Low Light - GL2 vs HV20

[jmacko]

I'm considering buying a camera for our church. The AV consultant is urging me to go the GL2 route. Comparing the footage from a GL2 to a HV20, it's a no brainer for me, HV20 in normal light.

Anyone have thoughts/experience in dimmer lit environments?

--Jeffrey

[conjsports]

The hv20 has far better lowlight than the Gl2. The Gl2 has min. of 6 lux whereas an Hv20 has a min. of only 3 lux (due to 24p). Tell the person telling you too go the gl2 route to throw a sock in it.

[Rikki]

Just did an indoor car show with the HV20 at 25p 1/50 and it rocked! Even on 21" FST Sony monitor there was very little grain (and Im using it in DV locked mode at the moment)

R

[Erik Bien]

As a GL-2 owner, I'll chime in: my camera sucks in low light situations. Most cameras suck in extremely low-light conditions. But what others have said, I'll second: 24p will help the HV20 get more in difficult low-light conditions than the GL-2.

I'd tell the A/V consultant to buy the HV20 and spend the $500-odd savings on a handful of PAR cans or fresnels (even if you have enough lumens, the lighting in most churches comes from such a steep angle it makes people look like sunken-eyed zombies).

[Pom16/10e]

I own and use both.
The problem with the HV20 in low light is you can't tell it to NOT add gain, (well in fact you can, but it's a very annoying hack), when the GL2 has real manual control. (and in my experience, 6lux spec is very nice... why would you want to shoot without some lights ?

I mean...even in a church a few lights are a nice addition, not only in the camera's eyes !

HV20 in HDV, shrunk to SD in the edit bay has better picture than the GL2.