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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 17, 2007, 8:18 AM   #471
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 630
Default

rajeshh wrote:
Quote:
Btw, I would really love it if we make a sticky of a tips thread for this, with questions like the following answered:

How to get the best video in low light?
Whats the best way to edit?

Seems like there was an attempt with this thread:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=27

I too have read most of the posts in this forum, and while there is a lot to be learnt reading the manuals, I also get the sense, the experiments which people are trying and then succeeding or failing is worth capturing in a single thread.
I agree. Why don't you try again with a list of straight forward questions. The answers are out there by now. Like you, I'd appreciate the tips. Somehow, my thread got more generalized than I'd hoped.
Setter Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 8:43 AM   #472
Senior Member
 
visorblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
Default

splunk wrote:
Quote:
I don't see why when recoding 4x3 I have more information at ALL SIDES of the frame than when recording 16x9. I would expect this camcorder to record video at 16x9 then crop it to get to 640x480.
I use mine for stills a lot and it does take a bit of getting used to as I have to reframe in still mode. The camera is set for 1280x720 in video and 7mp in stills (4:3). When looking at the 16:9 video setting and then pressing the Photo button seeing a wider view all the way around surprised me.

When using my other HD camera I get a wider view in HD than SD video so I expected the same with the Sanyo in still mode. Interesting suprise, but a welcome one.


visorblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 8:49 AM   #473
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

VB nice shots,

the pic 4:3 gotthis lil smear in a circle, then the 16:9 is a squarish, both wit ha white object?

there is a big difference there? more info or closer view?

wish my Aiptek had 16:9 but yes vid caption will do for me
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 8:54 AM   #474
Senior Member
 
visorblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
Default

rajeshh wrote:
Quote:
Btw, I would really love it if we make a sticky of a tips thread for this, with questions like the following answered:

How to get the best video in low light?
Whats the best way to edit?
Those aren't easy questions to answer. What signifies low light and good/best video will vary by person and their needs. Also, editing varies by person, software, experience and platform. My answer to the low light question is to add more light. Best way to edit is with the biggest, baddest, and fastest machine you can get and high-end software -- editing HD video requires power or patience. On the other hand people have done well with Windows Movie Maker and iMovie (Mac).

The Sanyo HD700 tip page is a good place to start and then experiment from there. Afterall, it's a digital camera so you can get instant feedback.

http://www.sanyo-dsc.com/english/pro...ips/index.html
visorblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 9:01 AM   #475
Senior Member
 
visorblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
Default

fishycomics wrote:
Quote:
VB nice shots,

the pic 4:3 gotthis lil smear in a circle, then the 16:9 is a squarish, both wit ha white object?

there is a big difference there? more info or closer view?

wish my Aiptek had 16:9 but yes vid caption will do for me
Hi Fishycomics,

I don't know about those being nice shots, I did them PDQ to show a friend what I was referring to in that the 4:3 has more image area -- the 16:9 is a still capture while the 4:3 is a still picture. The "smear" is lens flare and since I was shooting into the sun I expected it and didn't care for this test. It bothers you more than me. I even add lens flare in Photoshop for effect from time-to-time.
visorblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 10:39 AM   #476
Senior Member
 
visorblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
Default

I just looked at my files and seems I shot two 16:9 vs. 4:3 samples. 16:9 is on the top as is a screen capture of the video clip. The 4:3 is a still shot.


visorblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 11:51 AM   #477
Senior Member
 
visorblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
Default

Playing with Vimeo and uploaded 10 (so far) of my HD700 videos. Doesn't seem to like the stills I added to the end of the Garden Centrer Flowers one, it stops short of ending, but you can drag through them. Will figure it out later -- if you know the reason let me know.

http://www.vimeo.com/user309863/videos
visorblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 12:33 PM   #478
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 630
Default

visorblue wrote:
Quote:
I just looked at my files and seems I shot two 16:9 vs. 4:3 samples. 16:9 is on the top as is a screen capture of the video clip. The 4:3 is a still shot.

Isn't it possible to shoot both videos and stills in the wide format? Just curious. I suppose I'll find out when my 700 gets here in a few days.
Setter Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 12:34 PM   #479
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 145
Default

splunk wrote:
Quote:
Just thought I'd add this to the thread.

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=92

These pics were taken with IS turned off. There is still just as much "zoom" applied that creates a very narrow field of view when recording WS compared to FF.









I don't see why when recoding 4x3 I have more information at ALL SIDES of the frame than when recording 16x9. I would expect this camcorder to record video at 16x9 then crop it to get to 640x480.

This is a strange discovery indeed. I'm kind of surprised I never noticed this before, but then again, I've pretty much stayed in widescreen mode the whole time.

This makes no sense to me, and represents poor design IMHO -- unless I'm missing something. For starters, we know it doesn't have anything to do with stabilization b/c from what we know about stabilization on the HD700 is that it crops in and zooms, so there's no way it is reserving more space on the chip for stabilizing b/w 16:9 and 4:3.

Next, there's no good explanation for this behavior. If the chip were a 4:3 chip, then you'd think that 4:3 and 16:9 would have the exact same angle of view, just that the 16:9 would be cropped out of the 4:3 chip and saved at a higher resolution than the 4:3, which would have used the whole chip and downrezed to 640x480. In the case of a widescreen chip, you'd think the 16:9 would have a wider field of view and the 4:3 would be cropped from it. Either way, you'd never see behavior like this, where the 4:3 image has a wider field of view?

WTF? Unless I'm missing something, that is just flat out stupid design...
Taynt3d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2007, 1:21 PM   #480
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 41
Default

Taynt3d, you have the HD1000 too, don't you? Does it exibit the same behavior with cropping the 16:9 video relative to the 4:3 stills?
Outrageous 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 10:06 PM.