Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 30, 2002, 6:28 PM   #11
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162

Lin Evans ... thanks for the info on the 602, I'll give it another try. I assumed because there was so much jitter, even movement in a scene would be affected. But now I think about it, not only is the sampling working hard, but the JPEG compression will struggle if the entire frame is moving, hand held.

I'm now puzzled though, as to why playback full screen on a pc seems worse than direct cam out to a UK TV. running 625 lines/50Hz/interlaced PAL. - and all this decoding and conversion must be being done in the camera.

Even at 640x480 pix, 30fps progressive ought to be dvd like quality, but I don't yet see it on a pc. with 19" hi-res monitor. Perhaps I'm sitting too close!

To return to the starting post, so image stabilisation is another reason why camcorders will do a better job. The point about still digicams is they are designed with high resolution colour accuracy etc to satisy critical viewing of output 'lean forward' close up, whereas movies are of lower specification as they are watched lean back further away. The type and level of compression used and visual masking will be designed for either the close up static image, or the moving image further away.

If you walk close to a TV you'll see the interlace lines and flicker, It's the same with digital only we've traded the analogue artefacts for blocking,puddling, edge haloing, aliasing and other problems which are hidden by motion. Freeze an MPEG frame, look at it as a still - and you'll get the idea!
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2002, 2:11 AM   #12
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 72

Thanks for the very useful tips/information. In fact, I was planning to buy both - digicam and Camcorder. But, then I thought of checking to make sure there is no other option. My main point was the size. Now, I have to manage with two during my holidays! Thanks a lot once again.
Mathew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2002, 3:25 AM   #13
Senior Member
ajitkataria's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 315

I imagine that you are looking forward to buy something like the Sony 2MP Camcorder, click the link to learn more about it.


ajitkataria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2002, 11:06 AM   #14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163

Originally Posted by geof
Also, even though manufacturers claim that you can shoot video clips as large as your card storage, be aware that on all the ones i have tested, you can only shoot as much as the buffer in the camera. Then you have to stop, save and continue with the next clip.
According to imaging-resource.com, the S602 does in fact record continuously until memory is full with the right memory (SM, Microdrive, or possibly very fast CF type I).
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2002, 7:44 PM   #15
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 53

as most of the ppl above have mentioned,
especially Klaus DK, gibsonpd3620 and geof :

although we R obviously "getting there",
the time is not ripe YET
for digital cameras & camcorders to coincide .

I can atest that
for I was trying to catch 2 birds @ once, too .

believe us,
if U R serious about BOTH photography & video
buy separate ones .

unless U R ready to compromise a large portion on both worlds
the money U thought U would have saved
will end up serving no /real/ need in the end .

case-in-fact :
look @ some of the camera-bag companies :
they all have a mid-line model that have neat compartments for both a digital camera AND camcorder !
Mango is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:38 AM.