Very capable but beginning to show it's age
Written: Feb 08 '02
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Ease of Use: |
 |
|
| Durability: |
 |
|
| Battery Life: |
|
|
| Movie Quality: |
|
|
|
Pros: Excellent image & zoom; manual overrides well placed, no need for interchangeable lenses.
Cons: Autofocusing like a first generation Canon EOS, bulky, & low res. stills.
The Bottom Line: If you are serious about natural history photography but don't have $2500+ get one.
|
|
|
| hullyjr's Full Review: Canon GL1 Mini DV Camcorder |
Although the GL-1 has been round a few years it still sets the standard for quality, value and versatility in a single digital package. My primary interest in video is natural history, particularly birds and butterflies. The key requirements I wanted in a camcorder were excellent image quality at telephoto settings (color, contrast, and resolution), fast autofocusing, easy to operate manual controls for exposure and focusing, long battery life, be portable and reliable.
The Gl-1 excels at all but one of these requirements. No other camcorder came close including the newer Sony models. Why not the Sony? A B&W viewfinder, a paltry 10x zoom with no proven record of making top quality telephoto zooms, and higher price made Sony a non-starter.
I have heard that Sony optics are as good as the Canon. Probably true for the more consumer-orientated models but I trust Canon. They make their own high quality optics and I have experienced the difference ED/APO glass makes at long focal lengths. It is interesting that the newer Sony models are sporting Carl Zeiss optics. Now if the Sony's prosumer models had a 20x Zeiss it might have been writing a different review.
The quality of the image and sound are excellent although I wished it had the ability to make higher resolution stills. I am not a sound buff so the lack of manual settings does not bother me. However, the microphone is not directional so sounds I have a Sennheiser MKE300 attached.
The batteries are lasting longer than expected given the usually overgenerous specifications from manufacturers. I have carried in the field to places like the jungles of South America to the heat of SE Arizona with no problems. I don't know how reliable this model will be in 4-5 years, which is how long the average camcorder lasts.
The one area the Gl-1 stinks is autofocusing. This greatly surprised me being familiar with their EOS brand of cameras. Canon makes some of the fastest focusing lenses available but the one on the GL-1 is primitive. It is slow, hunts and often refocuses unnecessarily. Its saving grace is the ease by which you can override or switch off the autofocusing. I let the camcorder find the focus and then hit the A/M button and start filming keeping my thumb over the button should the subject move. Manual focusing through the viewfinder image is far from ideal.
Other quibbles? It could be smaller; no Flexizone like that offered on Canon's Hi8 camcorders, the contour of the grip hurts my hand after a few minutes, the internal back-up seems to fails after a few days if there are no batteries attached.
I constantly see mention as one of the cons of the GL-1 is the lack of interchangeable lenses. Ever heard of the XL-1? There are no camcorders within $500 of the GL-1/XL-1 that offers this feature even if you needed it. And the GL-1 certainly does not need it. I feel this criticism is a misguided reflection of the camcorder's high price. This drawback would be better directed at the Sony with it's higher price yet offers a bland zoom.
I looked closely at all the models and based on my particular needs I chose the Canon over it's obvious competitors from Sony.
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 1900
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
hullyjr
|
|
Reviews written: 8
Trusted by: 0 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.