Re: [videoblogging] The current best budget mic jacked cam?
David, Are you sure it shoots 300fps progressive? I couldn't find that anywhere in the specs. That would be very impressive. Adam On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:50 PM, David Jones david.jo...@altium.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 7:17 AM, David Jones david.jo...@altium.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Caleb Clark cale...@well.com wrote: Oh wise list. I've got $2000 to spend for a university on a documentation kit (photos for web site and printed brochures, YouTube channel videos of interviews and talks). I'm wishing for a dSLR that has a mic port, so I can buy just one camera, but it seems that might be a bit premature. I love Canon's FS200 type cameras (I actually like the tiny on camera fill LED light), but would prefer to stay away from AVCHD and just have a nice .mp4, .mov, or even .avi file to work with on Mac or PC basic editing platforms, but that's not crucial. I just have the feeling that AVCHD is so temporary...I don't need HD practically, but 16x9 I would like. Xacti's come to mind, if they aren't too wiggy with their UI and have some audio level control. One other thing I forgot to mention. I was going to get the Canon FS200, but the small sensor size turned me off. It's only got a tiny 1/6 CCD sensor (4.3mm^2), that's basically the smallest on the market. The Xacti on the other hand has a comparatively huge 1/2.5 CMOS sensor (25mm^2). See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format There is also a big difference in the lens. The Xacti has a huge fast F1.8 to F2.5 over a 10x zoom range, but the Canon has an inferior F2.0 to F5.2 over a (gimmicky) 37x zoom range. More zoom is NOT good, it just means a smaller sensor size and slower lens for a given zoom level. Those things can make a huge difference in lower light and other image performance issues. So for the same price as the FS200, with the Xacti I got full HD, Hot Shoe, much bigger lens and sensor, and 300fps high speed shooting (useful to me, useless for some). No contest IMO. Dave. Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] The current best budget mic jacked cam?
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Adam Quirk qu...@wreckandsalvage.com wrote: David, Are you sure it shoots 300fps progressive? I couldn't find that anywhere in the specs. That would be very impressive. The official specs are here, but it looks like they are incorrect (30fps instead of 300fps): http://us.sanyo.com/Digital-Camcorders/VPC-HD1010BK-Full-1080p-HD-Video-30fps-and-4MP-Photos Try here: http://www.testfreaks.com/digital-camcorders/sanyo-xacti-vpc-hd1010/ My Xacti HD-1010 does indeed do 448 x 336 (300 fps) in Web-SHR mode. I can record 10 seconds of video at this frame rate. See here for some high speed footage I shot: http://www.eevblog.com/2009/11/04/eevblog-42-exploding-capacitors-in-high-speed/ But this is an old model, the new HD2000 model can do 600fps at a smaller size: http://sanyo.com/xacti/english/products/vpc_hd2000/spec.html Dave.
[videoblogging] The current best budget mic jacked cam?
Oh wise list. I've got $2000 to spend for a university on a documentation kit (photos for web site and printed brochures, YouTube channel videos of interviews and talks). I'm wishing for a dSLR that has a mic port, so I can buy just one camera, but it seems that might be a bit premature. I love Canon's FS200 type cameras (I actually like the tiny on camera fill LED light), but would prefer to stay away from AVCHD and just have a nice .mp4, .mov, or even .avi file to work with on Mac or PC basic editing platforms, but that's not crucial. I just have the feeling that AVCHD is so temporary...I don't need HD practically, but 16x9 I would like. Xacti's come to mind, if they aren't too wiggy with their UI and have some audio level control. I guess if no magic dSLR is out there with a mic port, for under 2K with a tripod I'll go Canon Vixia with a SD Powershot still... Thoughts? Thank you. -- ~ Caleb Clark - Program Director, Marlboro College Graduate School: http://gradcenter.marlboro.edu/academics/mat/faculty - Portfolio: http://www.plocktau.com The problem with communication is the assumption it has been accomplished. - G. B. Shaw. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] The current best budget mic jacked cam?
Christian Payne (@documentally) showed me his point and shoot Lumix the other day - shoots great looking video. The Lumix GH1 compact DSLR is $1500, shoots 720p 1080p at 60fps 24fps and has a Mic jack. http://www.adorama.com/alc/article/Product-Review-Panasonic-Lumix-GH1 On 30-Nov-09, at 5:55 PM, Caleb Clark wrote: Oh wise list. I've got $2000 to spend for a university on a documentation kit (photos for web site and printed brochures, YouTube channel videos of interviews and talks). I'm wishing for a dSLR that has a mic port, so I can buy just one camera, but it seems that might be a bit premature. I love Canon's FS200 type cameras (I actually like the tiny on camera fill LED light), but would prefer to stay away from AVCHD and just have a nice .mp4, .mov, or even .avi file to work with on Mac or PC basic editing platforms, but that's not crucial. I just have the feeling that AVCHD is so temporary...I don't need HD practically, but 16x9 I would like. Xacti's come to mind, if they aren't too wiggy with their UI and have some audio level control. I guess if no magic dSLR is out there with a mic port, for under 2K with a tripod I'll go Canon Vixia with a SD Powershot still... Thoughts? Thank you. -- ~ Caleb Clark - Program Director, Marlboro College Graduate School: http://gradcenter.marlboro.edu/academics/mat/faculty - Portfolio: http://www.plocktau.com The problem with communication is the assumption it has been accomplished. - G. B. Shaw. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] The current best budget mic jacked cam?
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Caleb Clark cale...@well.com wrote: Oh wise list. I've got $2000 to spend for a university on a documentation kit (photos for web site and printed brochures, YouTube channel videos of interviews and talks). I'm wishing for a dSLR that has a mic port, so I can buy just one camera, but it seems that might be a bit premature. I love Canon's FS200 type cameras (I actually like the tiny on camera fill LED light), but would prefer to stay away from AVCHD and just have a nice .mp4, .mov, or even .avi file to work with on Mac or PC basic editing platforms, but that's not crucial. I just have the feeling that AVCHD is so temporary...I don't need HD practically, but 16x9 I would like. Xacti's come to mind, if they aren't too wiggy with their UI and have some audio level control. I got an Xacti HD-1010 that cost me $400 a few months back, The HD-2000 is the latest model, that's around $500 I think. Very nice cam that gives great results for the money. Yes, it has an external mic port and audio input level adjust (course low/mid/high type thing). No on-screen signal level meter though, but it has a headphone port that makes up for that (I don't use it though) Hot shoe attachment for external mic is handy. Great range of shooting options for size/quality. Nice big bright fast lens, I doubt you'll get better quality optics on any sub $1000 camcorder. The MP4's it outputs load directly into my Ulead VideoStudio package no problems. The autofocus can be a bit touchy with moving objects. The head/face tracking mode works. Works well in low light indoors environments. Forget all the talk about the UI being crap, it it perfectly fine and understandable, works more like a still camera and not like a camcorder, that's why people get confused with it. And the joystick thing works just fine. It also comes an IR remote that also operates the menus. I expect the worst after the reviews, but I've had no problems with it at all. Forget internal LED lights, they are all but useless, little more than a gimmick. If you need external lighting, get good quality external lighting and attach to the hot-shoe. See my blog for examples: http://www.eevblog.com Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] The current best budget mic jacked cam?
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 7:17 AM, David Jones david.jo...@altium.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Caleb Clark cale...@well.com wrote: Oh wise list. I've got $2000 to spend for a university on a documentation kit (photos for web site and printed brochures, YouTube channel videos of interviews and talks). I'm wishing for a dSLR that has a mic port, so I can buy just one camera, but it seems that might be a bit premature. I love Canon's FS200 type cameras (I actually like the tiny on camera fill LED light), but would prefer to stay away from AVCHD and just have a nice .mp4, .mov, or even .avi file to work with on Mac or PC basic editing platforms, but that's not crucial. I just have the feeling that AVCHD is so temporary...I don't need HD practically, but 16x9 I would like. Xacti's come to mind, if they aren't too wiggy with their UI and have some audio level control. One other thing I forgot to mention. I was going to get the Canon FS200, but the small sensor size turned me off. It's only got a tiny 1/6 CCD sensor (4.3mm^2), that's basically the smallest on the market. The Xacti on the other hand has a comparatively huge 1/2.5 CMOS sensor (25mm^2). See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format There is also a big difference in the lens. The Xacti has a huge fast F1.8 to F2.5 over a 10x zoom range, but the Canon has an inferior F2.0 to F5.2 over a (gimmicky) 37x zoom range. More zoom is NOT good, it just means a smaller sensor size and slower lens for a given zoom level. Those things can make a huge difference in lower light and other image performance issues. So for the same price as the FS200, with the Xacti I got full HD, Hot Shoe, much bigger lens and sensor, and 300fps high speed shooting (useful to me, useless for some). No contest IMO. Dave.
