the line on the xl2
 

i've been using canon's xl1s for a few years now, and i couldn't be happier with the camera. while shooting a friend's film, i used a sony (with 24p) that he had borrowed from work. i feel like i instantly saw the difference 24p had on the visual quality of the work. needless to say, my curiousity about the xl2 is insatiable. is 24p all it is cracked up to be? does it make video-to-film transfer any cheaper or simpler? is my mind playing tricks on my, or is there a clear difference between 60i and 24p? all told, i'm so familiar with the xl1 at this point that i can't imagine upgrading to anything but the xl2.

it's all that... and a bag of chips....

What Sony Camera did you use that had 24P??? Something really Hi-end? I thought Sony was staying out of the prosumer end of 24P cams for now.

24p is a whole different world, and in my opinion, infinitely superior to 60i.

It's the difference between Survivor and The West Wing.

I have a DVX100, and everyone that sees it's footage has the same reaction: "That's not film?"

I can't imagine working with anything other than 24p, especially on narrative projects.

If you love the XL1, the XL2 in 24p should be a dream come true.

Not to mention Chris that you'll retain backwards compatibility with your existing XL lense(s) and batteries. If you have a sizable investment in those items, you'll be able to save money by not needing to accessorize a new camera.

=gb=

thanks, folks.
 

i really needed a nudge to convince me to pack up the xl1 and trade up for the xl2. very excited by the group appraisal.

the sony i used was that hd 24p high-end camera that they make: only had access to it because a friend works at a philly-based productin studio.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jaime Valles :It's the difference between Survivor and The West Wing. -->>>

Ah, I see... tacky and shallow vs. boring and pretentious?

(-; sorry, I just couldn't resist ;-)