Suggestions for digital camera which has 1920x1080 video
James Egan
I'm interested in one which can take 1080p HD video, that's hopefully
under $700. Any recommendations or useful information would be much
appreciated.
J�rgen Exner
You may want to ask in NG that actually deals with video cameras rather
then still photos.
jue
Alfred Molon
says...
He is looking for a camera with video function, not for a videocamera.
By the way, the lines are blurring between cameras and video cameras.
Video cameras can now capture high res stills (9MP is possible for
instance) and cameras are able to capture high res video.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
tn...@mucks.net
There is no such group
ransley
Maybe next year. I dont know of any yet in your price range you will
be happy with, a Canon Rebel does 1080p but only at 20 frames a
minute. The 5 D does it for near 3000.00 tax included at a good frame
rate. Check out dp review. Video at a high resolution and fame rate
will eat your card up fast. But get a video camera if video will be
done alot as a few important features can be missing, like focusing,
image stabilisation, so you might get your 1080p camera only to find
it wont change focus, exposure or have stabilisation like a dedicated
video camera. Review it and try it before you buy it. The rebel t1i
does 720p at 30 fpm but may not have all the features you need.
Randal L. Schwartz
ransley> Maybe next year. I dont know of any yet in your price range you will
ransley> be happy with, a Canon Rebel does 1080p but only at 20 frames a
ransley> minute. The 5 D does it for near 3000.00 tax included at a good frame
ransley> rate.
My Canon 7D does 1080p at 30 or 24 frames per second (my choice) until the 4GB
boundary is hit (stupid MSDOS FAT filesystem), which means about 12 minutes
per take. And it's a bit cheaper than the 5D. :)
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<mer...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion
Better Info
George Kerby
On 11/24/09 6:20 AM, in article
8e670536-4861-4938...@p32g2000vbi.googlegroups.com, "ransley"
<Mark_R...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 23, 9:43�pm, James Egan <jegan...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I have a digital camera which takes 720p video, which looks pretty good. �
>> I'm interested in one which can take 1080p HD video, that's hopefully
>> under $700. �Any recommendations or useful information would be much
>> appreciated.
>
> Maybe next year. I dont know of any yet in your price range you will
> be happy with, a Canon Rebel does 1080p but only at 20 frames a
> minute.
???? Keystone Kops?
James Egan
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonSX1IS/page10.asp
Thanks, that's definitely a contender.
Fred McKenzie
mer...@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
> My Canon 7D does 1080p at 30 or 24 frames per second (my choice) until the 4GB
> boundary is hit (stupid MSDOS FAT filesystem), which means about 12 minutes
> per take.
Randal-
I understood the rationale for a 4GB limit, was that was how much would
fit on a DVD. I wonder if the DVD limit was based on the FAT Filesystem?
Fred
Charles G
Seems there's quite a few in the Panasonic Lumix line that also do 1080p.
From their new interchangeable micro-4/3 format to the waterproof compacts.
David J Taylor
news:fmmck-0B6C36....@freenews.netfront.net...
[]
> I understood the rationale for a 4GB limit, was that was how much would
> fit on a DVD. I wonder if the DVD limit was based on the FAT
> Filesystem?
>
> Fred
No, the CD and DVD format is a separate one, CDFS and UDF respectively:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_9660
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Disk_Format
Cheers,
David
Wolfgang Weisselberg
> I understood the rationale for a 4GB limit, was that was how much would
> fit on a DVD.
Actually, you can fit 4,38 GiB (4.7 GB in marketing speech or
'hard disk size') on a single side, single layer, 12 cm DVD,
7,92 GiB (8,5 GB) on a single side, dual layer DVD and 15,84 GiB
(17 GB) on a double side, dual layer DVD ...
> I wonder if the DVD limit was based on the FAT Filesystem?
So, nope, the limit is not based on FAT.
-Wolfgang
Pete D
"Randal L. Schwartz" <mer...@stonehenge.com> wrote in message
news:867htf4...@blue.stonehenge.com...
>>>>>> "ransley" == ransley <Mark_R...@Yahoo.com> writes:
>
> ransley> Maybe next year. I dont know of any yet in your price range you
> will
> ransley> be happy with, a Canon Rebel does 1080p but only at 20 frames a
> ransley> minute. The 5 D does it for near 3000.00 tax included at a good
> frame
> ransley> rate.
>
> My Canon 7D does 1080p at 30 or 24 frames per second (my choice) until the
> 4GB
> boundary is hit (stupid MSDOS FAT filesystem), which means about 12
> minutes
> per take. And it's a bit cheaper than the 5D. :)
>
Better Info
Plus the Canon 7D DSLR doesn't even produce image quality as good as P&S
cameras today. The G9 from two years ago and G11 P&S camera from this year
both surpass this year's 7D DSLR in image performance.
Ray Fischer
>On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:27:23 +1100, "Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Randal L. Schwartz" <mer...@stonehenge.com> wrote in message
>>news:867htf4...@blue.stonehenge.com...
>>>>>>>> "ransley" == ransley <Mark_R...@Yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>> ransley> Maybe next year. I dont know of any yet in your price range you
>>> will
>>> ransley> be happy with, a Canon Rebel does 1080p but only at 20 frames a
>>> ransley> minute. The 5 D does it for near 3000.00 tax included at a good
>>> frame
>>> ransley> rate.
>>>
>>> My Canon 7D does 1080p at 30 or 24 frames per second (my choice) until the
>>> 4GB
>>> boundary is hit (stupid MSDOS FAT filesystem), which means about 12
>>> minutes
>>> per take. And it's a bit cheaper than the 5D. :)
>>>
>>But not very close to the OPs $700 budget..........
>
>Plus the Canon 7D DSLR doesn't even produce image quality as good as P&S
Go away, asshole troll.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Randal L. Schwartz
Better> Plus the Canon 7D DSLR doesn't even produce image quality as good as
Better> P&S cameras today. The G9 from two years ago and G11 P&S camera from
Better> this year both surpass this year's 7D DSLR in image performance.
I'm really suspicious of any review that doesn't do an angle-for-angle
comparison of the 7D vs other options. They keep doing pixel-for-pixel
comparisons, and that's gonna fail, because there's just not the same
amount of light falling on each of the 7D's pixels.
In other words, shoot a picture where an object extends exactly across the
entire view from bottom to top, with both the 7D and the 50D. And
then resize the 50D image to be 18 MP, or downsize the 7D image
to be 12 MP. And apply recommended sharpening on both.
I think you'll find that they're comparable, if not identical.