The only reason I use my Kodak Zi8 and Zi6 is because I feel comfortable using them. The quality only comes into play when I want to do something for my family.
Ernmander On 23/10/2009 14:16, "Rupert Howe" <rup...@twittervlog.tv> wrote: > > > > > OK. I've got to get this off my chest. > > I think that HD is massively overrated for shooting videoblog posts of > people talking. > Or even videoblog posts of pretty things. > That beautiful video I posted by Jay the other day, with all those > super detailed little moving photographic moments - that was 320x240. > > If you're Robert Croma, and you're doing something insanely visually > beautiful at a large scale, great. > > But it's about the skill and artistry, not the resolution. Liss > produces more beauty than most of us can handle, at 640x360. Speakman > at 320x240. > > If you only want a cheap pocket camera for videoblogging, why is > resolution your priority? > > Why not get a camera that shoots much better images and colours at > lower res video? > > And is great in Low Light - surely one of the most important things of > all for videoblogging? > > I've always been impressed by the visuals and low light capabilities > of the good Canon point and shoots. Although they are getting sucked > into HD now. > > Nokia's blogger marketing people sent me a Nokia N86, which their ex- > Kodak imaging chief has put a lot of effort into - a beautiful Zeiss > lens and great processor. Shoots lovely video at 640x480, and great > photographs at 8MP. Or even 5MP. That's a *phone* that shoots better > quality video than your Kodak or your Flip. > > If you're not convinced by any of that, but you believe in energy > conservation and limiting your emissions, then consider this: a report > by McKinsey published before the explosion in HD video predicted that > data centers would outstrip airlines in carbon emissions by 2020. > Think about the energy costs of uploading *and* transcoding *and* > storing *and* delivering all the multiple formats of your video > (YouTube converts to and stores 3 copies: flv, mp4, HD) hundreds or > thousands of times. And the power required by your computer to edit > and playback HD. All to see your face in 1920x1080. > > RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA > > Rupert > http://twittervlog.tv > > On 23-Oct-09, at 1:10 PM, compumavengal wrote: > >> > I'd like to bring something up that is often forgotten about under >> > $200 camcorders. These camcorders were originally designed for point >> > and shoot users. >> > >> > Having said that the features of the Zi8 are stunning: >> > >> > # 1080p (1920 × 1080, 30 fps) >> > # 720p/60 fps (1280 × 720, 60 fps) >> > # 720p (1280 × 720, 30 fps) >> > USB 2.0 (high speed), AV out, HDMI, DC in, external microphone jack >> > (support stereo) >> > >> > in an under $200 camcorder. I don't expect it to do low light >> > shooting. I don't have expectation of white balancing. There is no >> > optical zoom. I won't ever use the digital zoom. >> > >> > I've owned a Xacti camcorder, never a problem with it. I have a Zi6 >> > and I love it. But I understand the constrictions these camcorders >> > by imposes on me. >> > >> > If I shoot hand held I'm gonna get jerky video unless I'm really >> > careful. I have to be next to the person I'm talking to or no more >> > than 4 feet away. >> > >> > I have to be creative in finding ways to stabilize the camcorder as >> > I walk; like having the camcorder on a very small tripod braced in a >> > handbag pocket. This may or may not work for you. >> > >> > If I am recording an event or lecture I'm taking my 30x optical zoom >> > JVC Hard Drive Camcorder and a tripod. >> > >> > My point is that comparing $1,200 features to a $200 camcorder is >> > inherently frustrating. >> > >> > If you need more stuff then you'll have to willing to jump to the >> > next price class. >> > >> > Gena >> > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com >> > http://createvideonotebook.blogspot.com >> > >> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com >> <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> , David Jones <david.jo...@...> >> > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > My quest for a cheap new videoblogging camera continues... >>> > > I came across the Kodak Zi8 HD pocket camcorder: >>> > > >>> http://store.kodak.com/store/ekconsus/en_US/pd/Zi8_Pocket_Video_Camera/produ >>> ctID.156585800 >>> > > Test footage looks really good: >>> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX-raL4iQoY >>> > > and the main benefit is that it has an external mic jack. >>> > > It even has a remote which is essential for solo video blogging. >>> > > Only downside seems to be lack of swivel head, so I won't be able to >>> > > see myself in the video. That would be annoying, but not a >>> > > showstopper. At least it would stop me looking off-lens all the >>> > > time... >>> > > >>> > > The real test will always under my own conditions of course, I shoot >>> > > in mostly the same location indoors in a fluoro lit workshop. >>> > > >>> > > I was considering the Canon FS200 SD card camcorder (looking for >>> > > second hand because new is out of my price range), but the sensor is >>> > > only 1/6" so most likely has fairly horrible low light performance, >>> > > and the reviews mention this as well. >>> > > >>> > > I don't need the full HD, but 720 HD would be nice. >>> > > >>> > > Any comments on the Zi8 for video blogging? >>> > > Anyone know of any other pocket video cams with an external mic jack >>> > > like the Zi8? >>> > > >>> > > My current cam is an old Canon Optura60 DV (NTSC), not exactly a >>> > > stand-out performer, so I figure a good pocket cam today will likely >>> > > beat it. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks >>> > > Dave. >>> > > >> > >> > >> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
