One last time! Gl1, TRV900, Optura???

[Hulk]

I'm deciding among these three and would really appreciate any input from the forum.

I must have optical stabilization.

How much difference is there between the 1CCD Optura and the 3CCD TRV900 and Gl1?

I'm also thinking that if I decide to go with the more expensive cams I'll go with the Gl1 because of the 20x optical zoom.

I've been waffling for few weeks now and have to finally make the call.

[dchip]

What a range of features and prices you have here. If money and bulk are no object and you will be doing some professional work, I'd say get that GL-1 and smile every time you see what you taped. Also, from what I have read, it would be the low-light performer of the trio. If you're not doing professional work but want professional-looking video and would prefer a handier camera, then the TRV900 would have to move to the front. The Optura would be the budget choice but is still a great Mini DV. As far as I know, all of these have optical stablization.

[Hulk]

I guess what I'm really wondering is what the actual video looks like when these cameras are compared. Is the diffence between the Gl1 and the Optura instantly noticable, or do you have to really look for it?

[Flying dutchman]

I have the Optura/MV30 and it is one great camera. Crisp, clean, sharp, high-contrast images. It has progressive scan too. Budget? I don't know. It costs about $1200 here in Holland. And that's the one without DV-in...

[CarterTG]

This is very much a rough observation of 1CCD vs 3CCD.... I just finished a project shot over a year ago on an XL1. Others contributed footage; one from a JVC miniDV (1-chip) and another from a Sony Hi8 (bumped up to miniDV)

One scene from the JVC was spliced into the XL1 footage. The footage was shot at the same location and same day. It's DEFINITELY noticeable. The 1-chip colors aren't as saturated... everything has more of a grayish drab to it. I didn't expect there to be that much of a difference, but there was. It wasn't just the one scene that I selected... I reviewed the entire (JVC) tape through a 27" Trinitron via S-Video and when toggled between the XL1 shots, it's significant.

If the 1-chip footage was reviewed on it's own, I'm sure no one would complain. The stuff I shot when the L2 (1CCD) was my main camera looked just fine. The differences only become noticeable when one is offered a visual taste test. Don't misconstrue, 1-chippers take great pictures, but if you go that route, you'll always want to make sure you're supplying enough light. With the L2, I always kept lighting issues on the front burner and it hasn't disappointed. It's when that lighting starts to shift or dim that the 1 chip's color fidelity starts losing to 3CCD cameras.

...as for the GL1, this year I shot about 5 days of footage at another event with it. I bought the XL1 along, but it only saw about one or two days worth of shooting. It's larger size mostly kept it in the trunk. Everything on the GL1 was shot in its Frame-Movie Mode. I only reviewed one of the tapes from the GL1 pile and so far, I really like what I see. The feel of the footage shot in 30fps progressive is niiiiice. Sure the purists would whine it's not true progressive nor 24fps, but I see FMM as a shooting OPTION. Colors in FMM seem flatter but not necessarily desaturated. Once you see FMM, you'll almost detest the "shininess" of highlights in interlaced video. With the plastic lens hood off, it was just as unobtrusive as the TRV900. The GL1's handle on top was also well-used. It had a pendulum effect that tended to level the camera. The optional BP-941 battery has plenty of juice for all the standby, zooming, and shooting for one or two tapes at least. With a WD58 wide angle attached to the front, the BP-941 helps balance out the back end. The TRV900 and GL1 are within the same ballpark of each other. Given the 15fps of the FMM on the TRV900, I'd suggest going after that extra 30fps FMM shooting option that the GL1 affords.


------------------
Carter
------
[EditRig] Tyan Tiger100 rev.F, Dual P3 650MHz, 256mb PC100, [C:] 10.2g Seagate, [D:] 10.1g IBM, FastTrack66 RAID, [E:] Dual 30.7g Maxtors, [F:] Plextor 12x10x32x CDRW, Dual 17" Monitors, Matrox G400 32mb AGP, SBLive, Canopus DV Raptor, FourPoint2000, FastEthernet, USB IntelliEye, Windows2000, MSP 6.0, Canon XL-1/GL-1/L2

[Jerry Jones]

I agree 100% with Carter.

I use a Sony DCR-VX1000 (3CCDs) at work.

I have a JVC GR-DVM5U (1 CCD) at home.

I thought the little JVC unit took pretty
good video until I experimented with both
one day and visually compared the resulting
video. The 3CCD picture not only reveals
much more detail - it also has far better
color.

Makes me wish I had saved my money for a
3CCD unit at home.

That said - I would buy the Sony TRV-900.
Why? I've just had fabulous luck with
the Sony stuff.

[Hulk]

CarterTG-

Thanks for the very informative post. Now I know that not only MUST I have optical image stabilization, I must also have 3 CCD.

It's down to the Gl1 and the TRV900.

I really like the 30fps progressive mode of the Gl1 but am a little concerned about the lower resolution of the Gl1. Do you have any experience comparing these two cameras? Most sites on the internet seem to say that the resolution of the TRV900 is indeed better but the color rendition and overall picture quality of the Gl1 is more pleasing. Plus, the lens is killer.


If only the Gl1 had higher resolution and adjustable audio input gain...

If only the TRV900 had the 20x flourite lens...

[CarterTG]

I have no experience with the TRV900. So claims of it having a sharper image than the GL1 perplexes me. All NTSC DV cams ultimately send a 720x480 picture via firewire. Your own visual preferences will be the ultimate determining factor here.

If I'm to believe that cameras like the VX2000 provides a sharper picture compared to the Canons, I'd likely interpret it as looking "artificial" with overly processed edges. If there's any real-world demonstration where the marginal "sharpness" difference between GL1 and TRV900 make a noteable difference, I'd sure like to see it. So far, all I've seen is <A HREF="http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/">Beale's</A> resolution charts and that's nowhere close to giving me reason to consider a jump.

All I know is that the image quality of the GL1 matches superbly with the XL1. And that's plenty good in my book.


------------------
Carter
------
[EditRig] Tyan Tiger100 rev.F, Dual P3 650MHz, 256mb PC100, [C:] 10.2g Seagate, [D:] 10.1g IBM, FastTrack66 RAID, [E:] Dual 30.7g Maxtors, [F:] Plextor 12x10x32x CDRW, Dual 17" Monitors, Matrox G400 32mb AGP, SBLive, Canopus DV Raptor, FourPoint2000, FastEthernet, USB IntelliEye, Windows2000, MSP 6.0, Canon XL-1/GL-1/L2

[Hulk]

Thanks for all of the comments.

I just ordered a TRV900. Hopefully I won't miss the 30fps FMM of the GL1.