HolidayBuyer's Guide

Camcorders forum

General discussion

Panasonic DVX100B vs. Canon GL2, which one to buy?

by Jaykaufman101 / August 31, 2007 1:28 PM PDT

Has anyone used the Panasonic DVX100B and/or the Canon GL2? I was just wondering which one preformed better, because i am in the market for a new camera and cannot decide which to choose...


Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Panasonic DVX100B vs. Canon GL2, which one to buy?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Panasonic DVX100B vs. Canon GL2, which one to buy?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
The Canon GL2 can see twice as far, has optical image
by Kiddpeat / August 31, 2007 3:27 PM PDT

stabilization, better low light performance, much faster shutter speed capability, and costs substantially less. The GL2 has done a good job for me, and certainly looks like a better camera than the Panasonic.

Collapse -
I certainly defer to Kiddpeat's
by boya84 / September 1, 2007 3:06 AM PDT

hands-on experience with the GL2 - and in my observation, have seen MANY pros using the GL2 in documentary type capture environments. It has been - and continues to be a wworkhorse.

I have also seen many other pros using the Panasonic DVX100A and B in more "film-like" capture environments (short subject or feature length).

In both environments on many different projects (when I have been fortunate enough to have been on location capturing "behind the scenes" or doing audio), full 20x zoom was not used and in most cases less than 10x was applied, but wanting the flexibility to get there is certainly understandable).

I guess it depends on what your video capture projects will be...

One item that may close the $ gap (as referred to by Kiddpeat) a little - the Panny has built-in XLR audio inputs - and the GL2 has an optional XLR adapter (from Canon to take advantage of the special hot shoe, though 3rd party XLR adapters can also be used). That said, capturing audio separately renders this moot.

Collapse -
I agree that a powerful zoom is unnecessary in a studio or
by Kiddpeat / September 1, 2007 3:31 AM PDT

in most 'location' shots where there is a lot of control over setting up the shots.

However, in the field, the zoom is invaluable. Want to get video of a sporting event? That zoom will be needed to get a decent shot. How about in an auditorium or other event location? Again the zoom is needed.

I recently came back from Alaska. The zoom was a necessity to get good video of wildlife.

Collapse -
Yup. But since we don't know what
by boya84 / September 1, 2007 4:38 AM PDT

the shooting plan is, we don't know if built-in 20x is a requirement. I do agree it is one of those "rather have and not need than need and not have" items. There are 3rd party lenses available for the Panny... just a web-search away...

Collapse -
That may be, but since the GL2 is better on several other
by Kiddpeat / September 1, 2007 8:44 AM PDT

features, such as optical image stabilization, it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that the Panasonic is the preferred camera. Also, I regard the zoom capability (10x versus 20X) that is backed by the lense specs to be a substantial advantage for the GL2. You simply do not use the camera for very long in the field before you are reaching for that zoom.

Collapse -
panasonic or GL2
by heather7373 / December 7, 2007 2:54 AM PST

I have both cameras. THe GL2 is a workhouse. It is a nice second cam to use on weddings, live shoots, etc. Downfalls are it needs an adapter for XLR inputs and it is a second cam. It is not designed to be a first camera for big shoots.

The Panasonic is better. It has better control over the picture, XLR inputs. It has a bit of a sharper image. The difference is around $800 dollars.

Also, the GL2 is usually not used for pro shoots as the main camera. Either the XL2 is, or another camera. I wouldn't use it as a main camera for anything really worthwhile.

Collapse -
Dvx100 vs Cannon GL
by ques24 / September 23, 2008 7:03 AM PDT

DVX100a/b ROCKS. I've worked with GL2 100+ hours the footage is always fuzzy dont like it. It sluggish compared to the panasonic. The footage on the dvx100b is warmer and sharper image. Dont forget that 24p looks awesome.

Wedding footage with dvx100b does not have to look like video it can look more professional with that film quality. I use studio lighting a lot whenever im filming a wedding i'll just prop the lights up there and if they have a problem with it let um know that i need better lighting.

You are always going to have die hard fans of Cannon Gl2 i used to love it cause it was my first camera i have not touched it since i got my panasonic. Since than i bought the 100b as well as the second camera.

I was hesitant to get the Dvx100a but the footage just blew me away. Try

Collapse -
You should have returned your GL2 for service if the focus
by Kiddpeat / September 23, 2008 2:24 PM PDT
In reply to: Dvx100 vs Cannon GL

did not work. I assume that is what you mean by 'fuzzy'. I have used the GL2 for about 2 years now. It produces excellent video which is clear and sharp. I've never seen it produce a bad result.

What is 'sluggish' BTW? Is it shooting at less than 30 frames per second?

It seems you do not know how to get good results from the GL2. I wonder how a different brand fixed that deficiency.

Collapse -
How does the difference in optical sensor size factor in...
by Pepe7 / September 30, 2008 8:41 AM PDT

regarding image quality(?) Just curious since one is 1/3" and the GL2 is 1/4".


Collapse -
I have looked at two sources for the DVX100 (cnet and B&H)
by Kiddpeat / September 30, 2008 3:47 PM PDT

and cannot find the sensor resolution that the Panasonic sensors deliver. B&H, in my experience, always reports these numbers if they are available. B&H does show the resolution of the GL-2. Without the resolution, it is not possible to say based on specs which camera produces better image quality.

The Canon GL-2 does have a much better lense with its 20x zoom. It reaches to 84mm versus 45mm for the Panasonic. A better lense usually means better image quality.

You really need to look at the entire camera to compare the two. Sensor size is not sufficient.

Collapse -
longer lens means better quality?
by Pepe7 / October 2, 2008 12:52 PM PDT

That's news to me at least. Please elaborate.


Collapse -
Ummmmmmm, yes.
by Kiddpeat / October 2, 2008 3:52 PM PDT

Telephoto lenses with a long focal length are much harder to make, and are thus more expensive. The longer focal length allows you to capture more detail on distant objects because the object occupies a larger portion of the captured image.

Optical zoom, BTW, is the ONLY kind of zoom that is desirable. Digital zoom should never be used on the camera.

Collapse -
I understand optical vs digital zoom...
by Pepe7 / October 3, 2008 2:51 AM PDT
In reply to: Ummmmmmm, yes.

but what I was getting at is, what about a short lens with great glass vs a longer telephoto w/ not so good glass(?) Is the glass quality also remarkably different in this particular model comparison? Why would Panasonic Leica glass be so terrible? <again, devils advocate>

Also, if the sensor size is different enough won't that compensate a little making these two cameras very similar in quality outside of the telephoto differences(?)


Collapse -
Are you Panasonic marketing?
by Kiddpeat / October 3, 2008 4:25 AM PDT

On what basis do you suggest that the Panasonic short focal length is a better lense than Canon's much better (2X) focal length? It is no feat to produce short focal length lenses. All point and shoots have them. It is much harder, and highly desired, to produce a lense that has an excellent telephoto capability. I can tell you that the lense on the GL-2 produces excellent results.

As far as sensor size is concerned, it is meaningless because Panasonic does not publish the resolution of the sensor. Canon does, and its resolution is very good. I can attest to that. Panasonic's failure to publish the spec suggests that the resolution is not good. Poor resolution means a poor image. I can also attest to that since I have a camera who's resolution is much less than that of the GL-2.

Collapse -
(NT) You are a funny little zealot (n/t)
by Pepe7 / October 7, 2008 5:26 AM PDT
Popular Forums
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Cameras that make great holiday gifts

Let them start the new year with a step up in photo and video quality from a phone.