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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 2, 2008, 5:22 PM   #211
Senior Member
 
scorbing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 122
Default

Dudes you really can't be serious. When I had the Jazz, I took a video in plain daylight, clear skies and converted it to DVD to play it on my DVD player andit looked like crap. You could not see the water and vegetation correctly. The details were not simply there. A lot of pixelation. I took the same video with the Action HD at 60fps and converted it to DVD and I can perfectly see the details on the vegetation and everything else. The Action HD simply makes better videos than the Jazz. I can't remember if it was you or who that said on the forum that the Jazz videos were a disaster. The Jazz videos look great up-close and on Macro but the Action HD makes better videos up-close and not up-close.

rgvcam wrote:
Quote:
sandmanfvr wrote:
Quote:
60 fps mean NOTHING when you convert to tv/dvd, which 30 or under after your convert it. The aiptek couldn't HOLD a consistent 30fps (from what I have read), where as the Jazz seemingly does 30fps all the way through. I haven't seen one frame drop in my videos and got one where my dogs are playing and run really fast, jump around and it is smoooooooth. To me Aiptek did the 60fps to make up for the A-HD and GO-HD lack of consistent 30fps. Plus the 60 fps is just more file space that will be reduced when you convert, kind of a waste.

They are all nice camcorders with strengths and weaknesses, but I think maybe Aiptek maybe falling behind, or at least catching up to other companies. Just my opinion.
That was what I was thinking. 60fps is only really useful for PC viewing at the moment which is why I am not currently excited by the 60fps setting.
scorbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2008, 5:24 PM   #212
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15
Default

sandmanfvr wrote:
Quote:
60 fps mean NOTHING when you convert to tv/dvd, which 30 or under after your convert it.¬*
Connect A-HD+ to HDTV through the video cable, you can get the true 60 fps effect. Any 720P30 is a joke compared to that. You can convert a 720P60 video to blueray compatible, which is also 60 frames per second.

sandmanfvr wrote:
Quote:
The aiptek couldn't HOLD a consistent 30fps (from what I have read), where as the Jazz seemingly does 30fps all the way through.
The 178 video I saw dropped frames every second, especially when it is panning. It is so obvious when the video was showed on an HDTV.
Tebay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2008, 5:33 PM   #213
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

like i said why are you comparing it to a Action Hd 1080P camcorder compare with a 720P model
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2008, 5:46 PM   #214
Senior Member
 
scorbing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 122
Default

The video quality of the Action HD is better than the Jazz...Period, even at 720p @30fps.



Tebay wrote:
Quote:
sandmanfvr wrote:
Quote:
60 fps mean NOTHING when you convert to tv/dvd, which 30 or under after your convert it.
Connect A-HD+ to HDTV through the video cable, you can get the true 60 fps effect. Any 720P30 is a joke compared to that. You can convert a 720P60 video to blueray compatible, which is also 60 frames per second.

sandmanfvr wrote:
Quote:
The aiptek couldn't HOLD a consistent 30fps (from what I have read), where as the Jazz seemingly does 30fps all the way through.
The 178 video I saw dropped frames every second, especially when it is panning. It is so obvious when the video was showed on an HDTV.
scorbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2008, 9:13 PM   #215
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

There are no tricks at all here, I am using two cams the Aipteks A-HD+, and the Jazz

The Jazz/AIptek are on the same object. In the pic I am not comparing pics, I am only showing what Iam talking about, you may do your own comparison if you like , and excuse the bluriness.

As you notice i have a fiber optic light it will glow a few colors, and a lamp that will be on/off and the room is well lit with 7 lamps guessing 60 watts per bulb, if you want t o count the bathroom one as well., I will also direct to the tv, while it is on at a soft volume. WHeat thins cartoon box aspercream tic tacs and coins you'll decide what camera if Jazz, AIp only two scenerios are up one stationed, one moving.

Depending on what program used you have the option to view Jazzs, Aipteks, and individual raw footage enjoy



http://www.vimeo.com/968246Jazz software

http://www.vimeo.com/968295Aipteks software

1 http://www.vimeo.com/968313

2 http://www.vimeo.com/968316

3 http://www.vimeo.com/968320

4 http://www.vimeo.com/968324

Donations accepted for comparing the 188 thank you :G
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2008, 5:43 PM   #216
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

Well I thought I go out and do some exploring, I only had my Aiptek and Jazz not two Jazz's

when I handed over the A-HD+ to my co-worker, I had to basicaly take it back, give him the Jazz. I did not like how he had to struggle to see the lcd screen in the low light, something just was not right when the Jazz realy showed clearity in the lcd in low light.

I have clips, and with the strain of the Processor, I will have to convert these clips or just load, I wantto do some PIP side by sides as We finished off the Aquarium again, I held both filming side by side shots

Knowing you want the Jazz 178 and Jazz 188 my paypal is where you can donate $$ for it a number of members realy want this they'll be happy LOL

video will be up later later can be a minute to a month or longer thanks :G
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2008, 6:13 AM   #217
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

http://www.vimeo.com/972631

Well I thought I toss another excellent test, I used Adobe Premier this time not Aiptek, or Jazzs software. The program works well for the Aiptek, not hte jazz on my pc in playback after saved why not sure?

As you view this video Hands down AIptek A-HD+ 1280x720 60f is on, and sure enough any fast motion will be caught perfectly, not the lighting thereis a excellent shot of salmon you'll see the fish and the canoe, / animal above with the jazz, the Aiptek just dark water.

any hesitated light shots are not Aiptek. only one i shte beginning I am not sure but not a test shot only an opening shot

1. given to my friend to film b/c I wanted him to snap and have fun. we went through th is place twice I have multple shots and not worth showing. when I have the time I will.

2 the LCD of hte AIptek shows the video of exactly what you're filming when I handed the cm over I gve the better one , the aiptek to him, I seen he had trouble viewing, I grabbed it away, gave him the Jazz 178. the Jazz truely showed the video in the LCD perfectly , and bright, no brightness controls, I raised my brightness of the Aiptek up, hoping the shots came out, as I viewed some they were exactly like I mentiond above.
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2008, 9:43 AM   #218
Senior Member
 
scorbing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 122
Default

Those videos clearly show that neither the Jazz or the Aiptek are designed for night or dark shots. The Jazz videos look gray. You can hardly see any color correctly, especially where the fish are at. I took a video with the Jazz before I returned it at a restaurant in Disney and it was all gray like that too. Unless there is plenty of light you will not be able to see the colors correctly with either camera. They are simply made for daylight shots and shots with plenty of light. I still say the Aiptek has better video quality. What do you say?

fishycomics wrote:
Quote:
http://www.vimeo.com/972631

Well I thought I toss another excellent test, I used Adobe Premier this time not Aiptek, or Jazzs¬* software. The program works well for the Aiptek, not hte jazz on my pc in¬* playback after saved why not sure?

As¬* you view this video Hands down AIptek¬* A-HD+ 1280x720 60f is on, and sure enough any fast motion will be caught perfectly, not the lighting¬* there¬*is a ¬* excellent shot of salmon you'll see¬* the fish and the canoe, / animal above with the jazz, the Aiptek just dark water.

¬*any hesitated light shots are not Aiptek. only one i shte beginning I am not sure but not a test shot only an opening shot

1. given to my friend to film b/c I wanted him to snap and have fun. we went through th is place twice I have multple shots and not worth showing. when I have the time I will.

2 the LCD of hte AIptek shows the¬* video of exactly what you're filming when I handed the cm over I gve the better one , the aiptek to him, I seen he had trouble viewing, I grabbed it away, gave him the Jazz 178. the¬* Jazz truely showed¬* the¬* video in the LCD perfectly , and bright, no brightness controls,¬* I raised my brightness of the Aiptek up, hoping¬* the shots came out,¬* as I viewed some they were exactly like I mentiond¬* above.
scorbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2008, 1:39 PM   #219
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 47
Default

One of the reasons I am so impressed with the Jazz 188 is it's low light ability. This is not a perfect low light scenerio but compared to my older Aiptek cam, the most recent being the DV5800, it is like night and day difference. Pun intended!
I don't know how many times in the past I have tried to use my Aiptek DV5800 for a family thing and ended up with nothing due to winter time indoor low light issues. The video noise in these shots was also unbearable.
This is why I am very content with the Jazz. Is it as good as my $2000 Sony VX-2000? Not by any means but what amazes me is that what these little cams are now doing for a tiny amount of the price!
The final thing I will say on this is if you are using these to encode and put a final edit on the web, they are spectacular! If you are wanting to shoot and edit and burn to Blu-Ray, I think you will be disappointed. Simply stepping up to the Canon AV-30 (I think that is the model) will be far and away better than any of these hybrids that claim HD! Not to mention that you can buy the Canon for around $700 which is dirt-ass cheap!!!!
The question is, what are these companies coming out with next?

I am waiting for some info from Jazz on the 205 model and will share whatever I get here. This is the model that actually has a mini DV handycam form factor rather than a matchbox style. Something tells me that this device is going to step up the quality to a more acceptible level without skyrocketing the price!

Jay
coosbaytv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2008, 2:43 PM   #220
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 584
Default

Jay, you probably mean the Canon HV20 (or HV30) with its 24p mode giving excellent performance in very low light. The clarity and focus of the Canon is also much better. For example, if you look at this video (below) you can see it starts with panoramic shots taken with a Sanyo HD700 and then changes (at 1:02) to the one-on-one interviews taken with the Canon HV20. I used TMPGenc for HDV pull-down, it was edited in Vegas in 24p, and heavily compressed for Vimeo with the MainConcept AVC/AAC encoder (avg HD video bitrate was only 800 Kbps).

http://www.vimeo.com/955029

Trevmar 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 2:18 AM.