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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 20, 2007, 7:58 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
subc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California, Sac area
Posts: 261
Default

Caelum: I've made the proper notations on the video hosted at vimeo. things like 'is not raw with that bitrate so low' and why it plays back so jerky.

Thanks again!
subc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 20, 2007, 8:19 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Caelum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,030
Default

psphoto wrote:
Quote:
[...]It will be interesting to see if I can figure out a way to attach a wide angle adapter. Are there filter threads?? Is the lens set well behind the square opening?[...]
I can make outa few ridges in the square, not threads; the lens is only recessed about 3mm in the square opening. I can't really see howa lens could attach exceptperhaps using the custom clip on method the lens cap uses (it snaps on there tight). But someone posted here about sucessfully attaching a wide lens onto a CG65, which surprised me.
Caelum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 3:04 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 19
Default

How does the new HD700 compare to the HD2 ?? They are both 720P camcorders and both do 7MP still shots. I know that the HD700 is a tad smaller. What kind of optical zoom does the HD700 have ?? I know that the HD2 has a 10X optical zoom. Is there any performance differences between the 2 ?? Thanks for any info. God Bless :G
JRDELUNAIII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 6:59 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1
Default

JRDELUNAIII

Try: http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news...s.php?id=14870

Note:

'Even if the HD700 is replacing the HD2, there is absolutely no comparison between the two of them: the HD700 is REALLY capable in providing you great 720p video'
Trickey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 8:17 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Caelum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,030
Default

JRDELUNAIII wrote:
Quote:
How does the new HD700 compare to the HD2 ?[...]
Primarily: theHD700 has an all new engine, the same as the HD1000, a high-speed video processor that encodes much higher quality video using the MPEG-4 part10 AVC (advanced video coding) / H.264 codec. The HD2usesanolder technology, MPEG-4 part 2 SP (simple profile), the initial version of MPEG-4 video.

The HD700 is more compact and portablethan the HD2; given its size it only has a 5X optical zoom lens whereas the HD2 had 10x. The HD1000 has a 10x zoom lens.

See my mini-review above for links to the full HD700 specifications and links to more information on AVC / H.264 (bolded text are links!).
Caelum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 10:44 AM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 58
Default

Caelum - Got a couple questions for you, if you could be as kind as to share your insights with me again. I couldn't resist and jumped for the HD1000 even while I had the HD 700 on pre-order, despite the many misgivings I had. So that has raised some interesting questions.

First of all, in YOUR opinion, do you think the HD 1000's 780/60 fps is a HUGE advantage over the HD700's max 780/30 fps? I was under the impression increased frames per second were mainly beneficial for capturing rapid action, and little else. Is there any other benefit to 60 fps that I've overlooked? Both the full 1080i and 780 at 60 fps on the HD 1000 cause my one year old Samsung 42 inch 1080i HDTV LCD to have distracting flickering and noticeable pixel clumping as the picture moves, for lack of a better word, which my previous CG65 did not have.

So, if the only benefit is rapid action, then I might as well send the HD1000 back and wait for my HD700 to arrive. I'm not seeing ANY qualitative difference on my TV between the 1080 and 780 60 fps modes of the HD1000. in fact, I prefer the smoother look of the CG65 at it's low-res to the HD1000. I'm hoping the HD 700 has better picture quality than the CG65 with none of the lens issues....

...which brings me to ask: on the HD 700, is there ANY of that infamous grey spot that I've complained about, the rectangular ghosting image that looks like a diamond? Please advise. If it is there, at all, that would be a deal breaker for me, because the HD 1000, for all its size and cost and disappointing HD picture does NOT have that artifact.

FYI, for those of you reading this while debating which one to get, I can tell you one thing that I've already noticed: the HD 1000 isn't going with me nearly as much as the petite CG65 did, which is approximately the size of the HD700. It is too big to bring with you comfortably in anything but a fairly large waist camera pack. In fact, it is almost the size of the body of my Olympus DSLR. A lot lighter, but I used to take the CG65 with me everywhere and am NOT doing that with the HD1000. So the 700 is really the only ultra-portable HD hybrid from Sanyo right now.

Thanks for any info and opinions shared.
IcelandFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 11:15 AM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1
Default

Hi I'm a new member here and like a few others am not sure which to buy , the HD1000 or the HD700.

What I would like to know is which has the clearer more detailed movies/stills between the two?
As I'm confussed by the different sensors, ie 4mp cmos on the HD1000 and the 7.1mp ccd on the HD700.

Also which one records better at lower resolutions? ie 680 x 340?
As again as far as I can see in the different specifications , that the HD700 records in higher megapixels at the lower resolutions.

And Lastly is there much diference between the still shots of both camcorders.

I'm really tempted to buy the HD700 from QVC's special offer, but the one thing I like more about the HD1000 is the 10 x's zoom.

Many thanks

Emrys
EmrysGlyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 1:30 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
pixelighter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4
Default

Why not give QVC a whirl. they are always saying about the 30 day return period. I have done a uk google and they appear to be very competitive, especially when you have to add a card and hd cable into the equation.



ian
pixelighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 6:03 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Caelum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,030
Default

Hi Icelandfan. Since you can directly compare 720p 60fps vs. 30fps with your HD1000, what you experience is the most important. I think 60fps should be better than 30fps, since it does capture fluid motion better. Also, if you extract a still from a 30fps movie it might have more motion blur than a still from a 60fps movie (assuming brightly lit scene). But practically speaking I also think the HD700's 30fps is plenty good enough to fully convince my eyes / brain that it is seeing fluid movement (unlike the cheap Aiptek HD cams that don't convince my eyes). When you think about it, all (so far) HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movie titles are encoded at only 24fps (1080p/24), yet they look great. We can see high frame rates, but presented with quality lower ones, the brain will, up to a point, link them together to still register fluid motion. So, I really don't think it's necessary and consumes more disk space, but I also actually think it is better.

This leads me to the flickering issue with your 42" LCD panel. Technically speaking there is no such thing as a 1080i LCD TV; they are physically either 720 (which can display 1080i) or 1080. Understandably, if you have a 720 LCD, displaying 1080i content on it will cause flickering as the same physical lines are alternatively being used to display the odd and even lines of the full 1080 video. If you don't have a 1080 LCD you will see no benefit from 1080i over 720p. Besides many claim you can't even tell the difference between 1080 and 720 resolutions on 42" and smaller TVs. However, I'm a little puzzled if you are noticing a bad image when displaying 720p/60 video on your TV, but it might be an LCD TV's refresh rate/motion blur issue (which is why they are introducing 120Hz and 180Hz LCD TVs now).

Regarding the diamond shaped blotches you've experienced on the CG65. I've owned both the C6 and the CG65 and the only times I have come across diamond shaped blurry spots in my video have been when dirt, or most often, fine mist (clean or dirty) have found their way onto the surface of the lens. The solution for me was to properly/carefully clean the lens surface, and then everything was fine. I cannot explain your bad experience (twice! strange). I have yet to see any of this with the HD700 yet (let me know if anything can be spotted in my samples). If you are happy with the HD1000, maybe you should stick with it.

EmrysGlyn, unfortunately I haven't seen many sample stills posted in the HD1000 thread, perhaps you could ask for some photo samples there. I don't know of anyone who has had the opportunity to directly compare the HD1000 and HD700 yet. I assume the HD1000 should be better for video since it has a bigger lens, higher resolution and frame rate support. They both do the same lower resolutions (640x480 & 320x240), I have no idea which one is better with those either.
Caelum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2007, 11:32 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 145
Default

Caelum,

Quick question for you...

I just discovered my HD1000 can't record with the LCD closed, which S-U-C-K-S for me. My CG65 can record while the screen is closed, just as long as you press record and get it recording before shutting the LCD panel.

Can the HD700 record with the LCD shut?

(Given the HD1000, I'm not confident that HD700 is any different, which would be a bummer for certain applications.)


Taynt3d 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 10:19 AM.