[ale] OT: camcorder/camera combos
Jeff Hubbs
hbbs at attbi.com
Fri Dec 13 13:26:14 EST 2002
For my part, I'm waiting for the Nikon interchangeable-lens dig-cams to
come down (and my income to go up) so I can port over all my for-Nikon
lenses.
- Jeff
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 10:19, Dow Hurst wrote:
> I really appreciate the nice explanation! So a big thanks on that!
>
> I can see for convenience a digital camera of reasonable quality is fun
> and fine for family vacations and knockabout photography. However, the
> reality seems to me to be that regular 35mm film and a high quality
> camera/lense would yield far higher quality output. The film could then
> be scanned at very high resolution for better digital prints, right? Is
> my thought process correct? Say that you wanted to take a picture of a
> landscape or object and blow it up into a poster. Wouldn't the process
> I just described yield a better picture than an affordable medium
> quality digital camera? Or would just totally sticking to the chemical
> world of regular film and standard techniques for making large posters
> be the best?
>
> I've been thinking about getting a digital camera but haven't due to
> wanting something with nicer lenses than I can afford. I remember from
> a previous posting that any digital camera that uses a standard memory
> card that can be put in one of those USB reader devices is pretty
> seamless under Linux since those reader devices look like a hard drive
> to the kernel. So the real question is whether a camera supports a
> media that a reader device can use, and what camera fits your needs in
> features and quality.
> Dow
>
>
> aaron wrote:
>
> >I think Eric's "Hi8 is analog" point was intended to help clarify the
> >definitions and was simply pointing out that Standard8, Hi8 and Digital8
> >are 3 different, independent signal and recording standards. Some
> >confusion arises in that products like the Sony Digital8 camcorders blur
> >the distinctions by supporting some functionality for all 3 standards of
> >8mm video tape.
> >
> >He was certainly correct in stating that the Hi8 format is entirely
> >analog. The fact that Digital8 is recorded on the same kind of metal
> >oxide tape cassettes as Hi8 or that a camcorder can play back or convert
> >between both standards is irrelevant to that.
> >
> >On a couple other points in the thread...
> >
> >I liked the CCD explanations, and they prompted a trip to:
> > http://www.howstuffworks.com/digital-camera.htm
> >...which also had some general answers to the original question:
> > http://www.howstuffworks.com/digital-camera38.htm
> >
> >Turns out the CCD descriptions were partly correct, but capacitive wells
> >are just part of the picture (pun intended) with these solid state analog
> >devices. The actual light sensitivity is provided by semi-conductor
> >diodes and are fairly similar to photovoltaic cells.
> >
> >Mostly the site confirmed what I knew already: that the resolution issues
> >of video and dedicated digital still cameras touch on a lot of factors. I
> >would be surprised to find many consumer Video cameras (for either
> >digital or analog recording formats) that employed a capture chain
> >producing more than 800x600 pixels, and I expect cost factors steer most
> >to 640x480 because that resolution is most consistent with common
> >standards for video signals and lossy digital encoding schemes. [For
> >those that may not know, the standard NTSC TV signal has a maximum,
> >physical vertical resolution of 482 pixels. The Euro PAL TV standard is
> >100 pixels better on usable vertical resolution, but the standard has a
> >"resolution" trade off of 5 fewer frames per second.] As a rule, the
> >"still photo" features of consumer Video cameras will be adequate for
> >small format prints and computer uses, but will not provide the
> >photographically oriented resolution that can be found in dedicated
> >digital still cameras. As near as I can determine, a 640x480 resolution
> >is roughly equivalent to a 1.6 "megapixel" rating on a still camera...
> >but my searches for exact numbers only confirmed that the marketroid
> >"megapixel" anti-standard value states the number of photo-sites on the
> >CCD of a device, while the true physical pixel resolution, color depth
> >and dynamic range of a device may only be loosely related to that number.
> >
> >As with just about everything, as quality goes up so does the price.
> >Industrial / Professional grade video cameras of higher cost and quality
> >will employ a beam splitter to 3 CCD's of greater physical area and
> >higher pixel counts, one CCD each for the RGB channels. As Eric also
> >correctly noted, the optics make a HUGE difference, and the better video
> >cameras employ true focus tracking 13 element zoom lenses made with
> >dichroic glass. All these factors greatly improve the effective
> >(interpolated) resolution, light sensitivity and color balance control of
> >the camera's capture chain. The last point of quality improvement with
> >more professional digital cameras is the use of higher bandwidth
> >recording formats with lower compression ratios (less than 5 to 1) that
> >don't discard most of the captured information before it even hits the
> >recording medium.
> >
> >Of course, the biggest marketroid myth is that "Digital" is somehow,
> >magically, always better quality, and in a whole lot of cases it simply
> >is not. Recording signals in digital form requires several times the
> >bandwidth of recording the same signals in analog, and there are a whole
> >lot of compromises being made to cram that digital bandwidth onto
> >increasing tiny formats. There are certainly a number of advantages to be
> >found with digital signal recording and processing, but these still come
> >at some cost.
> >
> >---
> >Sorry for the overkill, but these are areas I know a fair amount about.
> >
> >peace
> >aaron
> >
> >On Thursday 12 December 2002 09:02, Geoffrey wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Okay, so we're picking nits off of nits here. I'm a stickler for
> >>accuracy though so I'll throw out what the manual says and be done with
> >>it:
> >>
> >>With your digital camcorder, you can use Hi8/Digital8 video cassetes.
> >>Your camcorder records and plays back pictures in the Digital8 system.
> >>Also, you camcorder plays back tapes recorded in the Hi8/standard 8
> >>(analog) system. You, however cannot use the functions in "Advanced
> >>Playback Operations" on page 52 to 58 for playback in the Hi8/standard
> >>8 system. To enable smooth transition, we recommend that you do not
> >>mix pictures recorded in the Hi8/standard 8 with the Digital8 system on
> >>a tape.
> >>
> >>Eric Webb wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Thursday 12 December 2002 02:15 am, Geoffrey wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>Are you on crack? Hi8 is purely analog. miniDV is purely digital.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>Ah, not exactly true. My camera Sony trv730 is a digital camera but
> >>>>will accept either hi8 or standard 8 tapes. With standard 8 tapes,
> >>>>you get analog recording.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>There's a whole lotta crack smokin' tonight.
> >>>
> >>>I have a TRV330 and 530 myself. Read your manual again. While these
> >>>cameras may use either tape medium, the recording is in Digital8
> >>>format. All of these cameras (AFAIK) only PLAY the standard 8mm and
> >>>Hi8 analog formats -- they do not record in those formats.
> >>>
> >>>(Manual says that if you record on standard 8mm, you must play back
> >>>in same machine or you will get mosaic artifacting -- the fact that
> >>>it's a mosaic pattern alone tells you it's gonna record in digital
> >>>mode! The cheaper standard 8mm tape doesn't have the resolution that
> >>>Digital8 requires.)
> >>>
> >>>http://www.epinions.com/content_27278413444
> >>>
> >>>And even if it did, the fact that your camera would record analog on
> >>>a standard 8 tape doesn't disprove my original statement. It only
> >>>would mean that your camera supports multiple formats.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>-E.
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Ale mailing list
> >>>Ale at ale.org
> >>>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >>>
> >>>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Ale mailing list
> >Ale at ale.org
> >http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________________
> Dow Hurst Office: 770-499-3428
> Systems Support Specialist Fax: 770-423-6744
> 1000 Chastain Rd., Bldg. 12
> Chemistry Department SC428 Email:dhurst at kennesaw.edu
> Kennesaw State University Dow.Hurst at mindspring.com
> Kennesaw, GA 30144
> *********************************
> *Computational Chemistry is fun!*
> *********************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
More information about the Ale
mailing list