Hello everybody,

Thought this link might be interesting to you.....
It provides a frame line-up for several indoor and outdoor situations. The Xv-2 seems to be the Japanese XM-2 model indication.

I'm currently deciding between the VX2000 and the MX-2. (like many of us ;-)

I was surprised how small the differences are! However I was a bit disappointed by the XM-2 frames of the park and the flower close-up.

Let me know your impressions!

http://www4.big.or.jp/%7Ea_haru/temp020829/0208_3CCD.html

bye,
Randy

vx 2K & canon

based on the photo's ..IMO the canon has slightly more electronic detailing ( less is better) ...

notice that on some of the BRIGHT objects the canon has added slightly dark edge on the edges ..

on dark objects canon has added a lighter edge around that dark.

IMO the canon also has more stair stepping - notice the C/U of woman with flower .. the right side of face ( edge) the stair stepping creates a bright edge line

BUT in the end ( based on seeing video of both camera's) i prefer the "look" of the canon ...

Yes, viewing actual video on a good monitor from the cameras gives more information than the frame grabs, which sometimes can seem to overstate differences of certain qualities, and at others times marginalize the differences in others. But the shots on that page are useful.

There are certain situations where each one shines somewhat, but I'd say on the whole, that the order of the lineup (descending from vx2000, to trv950, then GL2, to mx5000) is a fair rating of Overall picture quality. -Not every nit-picky thing for each camera, but Overall. (I'm now ducking the virtual tomatoes being lobbed in my direction...)

For example, for absolute resolution of the finest details, the trv950 wins (squint at some of those distant bldg windows). For low light, it's the vx2000 (followed a significant step behind by the GL2, followed another step behind by the trv950, followed yet another step down by the mx5000). I don't know exactly what we're looking at in that last 16:9 comparison set, but the trv950 is way ahead there. The GL2 seemed to handle certain hot spots the best.

-Now some of the differences are hard to attribute to actual camera diffs vs. slight change of sun angle, etc. I have shot some test video on 3 of the 4, (not including the Panasonic) and saw that the quality of all certainly were in the same ballpark, but do have some visible differences. I think the biggest considerations between these cameras should be those other than just ultimate picture quality, and all three have their individual advantages.