# Canon GL2?



## rexbobcat (Mar 1, 2012)

I just got asked to videograph football games for a local football league here, because they're trying to get sponsorship in Dallas. Their last videographer did a poor job, so they didn't get the sponsorship. They're paying me $350 a game...it's one game a week. I can't give this up, basically.

Now, I COULD use my 60D and my 70-200 or 100-400 and I could rent a second DSLR to help out, but the whole "can't autofocus while recording video" thing is really making me uneasy about whether that is the best choice, even though the quality of the video itself would be far above anything that a consumer cam could produce.

But....I've been looking at prosumer camcorders that can give fairly high quality results with autofocus. I have generally been looking at Canons or some camera that takes SLR lenses, but those seem to be few and very expensive. I did come across an older cam, the Canon GL2, however, that seems to be promising...I think...

It's SD, and it uses miniDV tapes (yaay...) so I'm not sure. If they don't require HD, is the SD quality of DV tapes good enough? Is this camera sufficient at low light? Are miniDV tapes evil?

Are there any good digital camcorders that give decent quality results such as the GL2 supposedly does? The brand doesn't have to be Canon. Does Sony have a really good camcorder that can get the job done? Are their NEX video cameras any good with good AF since they are interchangeable lens cameras.


----------



## rexbobcat (Mar 1, 2012)

Also; is there a device that allows a camera to record directly to a digital device instead of going through the DV tape? Probably now, but I'm just curious.


----------



## rexbobcat (Mar 1, 2012)

Does anyone know about this? 

What about the Canon XL1S? It's miniDV also, but it can take EOS lenses with an adapter.


----------



## TimGilbertson (Mar 1, 2012)

The GL2 is fine. The XL1s is better, but not necessarily in the ways you need. If you can find that XL to EF adaptor, it'll likely be way too expensive and the crop factor is ridiculous (the sensors in these cameras are 1/4" and 1/3", not exactly the biggest). Maybe find a cheaper large sensor HD camera (Canon XF100 comes to mind) and supplement it with 60D footage. I would say the quality of newer single chip cameras is better than older 3-chip ones.


----------



## rexbobcat (Mar 2, 2012)

True that newer cameras of slightly lower caliber probably perform better than either in part because of their higher resolution. However, I'm not sure that a newer one CCD chip camera can outperform a 7 year old 3 CCD camera just looking at how the technology interprets the visual information. 

And I would be considering a different/better camera such as the HD XL camera or the XF100, but the price point was really inviting. $900 used for the XL2 and about $700 for the XL1s.


----------

