XL1s pr GL2

[Andrew Paul]

Hi Guys

Been away from here a while and I am back, as usual , with a question for you all. If you have used XL1s and GL2 you might be able to help.

I used to own a GL2 ( or XM2 as we call it here in UK) and loved the camera for its quality, size and lightness. I then upgraded to XL1s and expected even better picture, but only got the same quality picture. After a year now, I am now tempted to sell the XL1s and go back to the GL2. Does anyone manage to get better quality footage from the XL1s copared to the XM2

In your opinion, apart from changing lenses etc, is there any reason why I should go back to GL2 ?

Thanks

Andy

[Zack Birlew]

The GL2 was actually more advanced than the XL1S in terms of functionality (ie. audio meters), but either one will be fine. I don't think you need to go back unless you want to, the main difference is how you handle the camera. Shoulder mounting will make for smoother movement if you're moving around with it. The only other plus is that the GL2 is smaller than the XL1S.

Really, unless you need the interchangeable lense factor, then you can go either way. I'd personally stick with the XL1S as it has a better reputation in the bizz, mostly because it looks more pro than the GL2 does.

The image is the same so why bother?

[Henry Cho]

after using an xl1/xl1s for years, i bought a gl2 for a small project where some discretion was advised. i liked the portability factor, and the image was nice, but i couldn't stand using it. i almost always shoot in full manual mode, and having the iris, shutter speed, gain, etc. all buried in the same electronic menu screen and using a little dial to jump between settings nearly drove me batty. what nearly did me in those couple of days was turning the camera off, primarily to change batteries, and having the iris, shutter speed, manual focus, and everything else reset to auto/default values. a lot of people say the gl2 is a compact xl1s, but i think the xl1s is, in almost every way, a better camera. i like the form factor, there's an individual dial or button for most important camera functions, and the image, to me, is just prettier to look at. the gl2's images seemed just a little too sharp for my taste. note, i don't have a lot of experience with the stock lens on the xl1s... i shot with the manual lenses almost all of the time (and the 3x on occasion). i have to say i was pretty wowed at the weight of the gl2, and the surprising image quality from something so light. but i just couldn't get past feeling like i was shooting a home video on a handycam the entire time i used it.

if you need a lightweight camera, and almost always shoot in one of auto modes, i'd say to get your hands on another gl2. otherwise, i like the xl1s (especially with one of the manual lenses :-)).

[Jack Smith]

Jack,out of interest to clarify, what is it about the audio meters on the GL2 you find better than the meters on the XL1S?

[John Zahorian]

Because the camcorders are so similar, is the style of the body really worth buying a used XL1s instead of a new GL2? Both seem to be going for around $2000.

[Zack Birlew]

Sorry, Jack Smith, I didn't get an e-mail notification about your post. I guess I was wrong, the XL1S had audio meters too, my bad.

John, if you're in this range of cameras and don't even want to consider a Panasonic DVX, or Sony VX2100/PD150/PD170, or bump up to HD with the Sony A1U or HC1, then just go with the XL1S, it's the simplest answer I can give at this point.

[Jim Herman]

I like the image that comes from the GL2 better than the XL1s. The XL1s is too warm for my taste but I don't think it would bother me enough to switch back.

-Jim