Canon XL1 versus Sony VX-1000

XL1, as taken by VX-1000

VX-1000, as taken by XL1

Reader comments updated 29 September 1999.

Quick Summary In most cases, the XL1 is by far the superior camera. I consider it to be worlds away from the VX-1000 in quality, performance and professional features. If you need to photograph in low light, if you need extensive and sophisticated manual control, or if you need a long zoom range and the flexibility of interchangeable lenses, the XL1 is your camera. And if you're shy and want a camera that's also a social conversation starter, the XL1 is perfect; don't even consider anything else. However, the VX-1000 has its adherents and uses as well. The autofocus worked faster. It's much less conspicuous than the XL1, which helps in journalistic situations. Its pictures have a cooler feel, which some prefer. And it can be had for much cheaper than an XL1, if you know where to look. After having the opportunity to review both cameras in depth, there is no doubt in my mind that the XL1 is worth every penny I paid for it. But with a purchase of this magnitude, I think it's good to take a careful look at both cameras. So read on for the full story, and you can make an informed decision.

Note One of my readers accused me of producing an unfair, biased review of the cameras. I disagree vehemently that I am biased, but I do concede that the circumstances under which I obtained the VX-1000 might impact the fairness of the review. Most prominently, I obtained this extremely unintuitive camera without an instruction manual. My testing of the unit demonstrated quite clearly that VX-1000 functions are buried in obscure places within the camera, as you will see further down. This made me unable to access many of the unit's features, which I could easily use on the XL1. I tried to produce an even review by not using comparable features of the XL1, either. There is no doubt at all that the pictures shown here have been taken by the simplest automatic modes of each camera, and that someone skilled in their operation could get better quality. However, I suspect that in the end you'd get a similar differential in quality of results with either camera. That is, a skilled VX-1000 operator could improve these results, but so could a skilled XL1 operator. (And, further, that I am at least a somewhat more skilled XL1 operator than these pictures suggest :-) ). At any rate, I would find it quite silly to review a camera, or any other complex product, without considering ease of use and quality of design as major factors. On these, there is simply no contest: The XL1 is far and away the superior camera.

Introduction

Last weekend, I helped out a friend with his EditDV problems, and in exchange he let me make a brief video using his rented Sony VX-1000 to compare with my Canon XL1. This weekend (labour day weekend), I had another chance to use the camera and try to determine the relative levels of image quality of the two cameras.

I'd always been interested in doing an in-depth comparision of the two cameras. Although I love my XL1, I am not blind to its faults, particularly its heavy weight and notorious viewfinder burn problems. VX-1000 users in the newsgroups cited not only lighter weight, but higher picture quality from their machines.

Naturally, I was curious to find the truth. This page deals with the design and ergonomics of the two cameras, an area where the XL1 undeniably shines. Due to the number and size of the images, I have put the Image Quality Comparisions on another page; you could consider it Part II of the review.

My plan was to prowl the city with my VX-1000 toting friend, and see what we could photograph. As anyone who knows me well might have predicted, we first went to one of the major yacht harbours in Newport Beach, where the Big D, a 110' Feadship motor yacht, was waiting for our lenses.

Quick Disclaimer: When I started this project, I had far more time using the XL1 than the VX-1000, and I had access to the XL1's instruction manual. The rented VX-1000 I had did not come with a manual, so I was naturally unable to use it to figure out things that might have been obvious with a brief consultation. However, I doubt that access to a manual would have significantly altered the conclusions I make here. If any of my comments appear obviously false, or if any statement here appears unfair to the VX-1000, I'd like to hear from you about it. I now have additional experience with the VX-1000, and much of the camera is still an enigma to me. I did, however, hear from a VX-1000 owner who's offered some suggestions; I have implemented them and report the results here.

Design & Ergonomics

Eric, my partner in this venture, trying to figure out the VX-1000's menus

We put the VX-1000 on a tripod, and ran into an immediate problem -- the viewfinder was very hard to use in the bright sunlight. It was just not bright enough to get a clear image of the boat. It was only after turning up viewfinder brightness all the way and carefully shielding our eyes from the sun that we could get a vaguely acceptable image to come up. Even then, it seemed fuzzy and difficult to make out. The Canon's viewfinder has an outstandingly bright and crisp image, so this was an easy victory for the Canon. A couple of people have informed me that there is a larger viewfinder hood included with the camera that solves this problem. Unfortunately, the VX-1000 I rented did not include this feature, so I can't comment on its effectiveness compared to the XL1.

The XL1's rapid zoom speed was outstanding for framing an image. In our later studio shots, the manual zoom ring proved easiest for this task. The VX-1000's medium zoom speed (it has no fast one) was maddeningly slow for this purpose, and it has no manual zoom ring.

Some key VX-1000 controls, such as the automatic image stabilization switch, menu controls (left image) and others, were in the battery compartment, a very strange location to say the least. Because we had no instruction manual for the VX-1000 (typical in a rental situation), we had to search long and hard for these critical controls. In contrast, the XL1's image stabilization control is clearly positioned right on the lens, and the menu controls (right image), while under a flap, probably wouldn't be that hard to find.

The XL1's exposure modes and controls are virtually identical to those on a Canon still camera. So if you've ever used one, you'll find the XL1 delightfully intuitive and easy to master. Without access to the manual, I wasn't able to figure out how to use the VX-1000's manual exposure controls. There is a pushbutton labelled "Exposure" and a vertically mounted knob. I didn't find the manual exposure setting process particularly intuitive; it turns out that it's controlled by pushbuttons on back of the camera.

The VX-1000 is quite a bit lighter than the XL1 (at least without a battery; in outdoor testing, we ran the camera off a DC inverter). However, the camera is not designed to be easily held. I found it much more akward than the XL1, although this might have been in part due to a lack of experience with the camera. For professional shooters, a shoulder mount is available from third-party companies.

The VX-1000 has a very flimsy, toylike look and feel. I have been informed that it's made of aluminum, but it feels as though it's a plastic unit. The XL1 has a lot of real metal and higher quality plastics. All in all, it looks a great deal more solid than the VX-1000.

Image Quality

I have done the initial image quality testing for both cameras. This section contains an executive summary. Here's the full story, complete with (often large) images.

• In some situations, I found the XL1 was better at image and detail rendition, but this might have been due to a superior automatic exposure system that was better at avoiding washed-out images. I don't think there's a substantial difference between the two cameras, but the often-touted larger number of CCDs in the VX-1000 didn't seem to make a difference in detail rendition.

• XL1 colours were generally brighter, more crisp and vivid. This appears to be a stylistic question; some videographers prefer this (I did), while others prefer more subdued colours. This seems to be particularly true in close-ups of detailed subjects.

• Video taken under low light conditions on the XL1 is superb. You get black blacks and crisp, high quality colours. What can be seen looks fantastic. The VX-1000 in low light is far worse; There's lots of annoying video noise and speckles in the picture. If you want to do any amount of photgraphy in low light, the XL1 is a must-purchase camera. Incidentally, I believe that my comparision pictures understate the difference between the cameras when taking video.

  It was suggested by a reader that I use "an obscure menu option" to turn the gain down to -3 DB. I found the setting and used it. In my testing, there was no effect on picture quality.

• Focus hunting in low light on the XL1 is a problem. We saw this happen on the VX-1000 as well, but to a far lesser extent. The XL1's low light viewfinder image can be very dark, making it difficult to focus without an external monitor.
• I found the XL1 dramatically easier to use, and as a result my work with it is of better overall quality.

Some people have mentioned problems with focus on the XL1, especially at wide angles. Tony Sutorius has created the XL1 Focus Page to show examples and commentary on this subject.

Other Features

The VX-1000 has only 16-bit audio, on two channels. There is a manual level knob on back of the camera, but it's somewhat cryptic in use.

The XL1 has a choice of 12-bit audio with four recordable channels, or a higher-quality 16-bit audio with two recordable channels. Manual level controls are easy to access.

The XL1 has interchangeable lenses. The most useful application for this is their new wide angle lens, which should be indispensible for many shooters - as soon as it arrives. Price is estimated at around $1,200. You can get wide angle converters for the VX-1000 (and for the XL1); they are cheaper but not as sharp.

You can use Canon EOS lenses on the XL1, but they will all be pretty extreme telephoto. (EOS normal focal length is 50mm; XL1 normal focal length is about 8mm, so a 50mm lens on an XL1 is the equivalent of a 480mm telephoto on a 35mm camera. Since the XL1's zoom goes from 5.5-88mm, such a lens would be essentially useless on the camera). Adding an EOS lens to your camera requires the addition of a $ 500 accessory. I would expect this feature would be virtually useless for any application short of spy photography or astronomy.

Handy Selection Chart

For some applications, you may be almost forced to use one camera or the other, regardless of its other good or bad points. This handy chart shows you some of those situations.

If you are most interested in ...	Get	Why
Attracting Attention	XL1	People love the XL1; wandering around with it will help your social life a great deal. "Hey, is that the new digital camcorder?" was a common question. I didn't see any such effect with the VX-1000. Whether this is an advantage or a disadvantage depends largely on the temprement of the reader :-).
Audio Features	XL1	Both 12 (four-channel) and 16 (two-channel) bit audio available; separate manual level controls for both cameras. VX-1000 only has 12-bit four-channel, and can only record two of those.
Autofocus speed	VX-1000	Autofocus was faster and hunted less than the XL1
Being Inconspicuous	VX-1000	You're much closer to being one of the guys with a VX-1000. The XL1 screams "Rich video buff" or "Video professional". The VX-1000 is mute; it says nothing; nobody realizes what you have. However, for the ultimate inconspicuous, check out the new Sony TRV-900. It's a three-chip camera that looks identical to a crummy hi-8 or even 8mm unit. Everyone will think you're shooting home movies with that baby.
Ease of Use	XL1	All manual functions are easily accessible and intuitive, with or without the manual
Image Quality (normal light)	Either	Get the XL1 if you like warm colours, the VX-1000 if you want cooler hues. I was unable to substantiate allegations that the VX-1000 had higher quality images due to its larger number of image sensors. In my testing, there was little difference between the cameras other than their handling of colour.
Image Quality (low light)	XL1	If you film in low light at all, you need this camera. The VX-1000 is just awful in low light.
Interchangeable Lenses	XL1	Only the XL1 has interchangeable lenses. But read the full review before rejoicing; the feature may be of limited usefulness due to the high cost and low availability of the wide angle lens.
Remote Control	XL1	XL1 remote control far more comprehensive; includes jog/shuttle control for ease of editing, display options. Well-designed and comprehensive. Includes some bonus functions such as display mode and the aforementioned jog/shuttle, so if you lose the remote, you lose the features.
Remote Control -- Loss of	VX-1000	All functions on remote are also on camera
Time-Lapse photography and Animation	VX-1000	The VX-1000 has a comprehensive suite of functions for time-lapse photography and animations; the XL1 lacks those features.
Use with external monitor	XL1	During filming, the XL1 viewfinder display is basically duplicated in the external monitor; not so with the VX-1000. This feature can be turned on or off with a button on the remote control.
Viewfinder Display	XL1	The XL1 viewfinder display is more comprehensive, including time remaining on the tape. The XL1 overlays this information over the picture, while the VX-1000 has a separate display under the viewfinder for this information. I found the information more conspicuous and thus easier to digest on the XL1.
Zoom Range and Versatility	XL1	16:1 versus 10:1; Only the XL1 has a manual zoom ring; only the XL1 has a variable speed power zoom control with a sizable selection of speeds; the XL1's highest zoom speed makes for convenient framing of images that's lacking in the VX-1000.

Conclusions

All in all, I see many excellent reasons to get an XL1, from the excellent low-light performance to the superior manual and semi-automatic exposure controls. Against that, the VX-1000 has a less conspicuous look and lower weight. I don't think it's enough to compensate for the many substantial reasons to go with the XL1.

If you're interested in ordering a video that contains direct, side-by-side comparisons of the two cameras, let me know. I'd like to know if there's demand.

Technical details: All pictures of the VX-1000 were taken with the Canon XL1; all pictures of the XL1 were taken by the - you guessed it! - VX-1000. Both sets of images were then transferred from my XL1 using FireWire and Radius MotoDV software on an Apple Macintosh G3.

Return to the DV FAQ
See more Canon XL1 pictures

Visit David's web site