"Need a little push" or not
 

Hello,

I am the owner of a Canon XL-1, which I bought when the GL-1/2 (M-1/XM-2) was not in the market yet.
I was used to the Camera Hi8 A2 camera (which broke down and Canon could not supply the 'motherboard' anymore)
I decided however to stick with Canon and 'go digital' (the XL-1 being the only Canon having the DV-in at the time). I like the camera very much BUT the camera appeared to be so huge. For this reason I am considering to transfer to the Canon XM-2.
Among you I have seen many who own both the XL1(S) and the XM-2, but in order to be able to buy the XM-2, I (regrettably) have to sell my XL-1.
I am still hesitating wether to proceed or not, since I will definitely loose on the investment and even might have to pay extra when making the transfer to the XM2.
I will be using the camera for documentary work, oral history, nature films.
What will I be missing and what are the gains ? One of the big advantages to me seems the fact that the camera is easier to handle and taking less attention.
Is there anybody among you who did the same thing and can "help" me with this dillemma ?
A little 'psychological push' could possibly help me in making my decision.

I will highly appreciate your reactions !

Hans den Hertog,

take the plunge
 

From what I have read, the xl1 has 3 1/3" chips of 280,000 pixels each. My GL2, which I love, has the same three chips but 380,000 pixels each. The color is incredible and the weight very easy to use. I bought a beachtec xlr adaptor for my mics and the combo has helped add a few ounces of stability to the camera.

If you don't need the interchangeable lenses, the GL2 is for you. I also bought the canon wideangle lens for this. I feel very complete with my tools and my avid xpress 3.5 system.
Dixon

xl1 or gl2
 

if you do nature photography and need a very, very long lens, then the xl will be the ticket, assuming you can afford a long lens. the gl2 does have a great zoom, but nothing approaching the quality you can get with an extremely long tele lens. i have a gl2 (just a few weeks old) and used it at the san diego wild animal park recently, and it was superb....

Basically what you will loose is:

- ability to swap lenses
- ability to use a black and white viewfinder
- a "professional" looking camera
- shoulder support (with the standard one, ma-100 or ma-200)

What you will gain:

- a larger zoom lens
- a flip-out LCD screen
- a smaller more easily manouvered camera
- increased CCD pixels

Dixon: I assume you mean a wideangle "adapter" instead of "lens", right?

Need a little push
 

I think we're looking at the wrong issues. I don't care much for a professional "looking" care that doesn't offer professional resolution and ccd. Yes, I did mean wide angle adaptor which is more than enough. And as far as shoulder stock and xlr output,
I use a beachtec adaptor for xlr audio and made a shoulder mount.

In short, I love this camera, and saved $1,800 which bought my editing deck.
Dixon

If you want an even longer focal length than that offered by the GL2/XM2 at maximum zoom, the Sony 58 mm 1.7X convertor works well with the Canon lens.

There is inevitable vignetting at the wide angle end of the zoom, but then, if you wanted wide angle, you wouldn't be using the convertor! At maximum zoom with this convertor, you have effectively around 1350 mm focal length in 35 mm terms.

The Sony is heavy, but I have been using one for a couple of years, almost all the time I use the camera, without any ill effects to the camera frame.

It does shift the balance a long way forward. I have compensated for this by making a false base plate from 1/8" (3 mm) alloy with the quick release plate for my tripod fixed at the balance point.