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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 19, 2008, 1:38 AM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17
Default

subc wrote:
Quote:
What I mean is.. don't think not even for a moment that HD footage (specially h.264 at 1080 resolution) will be as easy to work with as, let's say.. DV files.
Not only is it hard to work with MPEG4 files at HD resolutions... but you need a lot of horsepower (CPU, ram) and you cannt freely scrub around the timeline to check your footage.

Think about it this way.. if it takes 80% of your processor just to playback a 1080 h264 clip... how much more do you think it will take to be able to manipulate that same clip? (resize, color correct, apply effects, scrub around in the timeline, re-compress).

At true HD resolution, there are 2073600 pixels for every frame, and to make matters worse, they are compressed with h264. Is not easy feat to edit HD footage. Marketing will always tell you how easy and 'fun' it is to work and edit HD.. to get you to shell out the cash.

In fact, I tell you what... don't believe anything I say, just go on the forum and look for some video completely edited in true HD resolution from an HD1000. There must be loads...
And let me give you some advice there, chief. If you're the least bit serious about any kind of HD video editing, whether its for novice or professional use, stop trying to get by using a cheap PC with a Windows OS.

Windows is good for a lot of things, I have a PC that I use everyday, but editing HD video IS NOT something they're good at doing. Get a Mac if you wanna edit high quality Mpeg-4 videos. Simple as that. There's a reason why almost every photo, audio or video pro uses them. Mpeg-4 (H.264) is built right into the OS & so is AVCHD.

Every other post on here is something along the lines of "I can't edit my HD videos from this camcorder! This format sucks!!" Well, no. The format is actually a standard. The reason why Windows users have trouble is because Microsoft doesnt even include H.264 codecs outta the box, they would rather have you use one of their own proprietary formats thats WMV based, so users usually have to go out searching for codecs & programs. Some work well enough, but a lot don't play nice with the OS because its WMV based. Sure you can do it, but they sure dont make it easy.

BTW, it doesnt take that much raw CPU power to edit these HD vids, even at 1080p. My little $500 Mac mini does this all day long. I edit my vids with it & then compress a bunch down using Automator all day.

If you wanna get serious about your HD content (and this goes for everyone), dump the PC. That aint its cup of tea.
peestandingup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2008, 7:48 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Rev2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 377
Default

While I will agree that Microsoft can be such a bunch of $]$@^%$ trying to get us to use their stupid codecs that is about as far as I'll go.

It gets tiring hearingpeople say "you need to get a Mac" cause that is plain nonsense. I am a musican and have been for the past 17 years. I've been writing, recording, editing, and mastering music on my PC systems for a little over 12 years now (Cubase, SoundForge, etc). I even have an album out on iTunes, Rhapsody, etc. It was all done on the PC and I couldn't have been happier. I also have done 3D Graphics for years and even got hired at a game company just based on them seeing my work online and contacting me with a job offer. I've worked in TrueSpace when I started then moved to 3D Studio Max. All this was on a PC and I couldn't have been happier. I've also done video editing here and there for years using mainly Adobe Premiere and now I'm playing around with Vegas Pro and I think Vegas is excellent. I have no problems editing and outputting MP4's, DVD's,and other formats all on my PC.

I don't have a Mac. I don't need a Mac. No one "needs" a Mac. Mac's are great, no doubt about it. I actually love Linux, which OSX is very similar to being a custom BSD based variant. But the fact is anyone that isn't a complete noob can figure out to download and install the FREE codec packs. You can go to download.com and find some excellent free codec packs that will enable a large range of format functionality.

Yes, the Mac comes with a large amount of creative software right off that bat and that's excellent for someone that wants a brand new PC with a lot of this stuff already in and ready to go. Most people already have computers and don't want to buy a whole new one and often don't need to to achieve what they want. With the inflated price of Macs however you CAN buy an equivalent PC *plus* the software you need to edit video.

So, that's my take on it. I'm living proof that the "you NEED a Mac" is misinformation. Mac's make it easier, true indeed, but whatever you can do on one you can pretty much do on the other. They even use the same hardware now!



Rev.
Rev2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2008, 12:28 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17
Default

Rev2010 wrote:
Quote:
So, that's my take on it. I'm living proof that the "you NEED a Mac" is misinformation. Mac's make it easier, true indeed, but whatever you can do on one you can pretty much do on the other. They even use the same hardware now!
That was my point. I didnt say one "must absolutely have a Mac or else you cant do these things." My point was that it DID in fact make it easier, ESPECIALLY concerning video editing. And yes, I'd say most pros do use them, even if you don't. And a lot of people arent like you & I. They dont know what codecs to install, they dont know what software they need, etc. There are many more of those types of people than there are people like us.

Look, I'm a fan of Windows, Mac & Linux. I use ALL OF THEM daily. I know their inner workings & what makes them tick. They all have their strengths & weaknesses. Macs are crappy at some things, but are better at handling media creation & editing. And its not just because "extra software comes loaded on them." Thats what people who have never owned a Mac usually say because thats all they see. Macs have always handled this stuff better. Thats basically what they're designed for. Windows is better at handling other things, media editing & creation not being one of them. This is all my opinion though. But many people share this opinion. But many people can also get by just fine without them too, as you can.

No misinformation here. I think I made that pretty clear in my previous post.
peestandingup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2008, 6:36 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Thank you for your opinions

I bought the camera, and as soon as I'm home, I think I will start doing some sort of review

thank you!
XoRDy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2008, 10:22 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Hi,

I'm still testing with the camera but I'mgetting i BIG disappointment

I thought the camera would use the lamp while recording video (I thought you told me that, that camera supported it). And that was the first thing I tried, I was searching where to enable it from 20 minutes, then I readed the manual and the forum, and saw that was in a great mistake...

I bought the camera for video-recording with the lamp, but it can only be used for taking photos...

Who on hel| did design an videocamera with an lamp that can't be used while recording?

Sounds stupid when you think on the bad quality of the photos :evil:

Photographies taken by videocameras as this, are as bad as photos with mobile-phones of halfa-price (with the difference, than them support flash in video with those tiny and useless leds)

By the way, I think it's sensible-enought for do what I want, but it's not he same...

Greetings.
XoRDy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2008, 11:05 AM   #16
Member
 
*derxxsfilmer*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 62
Default

Which cam did you bought, the hd1000?
Just read a post in the hd700 topic - last page - about an additional lamp.
Could be the thing you need.
*derxxsfilmer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2008, 2:14 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7
Default

There's another VERy, very annoying thing, the angle of view is ridiculous, in photo mode, the camera "sees" almost an 50 or 60% more than in video...

I'm very disappointed with this camera...

I've got an Canon A710IS and a Nokia 6280, and I have to put the Sanyo HD1000 ONE METER further than the others to get the same result... Is this the normal funcionality of the camera?

edit: this is what I'm talking about, see the file attached(there isn't any zoom on the camera.
Attached Images
 
XoRDy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2008, 9:02 AM   #18
Member
 
*derxxsfilmer*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 62
Default

Yes, the less fov in hd-video-mode is a little bit annoying, it´s the same with the hd700 and but almost other camcorder, I guess. You can handle it with a wide-angle lens adapter. There is a special topic here about the hd1000 and adapter lenses. The raynox hd5050 pro with a step down ring 40,5->37mm seems to be a good choice;
you can find a clip on vimeo about it - search hd1000.
I think generally it´s a great cam with a lot of manual options. Its Image quality (bigger lens, cmos-sensor) is much better than the hd700. The editing option on the hd1000/hd700 and the library function with an usb hd-drive is a great plus. Check it out.
*derxxsfilmer* 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 11:59 AM.