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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 16, 2008, 10:15 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

I have played the siren video through the different players here, and it looks like at least two different codec engines. The green blue windows at the end, on the tower block crawl. Red is blown out which is a common feature of consumer cams in particular, it is quite addressable to get red right. On Quick time classic the colors were better, and red was better, though yellowish ting to things, it was sunset like.

Too much noise, but then again the cathedral (or whatever it is) is darkish, but could be quiet light as there is sunlight coming into the room, I notice a lot of blur in people's faces, not too worried, but movement is blurred a lot.

Latitude is good enough, the cars are not so blow out, and ti looks naturalistic, bit it does not take contrasts between clouds (over buildings scene) and buildings street ell. Also on the siren scene in the side of the building, so a long way to go, but good enough as it is pretty much the same as moist over cheap hybrids. Score, not as good as I have come to expect. I don't know if the compression is any better, I am stopping at this point, but seems to require a lot more bandwidth in 720p (the cathedral ceiling looks funky).
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2008, 1:59 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,084
Default

Wayne12 wrote:
Quote:
The assertion you made was about hybrids not doing 16mb/s,
Quote:
You are right, and on this forum, a hybrid as we discuss it here, are the brands such as Aiptek, DXG etc.well under $300.Sanyo etcare not considered a hybrid here for the purposes of this forum otherwise, every camera from Kodak to Sony would be considered one since they all do video/still images at a minimum now. That doesn't mean we don't discuss them from time to time of course.
Quote:
not codec or price, or brand. The Link to the 800mb/s is the one I posted before that you should have seen by now (it is specified as 100MB/s which is megabyte, but we wonder if it is a typo, but you wont get much pro-quality at 6mpixel at 60fps. However, sharing there technology across models, it could be possible).
Quote:
Yes that was my bad. Having said that, I have seen that camera before and it is not even remotely in the same league as the hybrids we discuss here. It's not even in the same league pricewise as the low end prosumer devices such as Canon HF100 etc. so mention of this is in my opinion irrelavent. If you have the money to spend on that kind of equipment then why are you worried if Aiptek etc can shoot at 16Mb/s anyway? There many low end prosumer devices much less expensive such as the Canon Hf100 etc. that have the appropriate bitrate you are seeking.
Quote:
Sanyo has not significantly increased there data-rate over the year, which means that the next process shrink could make it a lot faster. The main stream competitors are going for 24mb/s and a handheld at 16mb/s is realistic.
Quote:
Never said it wasn't but at the pricepoint of the Aipteks, DXG etc I just don't see it anytime soon. There is obviously a reason why they chose to use half the bitrate of even the lowend Sanyo HD camcorder for the time being. They are budget devices at the end of the day.
rgvcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 12:44 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

rgvcam wrote:
Quote:
You are right, and on this forum, a hybrid as we discuss
Thank you. This has been discussed before see here for a list of hybrids:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...02&forum_id=92

As discussed all those cameras are hybrids but there are too many to go into. It is like saying, "we will only discuss silk string", and then suddenly differing types of silk string are about the only thing on the market. So the digital stills with video function cameras under $300 are left out (besides most have their own brand forums). Sanyo however, was an original hybrid that has it's own forum, and tends not to crop up here. However, the Scarlet is good for irony and sheer laughable boldness, you might get the joke about quoting it here.

Quote:
If you have the money to spend on that kind of equipment then why are you worried if Aiptek etc can shoot at 16Mb/s anyway?
Progressive, and the Scarlet is next year. The canon hf100 is consumer, prosumer tends to start around $2K with specific models (Scarlet is $3K). All these cameras do interlace or interlace and 30fps, I want progressive 50-60fps, data-rate to do it justice and manual/lockable controls would be nice for consumer. Professionally you can set and lock focus and aperture and walk around keeping distance to keep focus, also good for the knowledgeable consumer (a little button to turn auto focus on and off achieves this). i want to give it a go and for the sheer challenge do stuff with it, except most cameras are below optimal for even consumers (if I see a blurry blob, patterning or other such artifacts, its not that desirable). i also know that believe it or not, the market is moving to 100-200inch screens, with radical price reductions looming with new technology, and all this stuff will be obvious on them. A descent consumer camera is which has at least no artifactting, and a good one one which can take full advantage of consumer video formats (like h264 at highest data-rate on BD). I am aiming to buying a 8mpixel display, or 4K projector eventually.

Besides, I came here to write up video on stills stuff eventually. I am too busy elsewhere at the moment to even use a camera.

quote]Never said it wasn't but at the price point of the Aipteks, DXG etc I just don't see it anytime soon. There is obviously a reason why they chose to use half the bitrate of even the low end Sanyo HD camcorder for the time being. They are budget devices at the end of the day.[/quote][/quote]

They are both, these guys are very knowledgeable. But the reason was that they could do more with less than Sanyo, but the amount of processing required means that they can only do so much for the power envelope and price point unit the process shrinks, which allows higher precessing/complex circuits for the same power consumption and broadly the same price in the same price brackets. Sanyo does not have the same low power technology and codec efficiency as Ambarella. Somebody can get 16mb/s+ ambarella into a Sanyo HD1000 sized camera today for less money (maybe $300). I think you can buy the older 720p ambarella based 720p barrel camera for $399 at street (the Toshiba at $699) but that is not a budget manufacture, and the sensors in them are not that desirable I fear. Some of the cheap Asian manufacturers are unlikely to sit on 9mb/s once the rest upmarket competition (such as Canon) move to 24mb/s. 16mb/s is on the card as a good compromise.

However, there is a fly in the ointment, this obsession with lower bit-rates. This means, that despite having more data-rate capability they will still try to keep to the small data-rate, rather than offer various bit-rate quality modes like their competitors do, just because that is what they think it should be. Trying to fit 720p over 3.58mb/s is not that crash hot, trying to fit 720p60 over 6mb/s is not the best either. 9mb/s for 1080p semi-fullHD is pushing it. When they move to 1080p30 Full HD, and 1080p60 Fullhd, they will need to increase the bit-rate to around 16mb/s to 24mb/s.

We judge things on past experience, but the future changes ans so does past experience. The processing power from new technologies coming is capable of easily processing 24mb/s on a home PC, probably even 100mb/s H264 SHD. SD cards are available to 32GB and the price of flash is now a lot less. Hard drives are available cheaply in 500GB. Chip processes continue to shrink offering lower cost, higher processing power and lower power consumption. Broadband is moving beyond 24mb/s. So all the reasons that from past experience we think something will not happens goes out the window. The finale reality is market development. There is more to give consumers, so there is still room for the low end of the market to move, as the upper end moves up, and plans for the SHD and UHD future. Market control is something that leaves companies open to litigation, and leaves gapping holes in the market for new competitors. Sure it might work for 10 years, but eventually somebody comes in to relive the suffering. So, I don't expect that to be holding things back too much.
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 1:47 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
subc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California, Sac area
Posts: 261
Default

I still prefer youtube-like quality of an interesting video with good videography and an actual story, than pristine HD quality carp :?

In other words: let's argue less and make more videos. SD or HD, pixelated or not. it's all good
subc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 2:05 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

Yes, I would like to stop this crap as well.

Just note, assume we are talking about filming good videography with an actual story on the cameras as well. In this case I would much rather see it in pristine HD then on you-tube .
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 3:41 AM   #26
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default



just have to get use towayne :Gmeans well explains well, and will step up to the plate.

subc wrote:
Quote:
I still prefer youtube-like quality of an interesting video with good videography and an actual story, than pristine HD quality carp :?

In other words: let's argue less and make more videos. SD or HD, pixelated or not. it's all good
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 3:55 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Helsinki, FINLAND
Posts: 157
Default

Looks good, only problem is with loud sounds, but I guess it compensates for good audio sensitivity in silent environments. There should be some volume control in camera, but I guess Aiptek never will include it in their cameras.
Quenaelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 4:15 AM   #28
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

LOL

yes a manual control in incriments to raise lower likeEv. forsound

OUCH to easy Aiptek.

even sharpness.

these two key eliments we pay forbig time whem Lab rats kill the vid and sound. they try to correct they think itscorrect, and they never get it correct.

the Firmware that is. just offer it to us in the Action Hd Pro II model
Quote:
Looks good, only problem is with loud sounds, but I guess it compensates for good audio sensitivity in silent environments. There should be some volume control in camera, but I guess Aiptek never will include it in their cameras.
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 6:40 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

Thanks for your compliments Fishy, it also helps to start from a good position in the first place, and have it well thought out (which I admittedly have not been doing so much here, but not as needed as on a professional site).

Believe it or not, I have been thinking of doing an mock up Aiptek camera picture with a replaceable auto/manual lens here, and approach Aiptek to see if they would do something like this). But apart from micro Four/Thirds (which has a large sensor target but could be taken down through a triplet condenser, or optical fibre block) i don't know any suitable ones for sensors this small. It also has to be cheap and hands on. The camera would cost more (as long as it is $300-$500 (for a fast data-rate better sensor, manual controls, HDMI live precomrpession output without on screen displays, with lens) and whatever else is conducive. They could probably include a micro four thirds lens cheaper then commercial ones, but better quality then the current ones used. The camera would be excellent for lens adaptor, or just use the four thirds lens system. Taking a step back, you could merely have a pop off standard cheap lens, and pop-on condenser adaptor for four thirds, and go buy your own.

This would not be a cheap camera, this is a deluxe version that still camerae and video camera enthusiast will appreciate.
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2008, 6:48 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

I forgot, I am wondering if there is more burn out in the new camera's video, and if this might be a side effect of the anti-rolling shutter snapshot technique on exposure.

Does anybody else feel that there is more burn out?
Wayne12 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 6:29 PM.