Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

the Panasonic PV-GS500 versus the Canon GL2

May 19, 2006 9:46AM PDT

Hey camcorder gurus!

I've been asked to make a short 5-10 minute customer testimonial video for my company. We're still a small business, so the budget is tight. We've been looking at all kinds of cameras and are down to:

the Panasonic PV-GS500 versus the Canon GL2.

Obviously theres a big difference in price here, so I would need to be able to justify that extra money for the Canon. My concern with the GS-500 is that it wont look good in all these low light office interviews.

What do you guys think? How is the GL2 worth the extra money?

Any advice or suggestions for other cameras is greatly appreciated.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Good and Bad on each
May 20, 2006 11:31AM PDT

Canon is old but is very good in low light. Panasonic is very new and is a better all around camcorder but low light isn't "stunning". Personally, I would pick the Panasonic but the choice is yours.

- Collapse -
Which one
May 21, 2006 2:38AM PDT

I would be interested in an explanation of this comment.
Why is the Panasonic a "better all around camcorder"??

- Collapse -
Means it is better in many ways
May 21, 2006 3:16AM PDT

Ease of use, picture quality, etc.

- Collapse -
How??
May 21, 2006 3:20AM PDT

Why is it easier to use??
Both have an automatic mode.
Why is the picture quality better??
The GL2 has a bigger, better lens, and bigger ccds.
How have you come to this conclusion??

- Collapse -
Old is bad, new is good.
May 22, 2006 1:53AM PDT

Panasonic makes good television sets. They must make better cameras?

Hmmmm, Canon makes very good cameras, but not television sets. Hmmmmmmm.

- Collapse -
No doubt the Canon is better, but is it worth the money?
May 22, 2006 2:57AM PDT

I have no doubt that the Canon is the better camera, but is it worth the extra $400 if you're on a tight budget?

Hmmmm.....

- Collapse -
If you don't have the $400, then no it isn't.
May 22, 2006 6:30AM PDT

However, if you do, why go part way to the better camera (i.e. spend $1,200 rather than $1,600)? You'll be unhappy every time the lesser camera doesn't live up to your expectations.

- Collapse -
It's not so much the amount,
May 22, 2006 6:36AM PDT

but I have to justify in technical terms why the Canon is worth that extra money. Saying "Oh Canon is better at making cameras" to the boss doesn't cut it.

So how is it better?

- Collapse -
That boils down to what is important to the boss. The
May 23, 2006 12:47AM PDT

differences are there, but are somewhat subtle, and do not leap out of the specs. However, some of the items that I noticed;

The GL2 probably has better resolution - it's a bit hard to understand the Panasonic specs on this point.

The GL2 has better low light performance.

The GL2 offers much better control allowing you to control both aperture and shutter speed. It will even give you aperture or shutter priority.

The GL2 probably has superior white balance control.

The GL2 probably has better audio capability.

You'll have to look for reviews to judge color and other image performance. Try to find a review that reports how well color holds up in low light. My Canon XL1S is able to maintain color performance at very low light levels, while my Sony TRV17 essentially moves toward a monochrome image.

BTW, it looks like there is more than a $400 difference in price in the cameras. It may be a bit like comparing a Lexus to a Chevy. They both have similar specs, but the actual performance is quite different.

- Collapse -
awesome details, Kiddpeat!
May 23, 2006 3:42AM PDT

Great info here.

The $400 was based on a price we've found with a disreputable online vendor. Looks like the difference is more like $1000. We still haven't decided which to go with, but we're much better informed thanks to your post.

Thanks again!

- Collapse -
PS: It also looks like the GL2 can see farther.
May 23, 2006 3:26PM PDT

Panasonic does not supply the 35mm equivalent for their lense, but the raw numbers are 3.3mm to 39.6mm. The same numbers on the GL2 are 4.2mm to 84mm. The GL2 lense, at the very least, can see twice as far as the as the Panasonic's lense. We don't know the Panasonic multiplier, so we can't be certain that the GL2 has a 2x advantage. However, it looks like that might very well be the case.

- Collapse -
Which one
May 22, 2006 7:07AM PDT

I gave several reasons why the GL2 is better.
The GS500 is going for $750 right now at B & H. The GL2 is $1749 after rebate.
That's $1000 difference if my math isn't wrong.

The GS500 should be fine for your intended purpose. Use the extra money for audio and lighting.

- Collapse -
Thanks
May 22, 2006 9:18AM PDT

Thanks for your solid advice, drhiberd.

Mainly I just want to make sure the spot is not going to look cheap because we spent less on cheaper camera. It sounds like good lighting and audio are a key factor in making a video look a step above home movies.

- Collapse -
Cheap
May 23, 2006 11:56AM PDT

With the right lighting and sound, I'm sure it will look and sound great.