|
Author
|
Topic: JUST SAW THE XL1!!!!!
|
World_Empire_Films
|
posted 12-10-2000 03:42 AM
Hey! i was @ Vistek in calgary a little while ago and saw the xl1, it was bigger than i though, but it was AWSOME!!!! As soon as i have cash im gettin one!  ------------------
SUNSET STUDIOS!
"It's like.....CHA!"
www.sunsetfilm.com
COMING SOON!!! |
filmguy15
|
posted 12-10-2000 09:00 AM
Yeah isn't it! I love that thing, I wish I had enough $ to get it.-Chase |
Sloan
|
posted 12-10-2000 09:46 AM
If you want to make a quick $4,000 or more, you can write some chidren's books or you can put a demand on your signature!
Look at mine for an example.
It hasn't worked yet, but it will...------------------
Give me $10,000.Visit
JACKSLOAN.com
|
capt. video
|
posted 12-11-2000 02:34 AM
if i were you i'd seriously look at JVC GY-500 before i committed. i had planned to buy the XL-1 but the guy at the video store talked me out of it and into a GY-500 and it's the best desition i've ever made. |
Vision Productions
|
posted 12-11-2000 02:41 AM
Everyone who sees my stuff says "My god-The quailty! Its amazing! Looks like a real movie!" because I shot it with the XL-1. I intensely researched the product before I bought it and considered other cameras like the Sony "equivelant" and decided that the XL-1 was the best out there. Lots of extras made by third party distributers are out there too! The audio is great on the XL-1 too. Dont even think about it, just buy the XL-1 as soon as you can. |
morpherguy
|
posted 12-11-2000 08:41 AM
I couldn't afford the XL1 so I bought the Canon GL1 instead. I have had a chance to use the XL1 in the past and I'm hear to tell ya, the GL1 is every bit as good as the XL1.Here are some of the differences:
The XL1 has three 1/3 inch ccds while the GL1 has three 1/4 inch inch ccds. (picture quality looks the same to me) XL1 can use other lenses but the GL1 does not have an interchangeable lens mount. (for most of us, this is not a prime consideration) The both have interlace and progressive scan mode (movie frame mode). They both have image stabilization, manual override, stereo sound, built in special effects.. My GL1 cost $2200 while the XL1 was selling for $3600. I used the extra money to buy lights, a tripod, a large blue screen, a VCR and 19 inch monitor. When working with a tight budget you have to get the most out of your money. I love the look of the XL1 but that not withstanding, there is no reason why someone shouldn't buy the GL1 instead and save a lot of money. |
eggy
|
posted 12-11-2000 05:29 PM
Whereas the xl-1 has 3 1/3 CCD's, the JVC GYDV-500 has 3 1/2 CCD's. The bigger the better, so I'd get that JVC one instead... It is a bit bigger, though |
Cinetech
|
posted 12-12-2000 10:42 AM
The XL-1 is a great camera, except for the fact that the Focus shifts on the lens when you least expect it. If only the lens on the XL-1 were as good as the lenses for the Canon L-1 Hi8. I also think that after trying both the XL-1 and The JVC GY-DV500, The DV500 is a better camera and is well worth the $5000. |
morpherguy
|
posted 12-12-2000 07:28 PM
Maybe I'm wrong but I haven't read anything that suggests that the JVC500 operates in progressive scan mode.. Does anyone know for certain? As for me, I would never buy a camera that only operates in interlace mode. Also, the CCD's are bigger than those of the XL1 but it doesn't do 16:9 (true 16:9) either. Have you seen the JVC 700? Now that is an awesome camera and it does true 16:9 but just like the JVC500, I don't know if it shoots in progressive scan mode. |
eggy
|
posted 12-13-2000 12:52 AM
Can't you buy lenses for the GY-500 for true 16:9? Haven't seen the JVC 700 yet. Gotta check that out... |
DigiteyeZ
|
posted 12-13-2000 02:02 AM
after seeing and handling both the XL-1 and the GL-1, i have to say that i was dissappointed in the GL-1. it was very light but felt very cheap (plastic). i haven't done any extensive filming with either one, but my first look at the GL-1 wasn't promising. the XL-1, however, was awesome! it was the perfect size/weight for me, and had exceptional image quality.i might add that the XL-1 was one-of-a-kind when it was released and NASA used it up in space because it was the best out there. it still sets a very high standard for others cameras to compare to. |
morpherguy
|
posted 12-13-2000 08:26 AM
There is no denying it. The XL1 is at the head of the class. It is the best consumer level video camera out there today. Although I am using a GL1 right now, the reason is strickly financial. There is nothing wrong with the GL1 once you get over the fact that it looks like the kind of camera that dad would take to the zoo to shoot the family having fun on the weekend. It really is a wonderful camera. I've shot footage with the XL1 and the GL1 and I'll tell ya, there is no way that anyone could tell the difference. If nothing else, the GL1 makes a great second unit camera.The guys who designed the XL1 were smart when they decided to make it look professional. Many people probably buy the camera just because of the way it looks without having a clue as to its technical abilities. Again, if you look at the technical specs and compare the GL1 with the XL1 I think you will find them to be amazingly similiar. They are basically the same camera. There are anamorphic lens attachments that you can put on the end of an XL1 if you have the right lens. The same attachment fits on the end of the GL1 with an adapter ring. |
Fastlou
|
posted 12-17-2000 12:48 AM
I recently got the GL1 as well after doing research then deciding the extra grand for the xl1 could be better spent on other things. My big complaint is how difficult it is to hold still.
Have any of you guys found any products or rigged something yourself that lets you somehow add a shoulder mount to the GL1 so it is a more manageable? |
capt. video
|
posted 12-17-2000 03:29 AM
if your looking for something in the $2500 range that would have the feel of the XL-1. panisonic has a new shoulder supported model that looks very professional, the AG-DVC10 it has manual iris/focus, 12x optical zoom. extrenal mic. jacks, 3ccd and 12-16 bit audio. it only weighs 4.8lb. i however have not used it nor have i heard anything about it's proformance. however if looks and features are any indication it's a winner. |
