Considering buying a Canon XM2. Pro's? Con's?

I have my eye on an XM2, coz I might be getting some paying music video gigs soon.

Your thoughts. Good? Bad? Looks good to me but...?? I know the XL1s has the changeable lens but I doubt I would use that and that extra money is kinda painful at my po' selfs financial situation. (Okay, I'm a cheap bastard )

Or should I wait for HD? But I think it's too soon for gettign a HD cam anyways (needs to mature) and these video gigs may be SOON. Hmm.

ABSOLUTE DEMANDS on a camera:

- Optical image stabilizer
- Progressive Scan
- LOADS of manual controls
- Sharpness disable

XM2 fullfills all those but maybe there is something else? Comments? Thoughts?

/Z

 

If it helps you continue the great works of Zap, than it's worth the investment.

 

Zap, the XM2 is a good camera, but you should really look at the Panasonic DVX-100E. It's FAR better.

 

XL1 gets you the props visually.

 

Well my XL1 just burned out a couple pixels on one of the CCDs. It's sweet, because now I get to spend somewhere between $600.00 and $1000.00 to get it fixed! YAY!

Point is, the more expensive the camera...the more expensive to fix...even the little things.

 

The XM2 doesn't do TRUE progressive, does it? It has that pixel shifty thing. Even though I know you loathe the NTSC DVX-100, the PAL version looks pretty sweet to me. Though, like the XL1, it's a bit pricey.

 

is it pretty?

 

Well Zap, you just got three different opinions, so good luck

 

Panasonic DVX-100E. It's FAR better.

Motivate exactly why you think this.

/Z

 

yeah i just got an XM2 its sweet. More pixels that the xl-1, cheaper. Yeah i dont think it does true progressive, i hear its deinterlacing realtime. Its sometime leaves a ghosting trail. Anyways, i'd go for an xm-2 to an xl-1 any day.

 

The coolest thing about the XM is that it'd got two sets of controls for record/pause and zoom.
The first set is where you would expect them to be on any camcorder when you hold the eye piece up to your head, but the second set is on the handle. This way, you can carry and move the camera around in your fingertips and still control the recording and zoom.

I'm still getting used to the weight of my new GL2. It's a big switch coming off a ZR series. I can't imagine what it'd be like to get used to an and even bigger XL1.

I'd say go for the XM. If there were ever a special circumstance where you needed something different, you can always rent and roll the expense into your fee.

Have fun.

 

I love my new XM2,haven't used it much(1 film for the 72 hr contest,and a couple of test clips),but am very impressed by it so far, brought the wide angle converter(a bit pricey but worth it) for it saturday,the builtin mic was better than i was expecting,which was nice [face happy]

 

Yeah i dont think it does true progressive, i hear its deinterlacing realtime

I doubt that. I think this is an old myth hanging around due to the way the old GL-1 implemented its "frame mode".

Anyway, I plan to test one quite extensively before buying it; The problem is my current camera is pretty good, but it looks corny. I can't do a professional gig with my camera due to it looking like a cheap camcorder.

Pixel: I've looked at the Panasonic and I'm just... why? As you know, the PAL version works like a normal PAL camera, i.e. does 50i or 25p, so the "24p" (mis)feature of the NTSC camera (which I think sucks anyway, and I rather shoot in 25p with real resolution any day of the week) isn't there.

So I am paying extra for something not even included. Real smart, that.

Cinegamma? Tsk. Post.

The XM2 has a CCD's I hear.

/Z

 

XM2 has 3 CCD's.

Actually, Isn't an XM2 just a GL-2?

The Panasonic AG-DVX100 is a better camera in my opinion, but if you're wanting a cheaper solution that really does look just as good picture wise anyhow, go GL-2/XM2.

I've used both. Even though I prefer the AG over the GL/XM, you get similar results with each camera.

Plus, you can score some pretty sweet deals on entire GL/XM kits on Ebay! I haven't seen any really good deals for the AG yet, but I'll post if I do.

If you need a feature loaded camera, get the Panasonic AG-DVX100. If you just need a camera that gets a good picture and has the bare neccessities (unless you find adjustable framerate as lusciously like a neccessity as I do), get the XM2.

All in all, it's usually the videographers perogative to take the right measures to make the video shoot look as professional as possible. So depending on YOUR lighting, etc. that's really what's going to make the picture look good in the long run.

Just opinions.

I hope you find the camera you want.


-Will

 

Well, Zap, the reason I say get the DVX-100E is because it is better. It can do TRUE progressive. I'm sorry Zap, but the XM2 DOES NOT do true progressive. It's not a myth. It causes a 25% loss of vertical image resolution due to shifting the green color channel by 1/2 pixel. I have used the DVX-100 and the GL2(NTSC version of the XM2), so I know how both cameras operate.

The CCDs on the DVX-100 also have a better exposure lattitude. Therefore you get more detail in highlights and shadows. It also has chips that handle color better than the XM2.

Also, you say you want a camera that looks professional. The XM2 still looks like a consumer camera. The Panasonic has lens barrel markings and a professional looking industrial design. So you might still get laughed at if you bring a XM2 to a professional gig. Only people in the video industry know that the XM2 is a professional camera.

Zap, trust your good pal, Pixel, on this. I know you will not be dissapointed.

 

Woah. Someone knows what they're talking about.



Will

 

Wait, the XM-2 *IS* a GL-2!?

Are you sure!? Whats this bait and Switch crap? :/

/Z

 

Yes, it's the same camera. Here in the United States, it's called the Canon GL2. In Europe and other places, the same camera is called the Canon XM2. The XM2 is just the PAL version of the GL2.

And yes Zap, I'm 100% sure.

 

The GL2 is the same as the XM2 yeah, and Zap, considering the fact that you are going for the professional gigs, get a DVX-100 or a XL1-s!

 

I got some other tips from elsewhere....

What about

a) Sony DCR-VX2000

and

b) JVC gr-DV-2000

(A lot of "2000"'s around )

/Z

 

I've used JVC cameras, and I can honestly say they get fantastic image quality. The downside is, they're pretty unreliable and fry out with little trouble, not to mention the lack of good accessories for JVC cams.

Don't go JVC unless you're into multi thousand dollar cams that break on you after a year or two of light use.


I haven't used a Sony cam, so I can't give a review on it, but Sony usually makes pretty reliable products. Besides, they gave us the PS2. That has to count for something

\__Will__/

 

I would definitely get a DVX100E/DVX100A or a XL1s.
I personally would go for the DVX. I wouldn't look into a HDcam yet. The only one I know of is the JVC-HD1, which is great in resolution but not in other aspects. I would definitely keep an eye on HD, though. That's just my $0.02.

 

Zap, I wouldn't get JVC. They do suck.

Your best bet is still going to be the DVX-100E. It's the most professional, and professional LOOKING.

 

It's ugly, IMO. XL1s is just sexy.

 

Also remember that the "HD" consumer cam uses MPEG-2 compression to fit HD resolution on a miniDV tape. That's not a big deal when all you want is the high resolution, but assuming (as I am) that you want the ability to play with the image, add effects and color correct, you're going to run into a lot of trouble.

M. Scott