Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Kodak

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 16, 2007, 11:59 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8
Default

'DUPLICATE POST'
THX-1138 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2007, 12:00 AM   #32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8
Default

That is odd since my experience is such the opposite from yours. Pictures are great in sunlight and low light areas. Video is what I expect from a sub US$400 digicam. Could you post some of you pictures to see what you are saying? I'll post mine so you can see as well.
THX-1138 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2007, 11:46 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
big_potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 487
Default

Let me post mine first.

Hong Kong Night Scene, Nathan Road, the busiest road.

Manual Exposure: f/2.8, 1/20sec, ISO 100
Attached Images
 
big_potato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2007, 11:51 PM   #34
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2
Default

Turns out my corel photo album application was causing 80% of my disappointment. The jagginess of the photos was caused by the application viewer. WHen i looked at them with the standard MS viewer they looked much much better as i zoomed in a bit. definitely much happier.

i still don't have nice crisp faces though ... (sorry i'm not going to post family photos). i'll try taking some random photos this weekend. though in looking at the pics, it seems like either auto focus is not on or it's focusing on other areas in the scene. we were camping and hiking a lot, so various trees and shrubs may have been throwing the auto focus off.

one thing i would like to say that i saw on a previous post (not sure if it was this forum) is why do they have the stabilization as a separate setting? in the c875 you slected your setting and then in the menu set stabilization. They way it is now you can't have stabilization with manual or with ISO, etc. Seems strange.

still haven't shot HD either.
DrTivoL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2007, 1:55 AM   #35
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Default

dvdivx wrote:
Quote:
A 4gb card that says x133 is a non standard sd card and I'd stay far away from it. SDHC goes from class 2 to class 6 currently.
The Sandisk Extreme III is just like a class 6 SDHC card except that it has a 20 Mb vs. 6Mb speed. I now have the card and it works fine.
paulplatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2007, 2:04 AM   #36
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Default

big_potato wrote:
Quote:

Also FYI, the User's Guide says the longest video is 30-min only. I haven't got time to verify such rather short limit.
I inserted a 4GB SDHC card. I get just under 30 minutes available at 720p video. After taking 8 minutes of video I stopped and looked at what was left. I could still record just under 30 minutes. I looked ta the amount of 12Mp picture capability left and used that to calculate memory usage. What is happening with the 4GB card is that you can shoot two 30 minute videos. Thus there is a 30 minute/2GB max video limit as stated in the manual. But... the camera does see all of the SDHC card's memory.

Paul
paulplatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2007, 7:13 AM   #37
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

Awesome Pic realy wasesome



but 30 minute segment per vid that you are saying 2 gig = 30 min that is aweful a lot of memory if you ask me?
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2007, 6:28 PM   #38
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Default

fishycomics wrote:
Quote:
Awesome Pic realy wasesome


but 30 minute segment per vid that you are saying 2 gig = 30 min that is aweful a lot of memory if you ask me?
That is at [email protected]. In some ways I am happy itis that big. A lot smaller and it would most likely mean an overly compressed picture to the point of the 720p being useless.

Paul
paulplatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2007, 11:06 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
big_potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 487
Default

Compared with Canon M-JPEG which data rate is 2MB/sec for 640x480

=> 6MB/sec 1280x720
=> 21GB / hour

Kodak's MPEG-4 1MB/se for 1280x720 => 3.6GB/hour, is really nothing.

I don't see much diff btwn MPEG-4 vs M-JPEG, esp for fast subject movements, they BOTH are subject to pixel-blocks effect.
big_potato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2007, 2:24 AM   #40
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 68
Default

I found a HD video sample from the 1275 the other day. I down loaded it and it is here.(200kb download speed, 28 meg file)


jarods.com/sanyo/1275.mp4


The file is renamed a .mp4 so you might want to rename it back to a MOV if you wish to use QT to play it.

Supercoder says this.




General #0 Complete name : E:kodak z1275 sample1275.mp4 Format : QuickTime Format/Info : Original Apple specifications Format/Family : MPEG-4 File size : 26.8 MiB PlayTime : 27s 536ms Bit rate : 8160 Kbps StreamSize : 13.7 KiB Movie name/More : EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY KODAK Z1275 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA Encoded date : UTC 2007-07-06 17:16:01 Tagged date : UTC 2007-07-06 17:16:01 Origin : Digital Camera

I wish I could find the online manual but it looks like it is not online. This camera does have a vary large 1/1.72 in. CCD and they state a high senstevitey mode for the 6mp setting but can you set the camera to 6mp and high (gain) and use the flash? Do you have to stay in ISO 1600 at 6mp or can you get a clean ISO800 from it?


ArizonaVideo 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 3:14 AM.