BC Sport Bikes Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,070 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am within a couple months going to purchase one of these toys and was wondering somthing about the ones with the Mpeg movie option. I was watching the first videos at Annacis with Adamantium and CG and F4i where they were trying out wheelies and I forget who's camera it was but the video was a bit chopy on it compared to the recent Annacis video that was filmed with a digital video camera. Is this because its a lower grade camera or, set to low quality to keep the file size down, or are all the still camera's with the Mpeg movie option chopy like that ? Oh ya and Adam what is the model number or name of that camera you where talking about being released. The one that was the size of a credit card and a inch thick or somthing :confused
 
S

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Ryan, I have a Canon Powershot S40 still camera with video. Basically the best advice is that if you want to film video, get a video camera. This is what i found out while shopping for mine. Still cameras offer video as a bonus, but there is a big difference in the technology and purpose of still vs video. I can take videos in two redolutions, one bigger, and one smaller to save memory. The Videos are OK, especially since it is a still camera. Basically they are all poor quality when compared to a video camera, but you can check out the resolution in pixel size and FPS (framer per second) in the specs of a camera while shopping. Before you start picking one over the other because of the video specs, check out the still specs. Basically it all depends what you want to pay, like most things, but be sure to get a decent zoom lens (min 3X). The best resolution size depends on what you want to do with the pictures. I shoped around A LOT and found this one was a nice balance of size and quality/features. Check out www.cnet.com for some good reviews and plain language ratings.

I hope this helps!
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
whatever you buy, pass on the digital zoom. you can do that in software on your computer later. get something with at least a 3X optical zoom. 2.31 megapixels is kinda low end, although you can get a decent 4x6 print out of them. for true 35mm equivalency you need a 6 megapixel camera. 1.3 megapixel bites. stay away from proprietary memory devices. that means no sony and the memory stick. i can take the compact flash card out of my hp 318 and stick it in any reader and see the pics. sony's memory stick needs sony's stuff to be read.

having said that, i did still buy a sony digital 8 camcorder that has a memory stick slot for still captures.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,195 Posts
Doug, you're obviously a demanding photographer is you don't think you can get good shots with the 2.3 cameras. Nothing wrong with that mind you:D But I've done some 5x7's off my 2.1 Mp camera onto photo paper on my HP printer and they came out as good as the 1hour machines. And as an input for net ready photos it's fine. And all these were at the 300k JPG format. I still havn't done a full 8M TIF yet just because I've been so happy with the 300k results for what I wanted this camera for.

Ryan, STC is right about the video vs stills. The movie mode in the still cameras is very much a limited capability. You can get stills off a digital video as well but if you go that route then look into the resolution on those. Being video chances are that it's not going to be as sharp as the dedicated still camera. I could be wrong on that what with all the new formats each week so do your homework first. But of course you'll pay for all the bells and whistles. A pretty nice still camera with 3x can be had for $350 or so and up depending on what you want. I'm pretty sure the digital video jobs are still over $1000.

But in the end there's still no real substitute for a good camera and some of Mr Kodak's finest product..... at least not yet anyway (as I reach over and lay a tender hand on my Rollieflex medium format twin lens reflex and the Nikon SLR outfit)
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
i just got my Canon ZR 45 mc digital video camera for $999 from future shop. Haven't done too many still pics but they are fine from what i have done. I'm sure you'll be seeing it soon anyways so you can check it out then. By the way, i don't think any rain is expeted on mon or tues night, so i'm thinking wheelies.....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,114 Posts
Bluestone said:
i just got my Canon ZR 45 mc digital video camera for $999 from future shop. Haven't done too many still pics but they are fine from what i have done. I'm sure you'll be seeing it soon anyways so you can check it out then. By the way, i don't think any rain is expeted on mon or tues night, so i'm thinking wheelies.....
bluestone and wheelies :)

... this I gotta see :) better get that camera ready :) :) hehehe :)
 
K

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Hey Bluestone, that's the camera I'm looking to buy as well. That one, or the JVC 520.

Did you find out if there's any way to mount the camera onto the bike (gas tank?) for some "action shots" ? :D
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
i actually just got it on Monday and it's been raining out so haven't really even thought about it. I can't see it being too hard though....maybe strap it down to the tank with some tape..or a nylon strap.... maybe put a foam pad to lessen the vibrations..
i know you can plug in a pencil camera and jsut keep the camera in your backpack or even trunk...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Ryan, do you foresee yourself taking video or still picture more often ? Nowadays digital camera usually were able to take short video clips, and usually their quality were less perfect than analog camcorder (choppy, lower-res). It's just there for the convenience rather than a useful function. You can always take a demo unit, take some video clips and view it back and see if it were choppy or not.

Regarding megapixels, that's depends on if you want to print the picture or just keep it on computer storage:

a) If you want to print picture and you're demanding (quality as good as normal photofinishing), OR/AND if you have the need to zoom into the digital picture for detail stuff you've taken and still want good quality AFTER the zoom, then you will need to aim for higher megapixel camera. example: I have a customer want to get a digital camera for taken super tiny cracks on airplane body near any bolts, they require to take a picture and zoom into the crack, and then print it out and still get a perfect, crisp and clear picture as good as photofinishing...

b) If you only storing pics onto computer and rarely print it out AND/OR you mainly taken picture and post it or email it (bottom line, stay in digital format) then any digital camera (even 1.3MP, prefer at least 2.1MP) will be fine. Higher the pixel each picture is, bigger the file size is. Thus posting or emailing become a hassle. The memory you used for camera also requrie higher capacity.

So, decide according to what kind of quality you want, usage of the outcome picture, cost for extra memory, ease of transfer to/from computer. In fact, ease of transfer isn't a problem anymore, I have a product (Dazzle 6-in-1 Reader) that plug into USB port and were able to read all 6 standard memory card available nowadays on the digital market (SecureDigital, SmartMedia, Compact Flash, MemoryStick, Multimedia and Microdrive) and if I remember correctly it only goes for $80.00+tax

ps. The pictures I posted were using a very old Sony MVC-FD81 1.3MP digital camera. The pictures save as JPG and movie clips save as MPEG1 video format and uses floppy disk as storage, as my requirement don't require higher than that and I'm a cheap ass on buy accessories (ie. Memory) so floppy disk is my best bet. Welcome to check out 1.3MP quality from the picture I posted before, they were all taken at the resolution of 1024x768. Movies were very choppy and definitely doesn't have 29.95fps as NTSC specs require, I estimate it to roughly 10fps. But it's convenient to have such feature.

The movie that avaliable at this sites' Media/Video section, filename deltaport.zip was using an old Sony CCD-TRV65 Hi8 Handycam to tape, then using ATI-all-in-one to capture as MPEG1 format. Quality decreased during analog to digital conversion and MPEG1 video compression. DV camcorder won't have these down side.

Hope all this helps
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,070 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Well it looks like I will be doing a lot of shopping around cause it will be at least 2 months before i have the cash to get one and I intends to spend about a grand on it. Thanks for all the info guys ;)
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
BMatthews said:
Doug, you're obviously a demanding photographer is you don't think you can get good shots with the 2.3 cameras. Nothing wrong with that mind you:D But I've done some 5x7's off my 2.1 Mp camera onto photo paper on my HP printer and they came out as good as the 1hour machines. And as an input for net ready photos it's fine. And all these were at the 300k JPG format. I still havn't done a full 8M TIF yet just because I've been so happy with the 300k results for what I wanted this camera for.
actually i am far from a demanding photographer! i did end up getting a 2.31 megapixel camera, the hp 318. at $300 when it first came out it was a decent camera for a first timer, but it is lacking tons of features i will be going for in my next one. there is no optical zoom, the flash is weak, its autofocus, slow to focus and shoot and snap the next pic, and it is only 2.31 megapixels. you are right, you can get some nice shots with lower resolution, but blowing a 1.3 mp pic up to 8X10 is a lot harder to do than shrinking down a 3 mp+ pic to 4X6. if you look at the pic of my pocketbikes in the pocketbike track thread, it was taken at hi res (1792X1200X24b) with a full flash, dropped into a touch up program for brightening, reduction to 256 colours for file size, then cropped and resized. the original image was about 775k.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top