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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 2, 2008, 2:06 PM   #71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,084
Default

Cresho wrote:
Quote:
its not sanyo's fault. It is mr bill gates. Fat or fat32 has a file size limitation of 4gb. I think fat is less. ntfs is 1 terabyte or more and linux ext3 the same

it is an sd card issue. also, sanyo formats to these partition types as well. They use fat because it is more versitile accross all os platform.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table
Trevmar wasn't on about the ability to record more than 4GB per file. He was on about the ability to create multiple 4GB files such that when played back together they appear seamless. ie The camera would need to have to have a buffer to record while it was closing the previous file.
rgvcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2008, 3:37 PM   #72
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 584
Default

I have a Canon HF100. When I put in a 16Gig card it records continuously for 2hrs 50mins, opening up a sequential series of 2 gigabyte files called
000001.MTS
000002.MTS etc

This behavior is part of the AVCHD specification.

To implement a scheme like this, in any camera, is a trivial task which it has nothing to do with Bill Gates.

Trevmar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2008, 11:12 PM   #73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,153
Default

I've always believed the Sanyos sold mainly because the early models boasted "stylish" plastic shells.

As I've said, I bought two VPC-CG6s and one performed just fine while the other had the awful "stuck pixel syndrome" and I then did a search on the Web and discovered the "stuck pixel syndrome" is not uncommon with Sanyo video cameras... especially the older CCD models.

The new Sanyo CMOS camcorders might perform better, but -- for crying out loud -- I now hate the shells. They look like something the Pillsbury Doughboy would like:


Private Idaho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2008, 2:18 AM   #74
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 66
Default

rgvcam wrote:
Quote:
I just wish they'd stop competing with Megapixels and reduce it back down to say 3 or 4MP which would help with the noise issue. That would still be a very decent size for what is supposed to be primarily a video camcorder.
All the manufacturers can't stopping doing the pixels war. how come they don't understand? Most of users don't need that much pixels and the sensor is too small for such high pixels.
MP4-19B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2008, 2:29 AM   #75
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 66
Default

shabby wrote:
Quote:
Heres a vid of the backyard using the highest quality setting http://www.sendspace.com/file/vmmc0q


I resized them down but kept the quality but theres still plenty of noise when you zoom in even in the originals. It was much darker when i took these photos, this is definetly not a low light camera.
Did you take those pictures with flash night? Is it at 1600 ISO?
MP4-19B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2008, 11:19 AM   #76
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 23
Default

MP4-19B wrote:
Quote:
shabby wrote:
Quote:
Heres a vid of the backyard using the highest quality setting http://www.sendspace.com/file/vmmc0q


I resized them down but kept the quality but theres still plenty of noise when you zoom in even in the originals. It was much darker when i took these photos, this is definetly not a low light camera.
Did you take those pictures with flash night? Is it at 1600 ISO?
Not sure which iso it was at, it was set on auto. The pics were taken with the built in flash.
shabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2008, 11:33 AM   #77
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 66
Default

shabby wrote:
Quote:
MP4-19B wrote:
Quote:
shabby wrote:
Quote:
Heres a vid of the backyard using the highest quality setting http://www.sendspace.com/file/vmmc0q


I resized them down but kept the quality but theres still plenty of noise when you zoom in even in the originals. It was much darker when i took these photos, this is definetly not a low light camera.
Did you take those pictures with flash night? Is it at 1600 ISO?
Not sure which iso it was at, it was set on auto. The pics were taken with the built in flash.
I believe the aperture is toosure for taking nightshoot, the flash light is not nice as well.
MP4-19B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2008, 11:15 AM   #78
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 24
Default

adalfa wrote:
Quote:
Judging from the video and photo samples posted by shabby, I have to agree with you guys. It's not looking good, but still this is only one person and one camera. No offense to you shabby but your camera skills aren't super. I need to see some more test by people who knows camcorders and manual controls before totally cursing out Sanyo for making such lousy "upgrade":-).
I reserve my judgement too for 2 reasons:

1) this is ONLY one data point, one and only one, I would like to wait for a little bit more video shares before making a conclusion.

2) I am afraid shabby's shoot is in pitch dark, is that correct? I would not expect HD800 or HD700 would shoot anything pitch dark. I would like to see ambient lighting if HD800 improve over HD700. Shabby, mind to do another testing, if you still hold on to your HD800, shoot some video under ambient lighting, i.e., people seeing each other with a comfortable lighting. I think under pitch dark or candle light, you are comparing zero to zero, wont help.

Or anyone, has a HD800, please upload some video under ambient lighting situations. TIA,

bun
bunanson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2008, 2:42 PM   #79
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 23
Default

bunanson wrote:
Quote:
adalfa wrote:
Quote:
Judging from the video and photo samples posted by shabby, I have to agree with you guys. It's not looking good, but still this is only one person and one camera. No offense to you shabby but your camera skills aren't super. I need to see some more test by people who knows camcorders and manual controls before totally cursing out Sanyo for making such lousy "upgrade":-).
I reserve my judgement too for 2 reasons:

1) this is ONLY one data point, one and only one, I would like to wait for a little bit more video shares before making a conclusion.

2) I am afraid shabby's shoot is in pitch dark, is that correct? I would not expect HD800 or HD700 would shoot anything pitch dark. I would like to see ambient lighting if HD800 improve over HD700. Shabby, mind to do another testing, if you still hold on to your HD800, shoot some video under ambient lighting, i.e., people seeing each other with a comfortable lighting. I think under pitch dark or candle light, you are comparing zero to zero, wont help.

Or anyone, has a HD800, please upload some video under ambient lighting situations. TIA,

bun
I posted 3 videos shot during the day and 1 shot at night, i have since returned the camera.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/vmmc0q
http://www.sendspace.com/file/xkvzqc
http://www.sendspace.com/file/obchcw
http://www.sendspace.com/file/2uexpz
shabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2008, 2:49 PM   #80
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 24
Default

shabby wrote:
Quote:
bunanson wrote:
Quote:
adalfa wrote:
Quote:
Judging from the video and photo samples posted by shabby, I have to agree with you guys. It's not looking good, but still this is only one person and one camera. No offense to you shabby but your camera skills aren't super. I need to see some more test by people who knows camcorders and manual controls before totally cursing out Sanyo for making such lousy "upgrade":-).
I reserve my judgement too for 2 reasons:

1) this is ONLY one data point, one and only one, I would like to wait for a little bit more video shares before making a conclusion.

2) I am afraid shabby's shoot is in pitch dark, is that correct? I would not expect HD800 or HD700 would shoot anything pitch dark. I would like to see ambient lighting if HD800 improve over HD700. Shabby, mind to do another testing, if you still hold on to your HD800, shoot some video under ambient lighting, i.e., people seeing each other with a comfortable lighting. I think under pitch dark or candle light, you are comparing zero to zero, wont help.

Or anyone, has a HD800, please upload some video under ambient lighting situations. TIA,

bun
I posted 3 videos shot during the day and 1 shot at night, i have since returned the camera.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/vmmc0q
http://www.sendspace.com/file/xkvzqc
http://www.sendspace.com/file/obchcw
http://www.sendspace.com/file/2uexpz

I watched the one you posted during the day, they are quite acceptable to me, in fact, I would say, it is quite good because of the 720p. The night you posted, was it pitch dark? i.e, can one see his own hand? The debating point with my own decision is, how HD800 fare under ambient lighting conditions. Is it hopeless, or is it manageble.

TIA,

bun
bunanson 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 7:54 PM.