On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Rupert Howe <rup...@twittervlog.tv> wrote: > 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?
I think people are getting a little off-track with my original post and needs. I'm not thinking of buying this for the HD component, I couldn't care less about HD really. I do a "talking head" blog (www.eevblog.com) in fairly low light indoors fluoro environment, I don't need the camera for anything else. HD is a nice bonus though because I currently shoot 720x480 DV in 4:3 mode and this gets translated into 640x480 for YouTube upload and 320x240 for my iTunes podcast. HD would allow me to shoot in 16:9 so it comes up full window on YouTube, that's the main benefit for me, not the actual resolution as such. Croped widescreen on DV does not translate into proper widescreen on Youtube using my Ulead editing software, so this is why I currently stick to 4:3 aspect. I'd be happy with a cam that shoots 640x480, but it's got to have external mix, SD card, macro focus, and decent low light performance. Sub AU$300 was my price target. If someone can point me to another model that meets my requirements other than the Zi8 then I'd be very happy to hear about it. > 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? Can you recommend one that has SD card support and external mic connection? > 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. But no external mic, that's a #1 requirement for me. > 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. There is no way I'd ever use full HD, that's just silly. 1280 × 720 is more than plenty, and so would be the WXGA mode of the Zi8. But as it turns out, I think I might have a bit more to spend, so the Sanyo Xacti might be a possibility at the $450 or less price point. Thanks Dave.
