Sometime ago I did a fun (though longish) review of the Canon GL2. When we made the video we really enjoyed putting a bullet through a lumbering Sasquatch but after the whole thing was done and the footage was squeezed into Quicktime I was left wondering what the point of spending 2 gâ€™s on a camera when the performance didnâ€™t show through on the web. It turns out that it wasnâ€™t so much the GL2 or Quicktime underperforming as it was my eye underveiwing. I had become so accustomed to my lower end Sonyâ€™s performance that I was failing to see the difference the GL2 made. I noticed it the other day as I was watching some old videos and thinking â€œSomethingâ€™s got to be wrong with my cam, that looks awfulâ€ then I realized that I was at stuff shot with the Sony, the vids shot with the GL2 looked great.
So Iâ€™ve gone from kicking myself over my purchase to wondering why I didnâ€™t do it sooner (oh wait, it was the staggering price). I always thought the Sony was a nice camera, and for the money it is ($500 bucks new, Iâ€™m hoping to sell it for a hundred smackers) but once you step up to the GL2 itâ€™s like going back to Windows when you pull the Sony out. Personally I prefer the older low end Sonyâ€™s to the newer ones because you get a manual focus ring and all that and the quality of footage isnâ€™t all that different than the newer cams(moral of the story: go low end or high end, the value of the middle is questionable). But there really is no comparison to the GL2, you couldnâ€™t take footage with the Sony and weave it seemlessly in with GL2 footage even if the shots were taken under the most ideal conditions.
The GL2 also has a bunch of other features that I thought Iâ€™d never use when I bought it but I have grown to appreciate. Adjustable audio levels (very nice), the semi detached microphone and the plethora of manual controls (youâ€™d be surprised how much difference they make). One feature that I thought was really important at the time (optical image stabilization) turned out to be of little value the way I shoot (I script everything first knowing that Iâ€™ll have very limited resources and manpower). It turns out that I donâ€™t use pans very often and never use a moving camera so the optical image stabilization is really a waste in my case. The smart accessory shoe was also a bit of a bust for me (another must have feature). First off the freaking camera was so expensive I couldnâ€™t afford another mic and secondly for the conditions I shoot in I generally use a lavalier mic which nearly any camcorder can handle. If the need arises to use the onboard mic it easily outperforms the lavalie mic so thereâ€™s no pressing need for a hot shoe boom mic.
So I bought the camera for all the wrong reasons but I am very happy with my purchase. At this point I gotta thank a MyMac staffer Jeffrey McPheeters. Jeffrey was the one who assured me the GL2 was a great camera and not a high priced waste of dough. When I posited that Iwas an idiot for buying a GL2 to do mostly internet stuff Jeffrey let me know that it wasnâ€™t the camera. So thanks Jeffrey.
Now for requisite useless blog EZ to post crapola:
TV Pick: Geeze, pure shinola on the tube (or flatscreen you rich b@$#@^%$) tonight. I suggest either rewatching one of the LOTR movies or finding a copy of Crumb.
Cool Mac Article of the day:
No More Mac to Windows Ports
Self serving, I know.
Momentarily diverting link:
Kneel Before Zod