Quantcast

best point-and-shoot MTBMX camera.... ?

cmc

cmc

Turbo Monkey
Nov 17, 2006
2,052
6
austin
It's:
*gotta have wide angle
*gotta have good video clips (HD? at least bigger than 640 X 480)
*gotta have good low-light/manual effects.... (like Canon's "Night Flash" setting)
*gotta be small enough to put in your pocket and easily have on hand when sesh is going down. clunky, huge DSLR's are not what i'm looking for...

I'm coming up with

1) Canon PowerShot SD980 IS
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_sd980is.asp

2) Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz5/

3) Samsung TL320


Any others ????
 
W

WhoRyder

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2007
1,834
0
NYC
Dude for MTBMX Photos, GREAT ONEs you should go DSLR...

Sony, Olympus, Pentax, Nikon & Canon have some great entry level cameras that produce great IMAGES....
 
serbdog

serbdog

Monkey
May 13, 2002
141
0
drexel hill, pa
Canon has great digital processors and their colors are always nice, I would put that as your first choice. How much are you willing to spend?

Jack of all trades but master of none, it should be good for what you need. HD won't really matter for video, especially on a point and shoot. Your best bet is to just use the 320x240 setting to you can take more video and not worry about extra memory cards.
 
Bikael Molton

Bikael Molton

goofy for life
Jun 9, 2003
4,029
1,167
El Lay
i highly suggest the Panny if you are getting a point and shoot. I have the older model Lumix TZ3 and it's been nothing but awesome. I would buy the TZ5 immediately if I broke the camera I have now. The big zoom in a small package is also nice for bikesy, outdoorsy subjects.

640x480 video is WAY too small for video in 2009.
 
Last edited:
Beast

Beast

Turbo Monkey
May 23, 2002
1,579
0
Where the riding is good
rpet said:
i highly suggest the Panny if you are getting a point and shoot. I have the older model Lumix TZ3 and it's been nothing but awesome. I would buy the TZ5 immediately if I broke the camera I have now. The big zoom in a small package is also nice for bikesy, outdoorsy subjects.

640x480 video is WAY too small for video in 2009.
Click to expand...
Looks really nice, but no manual controls would suck for photos in low light conditions (aka most trail spots).
 
Greyhound

Greyhound

Trail Rat
Jul 8, 2002
5,065
365
Alamance County, NC
Last edited:
W

WhoRyder

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2007
1,834
0
NYC
Beast, about 95% of point and shoot cameras donot have Manual Controls.... to get this you much get an advanced point and shoot (which cost a few hundred bucks)

The Lumix LX3 comes with a 24mm Wide Angle, manual controls lens and shoot hi def video (i owned it for a while):

Lumix LX3
The downside of shooting video, the zoom is fixed (you cant zoom in or out)
DiabloWeen 2008 JumpJam! on Vimeo

The Nikon Coopix6000
Never owned it, but saw some great images from it... and shoots standard video, not HD.

CoolPix6000

Or the canon G10-G11 Shoots awesome Photos, shoot sh!tty video
Canon G10


Like all things in life... u get what you pay for, that's including cameras.... the higher end models are a better choice.....
 
cmc

cmc

Turbo Monkey
Nov 17, 2006
2,052
6
austin
so what exactly is HD when you are dealing with point and shoot cameras ?

is it semi-pointless if you don't have an HD monitor or HD dvd player ? or are you still getting better quality that you can use if you put together web edits ?

this website in 2007 was calling 1280X720 HD... but other websites say "full HD" is 1920 x 1080p....

i found this:
Resolution: You'll notice that all of these cameras take videos at 1280 x 720. This is commonly referred to as "720p," a high-definition specification that means the video uses 720 lines of vertical resolution. The "p" stands for "progressive," indicating that the video image is drawn line by line in one pass, rather than every-other line in two passes. To simplify things: more lines equals better image quality. DVD video only uses 480 lines of vertical resolution, about the same as standard television. With these cameras, you'll be taking true high-definition videos.

Frame Rate: Video, when you come right down to it, is just a series of still images played in quick succession. The speed is what tricks the eye into believing the image is moving, and in order to move smoothly, you need to cram in at least 24 frames per second. That's the standard frame rate for a motion picture. For a TV show, the standard frame rate is 30 frames per second. It's a subtle, perhaps imperceptible difference. Three of these cameras will provide you with "TV quality" video. Only the Panasonic LX2 lags behind with a startlingly slow 15 frames per second.
http://www.digitalcamera-hq.com/digital-cameras/the-new-frontier-high-definition-video-comes-to-digital-cameras-we-pick-the-best-buy_news.html


and this:

http://sanyo.com/xacti/english/products/vpc_fh1/index.html
The VPC-FH1 features a large-diameter Xacti HD lens, a high-speed CMOS sensor, and a newly developed high-speed processor to capture high-resolution images. These help it to record clear and smooth 1920 x 1080p full high-definition video despite the camera’s light and compact body. The FH1 also features SANYO’s advanced zooming function for video. Covering an expanded range from wide-angle to telephoto, it enhances your scope for shooting.
 
W

WhoRyder

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2007
1,834
0
NYC
I also have owned a Sanyo Xacto HD1000 (Yes i'm gadget whore)

You can see some of the videos from the HD1000 on here:

http://vimeo.com/dtufino/videos

i mainly used it to shoot video @ 720P (but at 60 Frames per second) never used it to shoot real Hidef.... then i sold the camera.... But, i'm picking it up again... that thing shoots some great videos. it uses the H.264 codec, basically you can play and edit it with any software, the AVCHD codec is fairly new and has some issues with editing and playing on some computers (played fine at my home computer but not my work computer).....

Do research on your own and figure out what you wanna achieve then go from there.....
 
Last edited:
cmc

cmc

Turbo Monkey
Nov 17, 2006
2,052
6
austin
rpet said:
i highly suggest the Panny if you are getting a point and shoot. I have the older model Lumix TZ3 and it's been nothing but awesome. I would buy the TZ5 immediately if I broke the camera I have now. The big zoom in a small package is also nice for bikesy, outdoorsy subjects.

640x480 video is WAY too small for video in 2009.
Click to expand...
i bought the Lumix. stoked. DMC-ZS3. thanks for the feedback.
 
cmc

cmc

Turbo Monkey
Nov 17, 2006
2,052
6
austin
Beast and WhoRyder, what do you think is the minimum computer requirements to edit video from the Panasonic Lumix, (i.e. a new point and shoot capturing HD video) ?

I know I need a lot of RAM, hard drive big enough to hold a lot of video, and a reasonably fast chip. But I'm a complete newb when it comes to video cards, etc. I just want to put together some edits. Not trying to become a video professional.
 
sittingduck

sittingduck

Turbo Monkey
Jun 22, 2007
1,958
2
Oregon
Check the requirements for whatever software you will be using.
Sony vegas 9, for example:

System Requirements

* Microsoft® Windows® XP 32-bit SP2 (SP3 recommended), Windows Vista™ 32-bit or 64-bit (SP1 recommended), or Windows 7
* 1 GHz processor (multicore or multiprocessor CPU recommended for HD)
* 200 MB hard-disk space for program installation
* 1 GB RAM (2 GB recommended)
* OHCI-compatible i.LINK® connector*/IEEE-1394DV card (for DV and HDV capture and print-to-tape)
* USB 2.0 connection (for importing from AVCHD, XDCAM EX, or DVD camcorders)
* Windows-compatible sound card
* DVD-ROM drive (for installation from a DVD only)
* Supported CD-recordable drive (for CD burning only)
* Supported DVD-recordable drive (for DVD burning only)
* Supported Blu-ray recordable drive (for Blu-ray Disc burning only)
* Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0
* QuickTime® 7.1.6 or later
 
Bikael Molton

Bikael Molton

goofy for life
Jun 9, 2003
4,029
1,167
El Lay
CMC - video editing doesn't really use your video card (those are for gaming). Processor power, RAM and disk space are key. A vast amount of RAM isn't necessary. 4gigs would be nice.

If you are doing simple cutting, a brand new computer isn't necessary for HD. However, the more effects, color correction, etc that you add in your NLE or in After Effects, the slower it will go without a fast set-up.

One fundamental hardware thing is that you really should edit with a different hard drive than your system and editing software are on.
IE - a second internal harddrive or an external Firewire800 drive where all your clips are stored along with all your NLE's rendering caches.
 
W

WhoRyder

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2007
1,834
0
NYC
rpet said:
CMC - video editing doesn't really use your video card (those are for gaming). Processor power, RAM and disk space are key. A vast amount of RAM isn't necessary. 4gigs would be nice.
Click to expand...
this is correct....

In my case, since i have a home server, and mini network i overkill my machines... (i build them myself...)

Although, some high def videos do not play with certain video cards as the images and video will be a bit choppy.... and freeze alot.. i suggest getting a 60 Dolla Video card with 512MB, just i case... I have a video card with 1gig ram and had trouble viewing 1080P videos... then i upgraded to a 2gig card and that resolved the issue...

CMC, are you having trouble viewing the videos you have taken with your camera yet? if not you have another to worry about.... if you want a low end video editing program that is good try... Ulead Video Studio.... cheap, very easy to use,,,,, good luck!
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

Turbo Monkey
Jun 15, 2009
3,893
1
I'm waving. Can you see me now?
Don't go crazy with a video editing program. Windows movie maker or imovie 07 are two that I recommend. The new imovie sucks. If you ever feel that you want better equipment and better program for editing, then you should move up to a better program. But I think you will be fine with one of those two.
 
Mr Tiles

Mr Tiles

I'm a beer snob
Nov 10, 2003
3,469
0
L-town ya'll
TheTruth said:
Don't go crazy with a video editing program. Windows movie maker or imovie 07 are two that I recommend. The new imovie sucks. If you ever feel that you want better equipment and better program for editing, then you should move up to a better program. But I think you will be fine with one of those two.
Click to expand...
I concur with this. I had vegas on an older machine and I absolutely hated it. some of my best edits were using movie maker...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom