Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Which is Better Canon xl 1 or Vx1000

  1. #1
    Inactive Member roel2001's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 17th, 2000
    Posts
    1
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    I really want your Opinion which is Better Recording wise and gives better resoultion?

  2. #2
    Inactive Member Jon Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 18th, 1999
    Posts
    110
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    In my opinion, whatever that's worth, the Canon is a better camera with it's better detachable 14x lens (as well as the superb Optex pro manual f1.4, 5.5 - 77mm macro lens, the 3x, 3.4 - 10.2mm wide angle lens, Canon EF image stabilised 300mm - equivalent to 2000mm - lens, an image intensifier, EF adapters etc, etc, plus power options to use Pag and Anton Bauer batteries, and stereo XLR mic adapters. The list goes on and on. This gives the option to expand the XL-1 into a very versatile and flexible camera kit.

    Secondly, the VX1000 records sound at 12 bits, where as the XL-1 at 16 bits.

    Jon.

  3. #3
    Inactive Member foxtrotyankee's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 23rd, 2000
    Posts
    3
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Talking

    Okay, firstly, how useful is the detachable lens on the Canon. I have an XL1 and I'll never be able to afford another lens for this, starting at about 700?. The idea is that this is a top of the range HOME vid camera. Who can honestly afford new lenses?
    professionals wouldn't really be using sony or canon as far as i can see.
    More to ther point who cares. Also, who can tell. who has both cameras at their disposal to compare and if so why?
    the canon is great if you don't use auto focus as it goes all over the place... and that's the last i want to hear on the subject!

  4. #4
    Inactive Member johnny16mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 11th, 2000
    Posts
    80
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    so the fact that you'll never shell out the money for a new lens means it's not useful. I seee your rationale behind that?? The capablility to use the Canon EOS lenses, which I take full advantage of after buying the adapter, Is great and VERY useful. It sounds like you are a bottom end, VERY low budget, TIGHT WAD. But that's cool. It takes all kinds. I understand not having the ways or means to pay out the money. But if you have an XL1, which costs about 4,000 bucks, what's a 700 lens to you? But anyway, in the words of somebody great. "You gotta pay to play!"

  5. #5
    Inactive Member Brien's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 3rd, 2000
    Posts
    12
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    If you are using decent equipment and trying to get semi-decent results you should never use the auto focus anyway.

    Brien

  6. #6
    Inactive Member Them1tch's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 15th, 1999
    Posts
    144
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Red face

    i've just spent 12 hours sat behind a XL1 pressing record then stop every five minutes for a time lapse. how i yearned for the vx1000 which has a timelapse feature.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •