deinterlacer by RE:Vision). In this case you could use the better resolution in normal mode.

Question about 16x9 Anamorphic
 

I know using 16x9 sacrifices resolution, but how much?

The CCDs are supposed to be a better resolution than 720 x 480. That res is only for DV standard, not an inherent limitation in the camera.

It would seem to me that the CCD should have enough resolution to ignore the top and bottom 12.5% each of the image in order to create the anamorphic version without sacrificing resolution. That would be the way I would hope the anamorphic mode works.

The other way I guess would be to take a normal 4x3 720x480 image, and crop 25% off vertically, to create a 720 x 360 image, and then stretch and smooth to go back to 720x480. That's how it would be done with software. I would hope that is NOT how the GL2 does it.

Does anyone know which way it's done? I know there's a resolution difference, but it's not huge, so I am guessing it must be the first option.

You may find Adam Wilt's page useful. It's a bit dated but still captures the essence of how this is done in various types of cameras.

The bottom line today is that creating a stylish 16:9 image with 4:3 CCD blocks involves compromise and manipulation. You can either chop, stretch, or squash (adapters). If you want a truer 16:9 image you'll have to ante-up quite a bit more cash (than conventional prosumer gear).

Thanks, that gives me the answer. The Canon DOES use the first method I described, which is obviously much better than the second.

Update on GL-2 problem out of the box
 

Want to first thank those from here who posted or emailed with suggestions. Those who evaluated my description, and diagnosed a warranty issue...thanks. You were, of course, right.

And kudos to Canon Warranty Service in New Jersey. We mailed the camera out on January 10. (that is just a bit scary, shipping a new $3k camera to an unknown location.)

Camera was signed for at the Warranty facility on January 12.

Camera arrived back here (Iowa) this morning, January 16.

It was repaired, and circuitry WAS replaced. Now, based on very early testing, it seems to be functioning perfectly. Can't beat warranty service like that for proficiency AND speed.

Thanks again to those who took the time to help; your advice was spot on.

Terry

Glad to hear it worked out for you.

Maybe OT . . but: Tips On Videoing A Party?
 

Hiyah!

I have an opportunity to be used by a pro-videog, to do some small-scale Party/Anniversary camera work for him. He's seen my XM2 and the results and is very jealous of my new baby. He's got a Sony DX9000 - heavy machine.

I'd like some Do's and Don'ts - yes? Any thoughts on the "rough" story board I should go for?

I've done a search on the web, but I keep coming back to our amazing Son Of Watchdog Forum - yes? THIS must say something.

Soooo... please bang in what you think would "cut-the-ice" in me getting THE essential shots in the can.

Thanks in advance - it's going to be interesting anyways - might help others too - with their new G or XM2.

Grazie

Get a good wide angle adapter that is full zoom-thru. Esential for working crowded spaces.

Have a low wattage light, no more than 20 watts for use in poorly lit spaces. But be careful using it so you do not totally irritate the guests.

If you plan to do inverviews, have a wireless handheld mic. But be sure that is what the client wants.

Don't shoot adults stuffing food in their mouths (unlesss it is that kind of party up front), or drunk uncle Charlie hitting on 15-year old Missy.

Be sure you know who are the key players and VIPs and get them at their best.

If there is an MC or DJ running the program, be sure to coordinate with them so you are ready and don't miss key program.

When there is action, be prepared to block everyone else's view, that way you get the best view/shot.

Check if the venue has rules that apply to videographers. although this is more common in churches that at receptions/parties.

And the hardest part when shooting a party - you are working, not there to have fun.

Don - Thanks.

All good advice. I've got the Canon WD58. Have used this in "confined" spaces and it is useful. I've got a video lamp - I'll make sure it is fully charged too! The wireless mic option gives a good reason to go ahead and buy one now!

I always have fun - especially when I'm hired to do a shoot! - But yes, you are very correct.

Thanks

Grazie