Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Hybrid Still/Movie/MP3 Digicams

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 24, 2008, 11:24 AM   #101
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,084
Default

Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
For me, the Jazz clips seem too bitrate starved.

My VLC player reports a 4Mbps bitrate.

Is that what others are reading?

Private Idaho
mediainfo reports between 4.1 and 4.8Mbps. The 4.8Mbps being for scenes with a lot of detail in them suggesting that it is variable.

I find that on scenes with large uniform areas such as this clip:

http://www.vimeo.com/934829

The camera seems to do quite well and goes with my suggestion that this camera is really meant for users whose main subject will be people (who tend to be less complex :G) and your eye will be drawn to the subject rather than the grass or vegetation etc in the background.

Private Idaho, I agree that on complex scenes it isn't so good but I would strongly disagree to call the video from this camera a disaster!
rgvcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 11:42 AM   #102
Senior Member
 
scorbing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 122
Default

I agree. The video on the Jazz is very good compared to others I've seen and the audio, compared to Aipteks, is excellent.

This camera is basically designed for close-up shots of people and things, not far away distant objects. I'm very happy with it, unlike the Aiptek HD which I was very dissapointed with because of the sound issue.



rgvcam wrote:
Quote:
Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
For me, the Jazz clips seem too bitrate starved.

My VLC player reports a 4Mbps bitrate.

Is that what others are reading?

Private Idaho
mediainfo reports between 4.1 and 4.8Mbps. The 4.8Mbps being for scenes with a lot of detail in them suggesting that it is variable.

I find that on scenes with large uniform areas such as this clip:

http://www.vimeo.com/934829

The camera seems to do quite well and goes with my suggestion that this camera is really meant for users whose main subject will be people (who tend to be less complex :G) and your eye will be drawn to the subject rather than the grass or vegetation etc in the background.

Private Idaho, I agree that on complex scenes it isn't so good but I would strongly disagree to call the video from this camera a disaster!
scorbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 12:12 PM   #103
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23
Default

I think the video on188 is about the same as the a-hd 200 but the sound is far better

when i get time i will post some videos havent really had much time to fully check it out, mine is the easypix 5311hd the clone of the 188
podger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 12:43 PM   #104
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,153
Default

Well, the mathematics don't lie.

Aiptek audio = 48Khz.

Jazz audio = 22Khz.

Those of you who think the Jazz sounds better, in my opinion, are probably making the comparison to the older Aiptek models and not the newer Aiptek models.

But even if you think the audio sounds better than the new Aiptek models, you probably are sensitive to higher frequences.

Since the 22Khz sampling rate cuts off certain frequencies, then certain types of audio you find objectionable are being screened.

Aiptek video = up to 8Mbps.

Jazz video = barely over 4Mbps.

Draw your own conclusions.

Private Idaho
Private Idaho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 1:14 PM   #105
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23
Default

where do you find these settings or how do you work them out so i can have a look

thanks
podger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 2:20 PM   #106
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,084
Default

Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
Well, the mathematics don't lie.

Aiptek audio = 48Khz.

Jazz audio = 22Khz.

Those of you who think the Jazz sounds better, in my opinion, are probably making the comparison to the older Aiptek models and not the newer Aiptek models.

But even if you think the audio sounds better than the new Aiptek models, you probably are sensitive to higher frequences.

Since the 22Khz sampling rate cuts off certain frequencies, then certain types of audio you find objectionable are being screened.

Aiptek video = up to 8Mbps.

Jazz video = barely over 4Mbps.

Draw your own conclusions.

Private Idaho
Private Idaho, you are comparing the HDV178/188 with the newer 1080p HD Aipteks which is a little unfair don't you think? I have no argument with sound quality as the older HD aipteks were 48Khz also but they burned their bridges with me when I tried a couple of the GO-HD. They both had terrible background noise. The newer 1080p seems like they may finally have got the sound right.

The Jazz cameras are to be compared with the original 720p Aipteks whose bitrate was around 4-4.5Mbps if I recall and certainly not 'up to 8Mbps' and anyway 8Mbps for 1440x1080 vs 4.5Mbps for 1280x720 works out to be the same ratio of bitrate to resolution anyway.

It seems the Jazz cameras and the A-HD/GO-HD have very similar bitrates as they are both variable but the Aipteks may be tweaked better but then they should've learned something after the disaster of the PVR.

**On a sidenote is anyone else started to get #$#$# off with some of these fileshare sites and their codes? I know they are trying to prevent bots from running rampant but they are starting to become a real pain in the behind to get right. A good example is rapidshare with it's cat pictures. I just gave up in disgust on one download trying to get it right! I find rapidshare.com much slower to download from than other sites anyway.

rgvcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 2:46 PM   #107
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,153
Default

Well, I just downloaded the "inside" clip... the shot inside the home... the walk to the kitchen... the pizza... the TV watcher... etc.

That clip doesn't look nearly as bad as the one I downloaded earlier.

So... perhaps I should not have used the term "disaster" to describe my first impression of the Jazz clips; I was basing my opinion on the clip that Fishy uploaded, which features those "crawly" artifacts. Not sure what explains the difference between the clip he uploaded and the "inside" clip.

I still prefer the new Aiptek Action HD model. The 60 frames per second temporal resolution is a real plus, in my view.

I agree that Aiptek should have gotten it right with the older models.

That's why I never bought one.

In addition to the Aiptek Action HD, I also have the ISDV2.4, which seems to be greatly improved over the older ISDV2 in low light situations.

Bottom line... we getting better camcorders over time, it seems... and more choices.

Private Idaho
Private Idaho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 3:20 PM   #108
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,084
Default

Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
Bottom line... we getting better camcorders over time, it seems... and more choices.
I agree, 2-3 years ago they were considered little more than low res toys at best that no one took seriously. Now we not only have a bunch of decent High Definition SD memory HD cameras, we are getting some full or near full HD ones at that!
rgvcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2008, 3:43 PM   #109
Senior Member
 
scorbing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 122
Default

The video Fishy uploaded is not really something we can use to see the true quality of the Jazz because when he uploaded the video, the site converts that video to compressed Flash format and that will cause loss of quality and that is why you see artifacts on it. When you guys make a video you should upload it somewhere on its original form, on a zip file or something.

*** RGVCAM: You are right about Rapidshare. They are getting absolutely ridiculous with those cat things. Try the site where I uploaded the videos too. It is pretty good and lets you upload up to a 300MB file at a time...and no cats!



Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
Well, I just downloaded the "inside" clip... the shot inside the home... the walk to the kitchen... the pizza... the TV watcher... etc.

That clip doesn't look nearly as bad as the one I downloaded earlier.

So... perhaps I should not have used the term "disaster" to describe my first impression of the Jazz clips; I was basing my opinion on the clip that Fishy uploaded, which features those "crawly" artifacts. Not sure what explains the difference between the clip he uploaded and the "inside" clip.

I still prefer the new Aiptek Action HD model. The 60 frames per second temporal resolution is a real plus, in my view.

I agree that Aiptek should have gotten it right with the older models.

That's why I never bought one.

In addition to the Aiptek Action HD, I also have the ISDV2.4, which seems to be greatly improved over the older ISDV2 in low light situations.

Bottom line... we getting better camcorders over time, it seems... and more choices.

Private Idaho
scorbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2008, 5:45 AM   #110
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

Tota agree with you on this Flash players for the JAzz model may not look great, and I am sure if it is on the vimeo site you have an option to decide, if you like what you see, download and test out yourself. Raw footage loading to certain sites for personal viewing , are just hte same, many ads to get through.

Never complaining, just why I load to Vimeio, and megaupload, why do not like Youtube and some direct load sites. LiveVideo seems to be a much better place , but not for the general audience at times, for that I do appologise.


fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 9:22 AM.