posted
I bought this new video camera and it has still image capabilities at 2.3 megapixel. You can insert a memory card to capture these and the video camera has a still camera mode.
Philosophically, I've been against this sort of thing all my life - it's why I use separate components for my audio system, for example (power amp, pre-amp, tuner, etc.).
Using a "built-in" camera or hybrid residual of a proper camera would normally seem pretty cave to me. BUT - while putting my new camera through it's initial paces, I decided to take some still images and see how they looked.
After taking about twenty or thirty shots (of girls and feet) I viewed them on the big screen - then uploaded them to my computer and even printed out an 8 X 10. The results surprised me (a LOT). I had to grudgingly admit, this was really not bad.
I can't believe I'm saying this (or even thinking it) but I'm starting to wonder if we should take the built-in still capabilities of modern video cameras seriously? I was actually able to get some results that are web and print-worthy, albeit from a 2.3MP camera with razor sharp optics.
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes indeed, modern (amateur and semi-professional)videocameras have vast capabilities of image capturing up to 1200 pixels.. even though the pixels do not get higher than 2 or maybe 3 Megapixels you get some good portions of high resolution images for web images, 10x15 printing images and collages. However, as with all things, everything is special on its kind. And videocameras are there for us to capture video (motion) images .. rather than still images. Although my camera has 1.3 megapixels and comparing it with my Canon digicam of 5 Megapixels I have to say that images of the videocamera are just for sampling reasons. After buying my Canon digicam and having seen the images from the videocamera it was like day-to-night results, i.e. big difference. Having no intention to disappoint you videocameras are for video recording and you should pay attention the fact that if same images would be taken with a digital photocam the results are way better and have more quality. Give it a try ... do some tests and I m sure you ll find the golden line between image quality and resolution. For example, try top resolution option with medium quality ... etc etc...
Most of what you are saying there is exactly my point. The right tool for the right job, and while I would never try to compare the "built-in" image camera capabilities of a video camera to a dedicated digital camera, I was very surprised the image quality was / is as good as what I've seen from this new camera of mine.
[ July 11, 2005, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Ben Del Amitri ]
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh yes sure! Dont get me wrong I agree with you! By all means new technology has raised standards and has created some state-of-the-art hitec gadgets... but I proceeded a little further than that to emphasise the fact that the right tool for the right job is the better job
PS: Something irrelevant --> Too bloody hot day today.. Temp reached 38 with a lot of humidity making it hard for everyone today. pfffffff
You are right of course (as usual). You mentioned a 5MP Canon digital camera. What model is that? I know they make some great digital cameras as well as camcorders. I have one of their photo printers and it is GREAT.
PS - Wow, that is HOT! Put that together with humidity and it's a wonder you can survive; but at least you are in a place that many of us just dream of visiting.
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
The digicam is Canon 1S-IS .. bought it 3 months ago.. and I m more than happy with every image it takes, whether web image, photo printing quality or even to create a poster.
That is a great camera. It's interesting that having so much zoom power is so rare on digital cameras, with 3x being something of an industry standard. I also like the way the camera looks and feels in your hand.
By the way - I am SO sorry for not getting a suggested pose of yours in the "Nurse with Feet" thing. By the time I read through all the posts on that I had already seen her.
So tell me which poses you'd like to see and I will get them next time around (maybe this week). I'm not as accomplished as many people in here so having suggestions and advice from others is really great.
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't worry about the requests Mr Ben. I dont normally request for anything because I think that the insticts and preferences of someone should not be tamed I tend to receive other people's tastes .. and so far I haven't been wrong
But you were going to suggest a pose and I'd still love to hear that suggestion. And besides - I have very little creative instinct and very few artistic abilities of my own.
[ July 13, 2005, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: Ben Del Amitri ]
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Home for a couple days and just saw this post, so thought I'd comment if I may...
Having fooled around with photo/video stuff for some time (anybody remember the ol' Commodore/Amiga "Video Toaster" days?), like you guys, I've also been impressed with the evolution of the hw. Although I'm no longer a Canon fan (having been badly burned on a vid-cam awhile back), I'd still have to say that their equipment is generally quality stuff. I used a couple F-1's for many years (back in the 35mm SLR days) and they were rock-solid.
Far as the quality of the still images you're getting from your vid-cam, Ben... wanted to say that I've had similar experiences, but from the other way around... We've got a Fuji Finepix S7000 (6.3mp) that we got a super deal on awhile ago... It's just a digital (i.e. "still") cam, but wow! you should see the video this thing takes... Only 640x480, but full NTSC 29.97fps with sound... and looks great. I was pretty surprised at just how good it looks. As long as you're using the Fuji/Olympus XD cards, that is... They seem a bit faster than the other cards. Kinda wish the cam had interchangeable lens capability & an external mic jack, but ahh well... All in all though, these hybrid cams are pretty darn slick, aren't they? ;-)
Posts: 521 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
I know all about Fuji. Great products and always at a reasonable price. That Finepix S7000 is a good example of this, it's a great camera.
The digital "movies" on that - a friend of mine (footgirl) went on a cruise vacation and came back with a video of her doing Karaoke; I was astonished to see video like that come from a "camera". I've also seen great video from the Sony Cybershot series and I love the fact that on many of those models, the length of video is limited only by your memory stick (as opposed to canned, thirty-second or sixty-second clips).
As to Canon, I will always be a fan of theirs and appreciative of their products. I've got their top of the line photo printer and it just blows me away each and every day.
Our footgirl Nikki bought a little ZR-200 mini DV camcorder for $269.00 at Fry's up here and I've been astounded at the results she's getting from that. She loves it because it's "cute", I love the fact that you can get results like she's getting at a 300-dollar price point (a lot of foot and feet recordings, by the way).
You are VERY right in saying "All in all though, these hybrid cams are pretty darn slick, aren't they? ;-)" ..... VERY good point and I guess that's what surprises me the most in all of this.
-------------------- Respectfully,
Ben
Malory in Signature Posts: 5772 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hiya guys... Hal... will try & post a clip for ya when I get home again... need to find a place to host it tho.
Ben... No doubt about it, as you've said, Canon makes some great gear. I used top-of-the-line Canon 35mm gear for many many years. My disillusionment at this point is simply rooted in having been one of the many folks who got rather badly burned in the 'bad cap' (bad capacitor) probs in their early A1 line of vid-cams. Ahh well. Just part of the hi-tech age (and gear) I guess... Abit had a similar prob with some of their mobo's not too long ago, as well.
I'm a huge fan of Panasonic (Matsu) gear... You can't go wrong there, IMHO. Great choice!
Far as the Fuji... the S7000 is pretty well loved around here... The girls really love it 'cause it's soooo easy to use. We got a really great deal on it that included 5gb of XD cards, so the girls shoot movie clips with it constantly (everything from washing the dog, to playin' softball, etc). Really been great so far. Amazing technology, no matter what brand/model really.
Don't know about you, but what I'm waitin' for now is a true 3D holographic imaging setup for home! ;-) Oooo baby!
Posts: 521 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
