Still cam question

Chamber005

Chamber005

Carbonite Member
Wasn't sure where to ask this question -- Panny forums don't really have a place for still cams.

I've had this Panasonic DMC FX3 digi still cam for a while that shoots video onto SD cards. For the life of me I can't figure out the specs (as to what the video would be comparable to in tech terms).

The specs say it has a 1/2.5 sensor, CCD, shoots 30fps and the video capture is QuickTime - 848 x 480.

The picture appears to be better than my old Canon miniDV 1/4" CCD camcorder, but I've never heard of a 1/2.5" CCD.

Overall I've got no experience with still cam's video, so I don't know if it's gauged the same way, or...

Thanks!
 
Okay -- so I found out that it's recording VGA. But what doesn't make any sense is that the picture out of the still camera looks better than the picture from the miniDV cam and is on par with an old 3 CCD DSR200 I've got lying around. I even put the footage from the still cam on my 43" pioneer and it still looks better than most SD footage I've seen online.

Can anyone explain this? How can VGA from a still cam look better than SD/DV? Is it something to do with the chip size, or...? Thanks!
 
It's the same resolution as DV,. A 1/2.5" sensor built for a still camera would probably be enough to beat out some low end video, and it looks like that's a pretty new camera; so recent generation technology from Panasonic, a company that excels at getting high quality on a budget. Lenses tend to suck on both kinds of cameras.

The only thing that seems odd is that the compression would still be quality footage. I'm sure it's compressed pretty heavily, but I guess efficiently. So it's possible, looking at the specs for that camera, and I wouldn't be hugely surprised. Which old Canon camera are you comparing it to?
 
A canon ZR20 (yeah). But the DSR200, while old, was definately super high DV Cam when it came out 10 years ago -- that's the better comparison, I think.
 
I guess I still don't understand the whole chip set thing. I mean, do these still cams have 3 CCDs and 1 CMOS like the prosumer camcorders, or do they have 1 CCD or 1 CMOS? And do megapixels come into play on prosumer cameras or just still cams? Brain freeze...
 
Dv is also vga resolution so i don't see what's so odd. I'm confused though, in your first post you clearly state the resolution and in your second you've "found out" that it's vga, but 480 pixels is exactly what vga is, and again all sd video including digibeta, dvd and dv (in ntsc). As for megapixels 848x480 is 0.4 mp, just do the math. The video is never more than that even if shot with a 12mp sensor.
 
Last edited:
mattsand said:
Dv is also vga resolution so i don't see what's so odd. I'm confused though, in your first post you clearly state the resolution and in your second you've "found out" that it's vga, but 480 pixels is exactly what vga is, and again all sd video including digibeta, dvd and dv (in ntsc). As for megapixels 848x480 is 0.4 mp, just do the math. The video is never more than that even if shot with a 12mp sensor.
Click to expand...


Yeah, literally every day is a learning process for me in the technical aspects of video capturing. I've done a lot of research on HD and 1080i, 1080p and 720p, but literally had no idea what VGA was.

But now that I understand digital video is VGA (which wasn't exactly what I've read in my research. I read that the hierachy places VGA just below digital video -- but who knows, the source of the information could have been corrupt, some one or something trying to sell a product or defend a product that they own?) I can try "doing the math".

You're saying the sensor is referenced in megapixels? I thought the sensor was regarded in the device's chip set (e.g. 1/4", 1/2", CCD/CMOS etc.) You're saying that I should look at 480/720/1080 as the device's sensory megapixels?

And again -- do these still cameras operate on a single chip, or are all cameras who utilize CCDs always grouped in threes? I'd never seen a 1/2.5" CCD chip listed before so it was confusing out of the gate, but then when I saw the video capture and it looked as good (if not better) than my old 3 1/3" CCD DSR200, I just don't get it -- unless this still cam has 3 1/2.5" CCDs, which seems so unlikely!

Any thoughts on this?

:undecided
 
The math is the number of horizontal pixels multiplied by the vertical, the result is the number of pixels, divide by a million and you have the megapixels. Dv doesn't mean digital video, except literally, it's a specific format and it's 720x480 pixels. This is really way less complicated than you think.
 
mattsand said:
The math is the number of horizontal pixels multiplied by the vertical, the result is the number of pixels, divide by a million and you have the megapixels. Dv doesn't mean digital video, except literally, it's a specific format and it's 720x480 pixels. This is really way less complicated than you think.
Click to expand...


Okay...so,

A) Since this still cam records at 848 x 480, it's better (more pixels) than DV, correct? That's why it has a better picture than both cams?

B) What about the chip set? These are all CCD cams. (1/4", 1/3" and 1/2.5" respectively). Does the still cam have 3 1/2.5" CCDs or just one (or is that a non-question as is having one even possible or are CCDs always grouped in threes?)

Thanks!
 
There are simply many other factors that determine quality like optics, noise levels, color fidelity and so on, you can't really tell much by looking at the specs. Try a camera and if you like it there you go. All you need to know.
 
mattsand said:
There are simply many other factors that determine quality like optics, noise levels, color fidelity and so on, you can't really tell much by looking at the specs. Try a camera and if you like it there you go. All you need to know.
Click to expand...


Yeah, no -- I get that. I guess I just still don't have a grasp on how CCDs work. I mean, CMOS I pretty much understand. I think of CMOS as "progressive scan" and CCD as "interlaced". So when something (like this still cam) has only one CCD, I just can't quite grasp the concept. Maybe I'm interpreting it all incorrectly?
 
using three sensors is just to get three separate images of red, green and blue, there are three cmos cameras too. one sensor cameras, cmos or ccd, use a grid pattern of color filters to get the same result. i'm not sure what you mean by interlaced and progressive, that's a separate issue altogether.

/matt
 
mattsand said:
using three sensors is just to get three separate images of red, green and blue, there are three cmos cameras too. one sensor cameras, cmos or ccd, use a grid pattern of color filters to get the same result. i'm not sure what you mean by interlaced and progressive, that's a separate issue altogether.

/matt
Click to expand...


No, I know it's a different issue (p vs i), I just always understood CMOS as recording the entire image and CCD grabbing the image in parts. Another misconception on my part, I guess. Thanks!
 
i honestly understand less and less what your question is. if you already know how a one sensor camera can be better than a multi sensor one, why do you want to know how it's possible? and if you know that it's not interlaced why do you "think of it" that way?

/matt
 
A CCD is a plate of silicon with circuitry on it. Silicon is naturally photovoltaic; when light hits it, it changes that light to voltage. In a three chip camera (which is a video thing), the colors of light are separated by a precise prism. They each hit their own CCD. This results in the most defined color space. One chips tend to be a little more washed out since the interpretation of colors is less reliable. That answers the one question.

Two CCD's doesn't happen, since one would have to get two colors. which would be weird. One channel would be stronger than the other two.

CMOS is a different way of getting images, but I'm not going to explain it since I have slightly less understanding on that front. But they do the same thing, just in different ways.

I also am not sure what else you're looking for at this point, if anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top