Shooting video with still camera v. camcorder

[Taxgeek]

Hi all, I'm new here, have been reading alot of your excellent advice!

Here's my issue: I'm currently shooting underwater video with a canon P&S digital camera - the Canon S1 IS. It shoots 640x480 (which I gather to be equivalent to "480 lines"???) at 30fps. The quality seems really good, but I don't have anything to actually compare it to. It's a compact little setup, easy to use, great optical zoom, image stabilization works beautifully underwater. I can get 8 min of continuous video on my 1gig cards, 16 minutes I presume if I upgraded to 2 gig cards - plenty for each dive, so far anyway. (I'm not using lights just yet, but I may not be able to restrain myself much longer. )

What I can't find is a description of what exactly would be better if I went to a better camcorder - even say a 3 ccd camcorder. Can anybody explain that for me? It seems like 640 x 480 (or so) is what the NLE is going to resize to anyway for DVD recording, is it not? I'm soooo confused! :06:

I know that one advantage would be the availability of manual white balance. But what else? I'm shooting for fun only, not profit, but at the same time, I want to get the best quality footage I can. I don't shoot still photos at all, the S1 (imho) has too much shutter lag and too much noise for that.

Trying to figure out if there would be a serious benefit to upgrading and spending the moolah, or whether I should just spend the money on a housing for my dSLR still camera.

Thanks in advance for any advice, and sorry for all the smilies, I just couldn't resist!
Taxgeek

 

[teksimple]

What I can't find is a description of what exactly would be better if I went to a better camcorder - even say a 3 ccd camcorder. Can anybody explain that for me?

That is a good question, and one that got my curiosity up. Now, it makes sense that a lot of the bulk of a camcorder is the recording mechanism: the video tape recorder. Take out the VTR of a digital camcorder, and you have a digital camera: which consists of the lens and the imaging device. The latter is the CCD (Charge Coupled Device) which converts the light photons into electrical currents which then are recorded onto some medium. Your Canon has a solid-state recording medium (memory card) which allows you to record video without the bulk of a VTR device.

So why do people use camcorders anymore when solid-state recording media is so well refined? Well, it may be refined, but it is still expensive. 1GB of solid-state recording media is still much more expensive than the equivalent storage capacity on digital video tape.

Your Canon records video in the AVI format. To get 8 minutes of video on a 1GB card, it uses compression technology, just like a regular digital camcorder. But 8 minutes of video on 1GB seems normal, that does not reflect a large amount of compression. So you would think that the video would be OK, everything else being the same.

So then I took a look at the specs on your Canon, here:

Canon S1 IS Spec Sheet


Note the 1/2.7 inch CCD. That is much bigger than the 1/4.7 inch CCD’s in my PDX10. Arguably, my PDX10 has relatively poor light capability, so your Canon should have better low-light capability, all other things aside.

So, your Canon does not appear to have any technical limitations with video storage, and it’s relatively large CCD should have better light collection than my expensive PDX10 3 CCD camera. Your Canon also has auto white balance.

So, HOW DOES the video look? Have you compared subjectively to video shot from a video camcorder?

 

[Taxgeek]

Hi! And thanks for the detailed reply.

I haven't yet had a chance to objectively compare the video to that of another camera. I'm going out again in a couple weeks, and was thinking of asking somebody to film a little snippet right beside me, then we could compare the results. I suppose a fair comparison would be to give somebody a dvd and ask them to burn the sample video without any compression or conversion, and I could do the same, and compare them on the tv set, since the tv set is the ultimate display device anyway. Hmmmm.

Just from my observations, the video quality is quite good, even when I messed up and shot at 15fps during my entire Mergui dive trip. And the camera does fine in low light (100+ feet, <50' viz = pretty dark). I filmed a few shots from inside a crevice, and the black sillouette of the rock gets pretty noisy.

Focus hunts a little sometimes, but from watching people's videos on this and other sites, looks like that's a bit of an issue with any autofocus system. Also, on video, the thing will focus basically down to zero at wide angle - really fun.

If I can figure out how to compress a snip enough for internet, I'll post one. (But the quality will be so trashed from the compression, I'm not sure if it will be any use.)

What you mentioned about capacity is definitely right on - I don't know the capacity of the tapes people are using, but I'm sure it's more than 8 minutes!

Taxgeek

 

[ChrisA]

Here's my issue: I'm currently shooting underwater video with a canon P&S digital camera - the Canon S1 IS. It shoots 640x480 (which I gather to be equivalent to "480 lines"???) at 30fps. The quality seems really good, but I don't have anything to actually compare it to.

Unless you have a fair amount of light, good optics and clear water. You may not notice much difference. If the limiting factor is the water visability

The mini DV camera will use less compression. In the DV format each frame "stands alone" Whereas the mpeg video uses key frames and differences. This intro duces compression artifacts

a three CCD system will have much truer color

The mini DV system will also put "time code" on the signal which means that non linear editors will work

 

[TeddyDiver]

Unless you have a fair amount of light, good optics and clear water. The mini DV camera will use less compression. In the DV format each frame "stands alone" Whereas the mpeg video uses key frames and differences. a three CCD system will have much truer color
The mini DV system will also put "time code" on the signal which means that non linear editors will work

And to add your mpeg gots around 300k pixels a mini DV with reg picture format a double, and the ones with real wide about 1M. HD format around 1.6M pixels. Thats the difference...

 

[Taxgeek]

And to add your mpeg gots around 300k pixels a mini DV with reg picture format a double, and the ones with real wide about 1M. HD format around 1.6M pixels. Thats the difference...

Hi TeddyDiver. A question abut resolution - I'm not contradicting you here, I'm just confused about how more resolution is a benefit when the NLE is going to resample it back down to 720x480 anyway prior to burning onto a dvd.

Thanks!
Taxgeek

 

[diversteve]

I don't know the capacity of the tapes people are using, but I'm sure it's more than 8 minutes!

Taxgeek

Media size, cost and convenience should be a consideration. You get up to 120mins. on a MiniDV tape, 180 at lower resolution w/o having to change tapes/open the housing.

What do you pay for 1GB media cards? $100?

On a trip I could take 6 tapes with me for under $75. That's 12 hours of time. With 6 media cards you'd only get 48 mins. of time.

For the cost of 6 cards, you could buy an inexpensive new housing. Or a pretty nice camcorder.

 

[Taxgeek]

Media size, cost and convenience should be a consideration. You get up to 120mins. on a MiniDV tape, 180 at lower resolution w/o having to change tapes/open the housing.

What do you pay for 1GB media cards? $100?

On a trip I could take 6 tapes with me for under $75. That's 12 hours of time. With 6 media cards you'd only get 48 mins. of time.

For the cost of 6 cards, you could buy an inexpensive new housing. Or a pretty nice camcorder.

Yes, ability to get more recording time without changing media is definitely an advantage of camcorders. Totally clear on that one! ;-)

Actually I download the CF cards between dives though, so I don't have to carry a jillion of them around. But I do grant you the point on that count - it would be soooo much easier just to carry a handful of tapes home.
TG

 

[teknitroxdiver]

This is an interesting question to me as well, as I am doing right now what this thread is asking about. I'm on vacation in the BVI, shooting video on a Olympus D-580.

It seems to be doing quite well, today I shot about 35-40 minutes over two dives, and it turned out quite well. The only problem I find with it is that with such a small housing and small camera, it's hard to hold it very still -- you don't get as much of the 'liquid tripod' effect as with a heavier camera. A cool thing is that the camera has a microphone, so every little sound is audible. Including a hugely irritating 'clunk' at the end of each shot which I'm thinking is from the shutter button being pressed.

I'm happy with it as of now, I would like to get a 1GB card for it so I can film more and also take more pictures, as opposed to the 512mb card I have now. I think simply it's small size puts it above a 'real' video camera setup for what I am doing--for entertainment and memories only.

 

[TeddyDiver]

Hi TeddyDiver. A question abut resolution - I'm not contradicting you here, I'm just confused about how more resolution is a benefit when the NLE is going to resample it back down to 720x480 anyway prior to burning onto a dvd.

Depends how much you want to do editing, or whether like to see the outcoming with 16/9 ratio television. Just to make it simple do as you do now, and in the other end making prof quality for broadcasting in widescreen format... and all the things in between..