Curious about GL2 vs DVX100
 

I was really looking between these 2 models based on overall quality.

Does anyone know the major differences between the 2???

I like the aspect of 24 fps film mode on the Panasonic, but you can obviously give a film look during post with Vegas 4 or other programs.

Which has the overall better quality overall???

The DVX100 is a great camera, but so is the GL2, especially if you're fairly new to the video world. To do the 24p in the DVX100 the whole camera becomes manual (no auto focus, gain, that sort of thing), which may be too much of a hassle. Plus, you can certainly re-create the film look in post with Vegas, or many other software choices.

For me, the reason to get a DVX100 is if you're shooting independent films and are planning to transfer to film later on. If all you're doing is shooting for fun/hobby, the GL2 is an excellent camera, with many pro features and a great feel, at a more affordable price.

By the way, any place that's selling the DVX100 at $2900 is probably trying to rip you off somehow. Seriously, they use sketchy, grey-market products, and often advertise the price just to get you in the store and buy a bunch of stuff you don't need. I highly recommend using a trusted professional video store (like B&H, for example). When you're shelling out that much money, it's worth the extra $300 to know that your equipment is in good hands before you get it, and that you get ALL the equipment when you buy it.

Hi Bob:

I moved from the GL! to the DVX-100, primarily for the audio capability the GL1 lacked.

Although the DVX 100 is a fine camera, the first time I missed the GL1 was when zooming, and I expected it to keep on going (but it didn't). The leica lens is nice but the glass on the GL1 w/ a 20X zoom (non digital) is very sweet. 40mm-806mm in 35mm lingo.

WW

DVX100 is a better camera overall, but it's almost $1000 more and arguably in a different category than the GL2. If it's in the budget, get it, if not, get the Gl2. You will probably be very happy with either.

The time to create 24 fps in post for long projects is far more costly in time and money than upgrading to the DX100. Plus, no system, even Magic Bullet, can convert 60i to 24p without some loss in resolution and some artifacts. Magic Bullet comes close, but also costs $1000.

If you want to see what you can do with an XM2 (Pal GL2), download this file (26Mo):

http://marc5532.free.fr/motocross.wmv

The footage has been edited in Vegas Video.

link is not working...

I don't know what is the problem (perhaps a server problem), the link isn't working in IE6 but works in GetRight, so try with GetRight if you have it or download it at http://www.getright.com , then enter this URL in GetRight http://marc5532.free.fr/motocross.wmv

I was able to download it on my girlfriend's computer a little while ago. I watched it and it played kinda funny, skipped around a bit.

I tried to see if it was just the computer, so I tried to download it again, now it's gone.

<<<-- Originally posted by William Wallick : Hi Bob:

I moved from the GL! to the DVX-100, primarily for the audio capability the GL1 lacked.

Although the DVX 100 is a fine camera, the first time I missed the GL1 was when zooming, and I expected it to keep on going (but it didn't). The leica lens is nice but the glass on the GL1 w/ a 20X zoom (non digital) is very sweet. 40mm-806mm in 35mm lingo.

WW -->>>

I myself have moved in a similar fashion. I'm actually supposed to recieve my DVX100 today- that's why I'm home from work posting on the board. The GL-1 was or IS...a great camera. Very crisp pictures with good color saturation. I'd even, on a stretch, say in proper lighting the images look better then that of my buddy's XL1-S. However like you said the audio stinks. I'm working with a Sennheisser ME66/K6 via a Beachtek adapter and the problem is I have no control over the audio. It's such a sensitive mic it's hard to set the level correct without clipping.

Another thing I'm looking forward to is shooting in 24p. With the GL-1 I almost always shot in frame-mode to depart from the "home video" look the best I could. However it did introduce major strobing. I heard the 24p on the DVX100 can do the same thing but I'm hopping it's less severe- especially during paning.

"Strobing" at 24P will be worse than frame mode because it's fewer frames per second - frame mode is 30 frames per second. Of course the DVX100 shoot 30P as well.

But if you shoot at 24p and you have not shot film or other 24fps stuff before, you will need to learn some rules of panning. The great thing about the DVX100 is you can see it on the LCD while shooting rather than waiting for the workprint from the lab.

My method is to use a approx 5-8 second pan if needed (5-8 seconds edge) or use whip pans or follow/track with moving subject to disguise strobing.

I see strobing in films in theaters all the time - we're just conditioned to accept it there more than on TV.

You can also pick ASC Cinematorgrapher's handbook with detail charts for panning at 24fps.

Yeah but....
 

I'm only working with Adobe Premiere- so that means I have to shoot in 24P rather than 24Padvanced. Correct?
Also Adobe doesn't support 24p so I'll have to live with the basic 2:3 pull down. Is it the 2:3 pulldown that makes it strobe?

I read somewhere that if your editing suite accepts 24p you can shoot in advanced mode and it looks alot better.

Lastly, I have a hi-def tv (probably besides the point) and a progressive scan dvd player. Does that mean if I had an editing suite that accepted 24p footage, when I make a dvd out of it and play it...it'll be true progressive scan on the tv?

You can shoot Advanced and use DVFilmmaker to process your files for 24P in Premiere.

Yep, if you software supports it, you can make a true 24p progressive scan DVD.

I dropped Premiere for Vegas Video. Version 4.0B with DVD Architect 1.0 support this plus 5.1 mixing and encoding. As I already owned Vegas Audio, upgrade only cost $299 for both applications.

Hmm tell me more about DVFilmaker? What is it? And if it's processed in DVfilmaker then imported into premiere won't I run into the same problem or does DVfilmaker "remove" the frames needed to run smoothly without strobe.....or is strobe an inherent affect of 24p in general?

search here in this forum or go to www.dvfilmmaker.com - lots of info and demo version.

That's actually one thing I hate about films, strobing when something is panned. I am not conditioned to accept it even though I see many, many movies. I'll admit it kinda gives me a headache. I kinda look away when I see a pan that involves strobing.

I've read that soon there's going to be filming/video done at higher than 24p even in films on the large screen. There trying to figure out how it can be inexpensive. I saw this along time ago, but the main point is trying to achieve a new standard in high def filming compared to 24p.

I have post again the file on my server. The server has some problems, it's not my fault, so to download, right clic and save as. It works now.

The file was made with an XM2, edited on Vegas, encoded in WM8 (Windows Media). It is normally Mac compatible. You can download the Mac player here: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/software/Macintosh/osx/default.aspx

I dont get it, is there something wrong with my eyes? i never see any strobing in movies, especially not the big ones, not anything like the mini-dv cameras mimick anyway. I did see it in old 8 mm film, shot with cameras for the consumermarket. Anyway can somebody give me the technical specs on the 24 p mode of the panasonic compared to the xl1. I have seen this 24p mode also on the more expensive professional camera's (panasonic) is it the same system? I am going to write an article and I want your expert opinions on this...(.oh I did search but there is very much confusion on the subject)

thanks,

Start your research on http://www.adamwilt.com - much info on 30fps frame mode of XL1 and 24p progressive scan on DVX100.

David, I think they are talking about motion blur, because that's what you get with a pan at 24fps. Strobe is more like a pulsating image I would say. So if you look closely, you will see the motion blur in any feature film out there.

I think they may be talking about 'motion artifacts' when a camera is panned quickly at 24fps?

Like for example... at a large local cinema they used to have a 3D rollercoaster ride as a pre-curser to the actual feature. It was basically a cheesy quality animation where they put the camera on a 'coaster' that rides along a track of film while giving the audience valuable information about depositing trash in the trash cans. When the coaster makes sharp turns in the animation, the camera pans quickly across the 3D scene, and when it does the image looks choppy and seems to almost lose detail because of this.

It's somewhat hard to explain, but you can sort of mimic it on your computer. Move any object across your desktop quickly (such as your mouse cursor or a window) and you will get a sort of strobing effect. It doesn't look smooth. Now, in the movies it doesn't look quite this bad because cameras actually capture motion blur... so your eye is more or less tricked into believing it's smooth. But when things pan too fast at 24fps it can still look choppy or strobby even with motion blur.

I am pretty sure that any DP or director or whatnot knows this so they try to minimze it with their camera movements.

Yes, it's not the old school strobing effect on super 8 films. It's more of the motion artifacts while panning quickly.

Ahh...ok, that's what you guys meant. I guess I call it strobing from now on, but I like choppy better. lol

Thanks Stephen, good info.

I am not familiar with Vegas Video, can you capture live to hard drive (tapeless)?
WW

Am I missing something? Wasn't the original question about the overall quality between the two cameras? The GL2 has 1/3" CCDs whereas the DVX100 has 1/4" CCDs. Even with the whole 24p question set aside the Panny really should have a better image.

I have read reviews which suggest that the DVX100 has a comparable image quality, maybe better, maybe about the same, as the PD150 when shooting at 60i . The GL2 is a fine camera but not quite in the same league due to the smaller CCDs. Or am I missing something?

Rick, I think you mean the other way around, the GL2 has 1/4" CCDs while the DVX100 has the 1/3" CCDs.

The GL2 is 1/4" CCD, and DVX100 1/3"

Yes, GL2 has smaller CCD than the PD150/VX2000, but... read this: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9359

It will be interesting to compare side by side DVX100 and GL2.

Exactly, I swapped the ccd sizes. Oops.