|
| I'm looking at buying a camcorder for around $2000 and these 2 seem to be the best in that price range. If someone could tell me which is the better buy for quality of picture in the 16:9 mode and the better camcorder for low light filming. Thanks. John K |
|
Anonymous | hello john, i am in the same spot as you, looking for a camera in that price range, and ive been trying to decide between the gl2 and the vx2000. after reading many reviews ive made the decision to go with the gl2, because a few things that really stand out about it to me. the overall image quality is reported to be better, the still pictures it takes are MUCH better quality, in its progressive scan mode it shoots 30 frames per second rather than sonys 15, and i love all of the buttons that are on the top handle of the gl2 (im pretty sure the vx2000 doesnt have that feature). go to zdnet.com, i found they had really good reviews of both the gl2 and the vx2000 and show good comparison between the two. good luck. also, if you find more info that helps you make your decision, please email me and let me know, pbroderi@cp.chemeketa.edu |
|
Anonymous | john, this is the same person as the last post, just letting you know that the gl2 and the vx2000 have the same low light quality in all the reviews i have read. |
|
Chasen Spellman | Yes, the GL2 is good. And The vx2000 is good. But the vx2100 is the best of both worlds. Way better image quality with features of record and zoom button on the handle. It will be the same price as the vx2000, a much better buy for the same money. |
|
Derek | See http://www.camcorderinfo.com/index.php3. |