Q. I am particularly interested in picture quality (nothing else). Especially the pixel count and perhaps the speed at which it records which will affect the quality when it is put into slow motion.
A. Well, you can rule out Aiptek... they only make low-quality toy camcorders.
Pixel count isn't that important for video in camcorders, because there are only a few options, and they're tied to the standards. Standard definition camcorders record at 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL), regardless of the size of the sensor in pixels (many consumer camcorders have many pixels, to improve color and give you a better digital still camera function). HD camcorders recorder at either 1280x720, 1440x1080, or 1920x1080 (the latter only on tapeless camcorders).
Very few camcorders have any sort of slow motion mode. You get slow motion when you shoot at one rate (in frames per second) and replay that slower.. but if you replay much below 24 fps, the video will look jerky. So faster fps = better slo-mo. And you will find, in the few cameras that do slo-mo at a consumer price, the pixel count does start to drop.
Some pro models offer full video at 60fps, which lest you do 1/2 rate slo-mo at full video quality, as long as your flash cards hold out. But unless you're thinking of spending $5000 or more, this is not for you.
But don't fret... 60fps is starting to enter the consumer world. One such option is the Sanyo Xacti 1010. This is an HD camcorder that records in MPEG-4 on flash. It's not the absolute best quality around, but it's decent. And it can record at 720p (1280x720) at a full 60fps. This is under $700 online.
To go beyond that on a consumer budget, there are a few weird choices. Sony offers a very short burst high-speed mode on some of their camcorders. They call this "Smooth Slow" recording mode, and it can go to 120fps-200fps, depending on the camera model. This is supported in both pro/prosumer (HVR-V1, HVR-Z7, others) and consumer (HDR-CX7, HDR-HC3, others) models. This is always at a much lower resolution, good for YouTube but little else. And you're limited to bursts of about 3 seconds real-time.
Another interesting option isn't a camcorder at all, but Casio's new digital still camera, the Exlim Pro EX-F1 (about $1000) http://www.exilim.com/intl/ex_f1/. Most digital still cameras these days have a video mode, but it's usually at best standard-def at 30fps, maybe a tad better. But the EX-F1 has several high-frame rate video modes. It can actually shoot near SD-quality (512 � 384) at 300 fps, 432�192 at 600 fps, or 336�96 at 1200 fps.. it also does standard High-def. And this is continuous, up to memory or file limits, not just short bursts. If you're really serious about high-speed filming on a consumer budget, this is your best bet.
Pixel count isn't that important for video in camcorders, because there are only a few options, and they're tied to the standards. Standard definition camcorders record at 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL), regardless of the size of the sensor in pixels (many consumer camcorders have many pixels, to improve color and give you a better digital still camera function). HD camcorders recorder at either 1280x720, 1440x1080, or 1920x1080 (the latter only on tapeless camcorders).
Very few camcorders have any sort of slow motion mode. You get slow motion when you shoot at one rate (in frames per second) and replay that slower.. but if you replay much below 24 fps, the video will look jerky. So faster fps = better slo-mo. And you will find, in the few cameras that do slo-mo at a consumer price, the pixel count does start to drop.
Some pro models offer full video at 60fps, which lest you do 1/2 rate slo-mo at full video quality, as long as your flash cards hold out. But unless you're thinking of spending $5000 or more, this is not for you.
But don't fret... 60fps is starting to enter the consumer world. One such option is the Sanyo Xacti 1010. This is an HD camcorder that records in MPEG-4 on flash. It's not the absolute best quality around, but it's decent. And it can record at 720p (1280x720) at a full 60fps. This is under $700 online.
To go beyond that on a consumer budget, there are a few weird choices. Sony offers a very short burst high-speed mode on some of their camcorders. They call this "Smooth Slow" recording mode, and it can go to 120fps-200fps, depending on the camera model. This is supported in both pro/prosumer (HVR-V1, HVR-Z7, others) and consumer (HDR-CX7, HDR-HC3, others) models. This is always at a much lower resolution, good for YouTube but little else. And you're limited to bursts of about 3 seconds real-time.
Another interesting option isn't a camcorder at all, but Casio's new digital still camera, the Exlim Pro EX-F1 (about $1000) http://www.exilim.com/intl/ex_f1/. Most digital still cameras these days have a video mode, but it's usually at best standard-def at 30fps, maybe a tad better. But the EX-F1 has several high-frame rate video modes. It can actually shoot near SD-quality (512 � 384) at 300 fps, 432�192 at 600 fps, or 336�96 at 1200 fps.. it also does standard High-def. And this is continuous, up to memory or file limits, not just short bursts. If you're really serious about high-speed filming on a consumer budget, this is your best bet.
digital camera good enough for movie making?
Q. im looking to get a digital camera 5000 or under to start a hobby and movie making. i was thinking the Canon EOS 5D Mark III would be a nice purchase? would there be something better, tips or pointers?
A. For movie making specifically skip a DSLR altogether. Look into the Sony NEX FS100UK with a Super 35mm sensor or a similar camera in that price range. You will need to add a lens but you can get an 11x zoom lens from Sony with the camera for an additional $600. You can make a movie with a $109 Canon A1300 but you won't get "Hollywood" quality - for that be prepared to spend even more than $5,000 - closer to $10,000 and more for all the stuff you will need to go with it - software, lighting, a computer with huge hard drives, etc.
The person who said Canon 5D Mk III is better for video might not know that the Nikon D800 has superior autofocus to the Mk III. Nikon has finally caught up. You will need to buy extra accessories to do video so by the time you add it all in you might have spent just as much as buying a video camera. You are also limited to 4 GB file sizes in a DSLR due to trade tariffs (I think) so if you want to make a video longer than 30 minutes that is not interrupted you need to go with a camcorder anyway.
The person who said Canon 5D Mk III is better for video might not know that the Nikon D800 has superior autofocus to the Mk III. Nikon has finally caught up. You will need to buy extra accessories to do video so by the time you add it all in you might have spent just as much as buying a video camera. You are also limited to 4 GB file sizes in a DSLR due to trade tariffs (I think) so if you want to make a video longer than 30 minutes that is not interrupted you need to go with a camcorder anyway.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar