First off, let me mention that progressive scan is absolutely incredible. I can no longer stand the home-userish look of interlaced video. What progressive scan (or "frame mode") does is it takes 30 full frames per second. Interlaced records 60 FIELDS per second, creating a supposed 30 fps (giving it that unrealistic, slimy-smooth motion like a home Hi8 camera). What FULL frames do is make it have a somewhat "jerkier" effect which gives the footage a much more film like look. It's beautiful, you've got to see the difference side by side, sometime (or just switch between interlaced and frame on the XL1, or some other Canon).
The Color: There are many sites with side by side comparisons of the XL1 and the VX1000 (perhaps the VX2000, too). The thing is, there is no comparison. Sony's lenses lean toward the blues, giving it a very cold, unnatural feeling (not to mention interlaced un-naturalness!). The blueness is so apparent, that at times you must add color corrections, wasting time in post. Canon leans towards the reds, giving it a much warmer, more realistic coloring, and shading. But, what do you expect? Canon has been in the business of lens making for a long time. Who ever heard of Sony making a 35MM cinematic lens? Yes, some Sony cameras have Carl Ziess lenses, but they still have the blue tint to it. In fact, those are the lenses I was speaking of earlier as being cold, and blue.
Optical Stabilization: The stabilization is incredible to see when zoomed all the way! There is virtually no visible shake, whatsoever. Of course, this does not replace the rock solidness of a tripod shot... but for handheld work outdoors, it is indispensable. Some people have mentioned that when shooting a tripod shot across a canyon or some such thing, that it tends to "stick." All you have to do when shooting tripod shots is simply turn off the image stabilization.
All that, and the ability to control the shutter speed, the aperture, the exposure, the focus, the ability to change lenses... even to 35MM Canon EOS lenses (with an adapter)! All these things and much, much more make this the camera to own. I would take it over a $15,000 interlaced beta cam any day (unless I could sell that camera, and buy a few XL1s!;).
This camera is highly recommended be me. Canon even made a commercial with it ... for their ZR10! Buy today, you won't regret it (and no, I don't work for Canon:). If you're just considering buying a MiniDV camera, but can't afford this one, still, go Canon. Most of them have a lot of the of the same features (GL1, and Optura), or slightly dumbed down HIGH quality home cameras that still have progressive scan (Optura Pi, Elura, Elura 2).
Online reviews typically give XL1 and Sony VX2000 image quality equal ratings.
Although my XL1 was manufactured in August 2000, the model itself appears to be a couple of years old and lacks some of the Sony's electronic features and an LCD viewfinder.
I was also disappointed in the XL1 still photo quality. Most Sony models perform much better in this area.
The XL1 zoom motor is so loud as to interfere with sound recording, and the manual zoom apparently invokes a proxy mechanism rather than controlling the zoom directly, resulting in a latency which is perceived as lack of responsiveness.
Several online DV sites mention rumors of a Canon XL2. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the XL1 is near the end of its product cycle.
The only negative... I think it could be a little more comfortable to shoot with. Get a better shoulder brace or the balanced audio input, the Balanced Audio adaptor makes a better shoulder pad than the standard one... and gives you better sound quality to boot! That's saying a bunch cause the standard mic is pretty damn fine!
