AndyMan 7 #1 March 29, 2005 Has everyone seen the Samsung / BestBuy two page spread in April's Parachutist? I was amazed that a major electronics manufacturer and retailer is marketing direct to us. The product appears to be SC-X105, as pictured here, but with an optional remote lens installed. The remote lens appears to be larger than all of the "lipstick" style cameras I've seen discussed here, so I would expect a higher quality. It suffers the same drawback of any other remote lens, which is a direct cable connection to a recorder mounted somewhere else. If I've linked to the right product, then it's also MPEG4 and uses a memory stick. No DV tape. Interesting. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NSEMN8R 0 #2 March 29, 2005 Quote If I've linked to the right product, then it's also MPEG4 and uses a memory stick. No DV tape. That probably means no firewire too, right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hipgnosis 0 #3 March 29, 2005 Reading through the product it appears that it has no FireWire nor a LANC connection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JeffNo 0 #4 March 29, 2005 I was amazed that a major electronics manufacturer and retailer is marketing direct to us. _______ By "us," do you mean dummies? Samsung apparently thinks so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
efs4ever 3 #5 March 29, 2005 A Google linkRussell M. Webb D 7014 Attorney at Law 713 385 5676 https://www.tdcparole.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FeFe 0 #6 March 30, 2005 QuoteI was amazed that a major electronics manufacturer and retailer is marketing direct to us... ... with a product which is almost useless for the target audience Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #7 March 30, 2005 QuoteSomebody who'll pay $3,000 to jump out of an airplane won't bat an eye at this camera's sticker price man prices have gone up since I was over there last... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #8 March 30, 2005 MPEG4 just isn't good enough. It's only a matter of time before someone makes a decent, usable solid state camera but this isn't it. JVC came close with their MPEG2 camera that uses compact flash, but it doesn't have a LANC. http://www.jvc.com/presentations/everio/overview/index.html#model As CF capacities and speeds increase it will happen. We just need to wait a little longer.illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vid666 0 #9 March 30, 2005 I only see one benefit of this camera.. With a mechanical recorders all of us use, any hard opening ( say BASE slider down ) gets very messy on tape, with solid state media, it should be very consistant. otherwise - $649 for a tapeless camcorder that gives less quality and less recording time than a $300 used TRV22 from ebay ??? cmon...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #10 March 30, 2005 Isn't MPEG4 used in many HDTV systems? I know it is used on my home Digital Cable setup, and it's certainly good enough for that. IIRC, it's also used on DirectTV - which is known for good quality video. If MPEG4 is good enough for DirecTV and digital cable, it's certainly good enough for a tandem video. Not that I believe this camera is good for skydiving. I can't tell that (either way) until I see more specs, and see one up close. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #11 March 30, 2005 Just since its MPEG4 does'nt mean the quality level of the compression is at the same as the high bandwidth TV applications.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #12 March 30, 2005 Quote Just since its MPEG4 does'nt mean the quality level of the compression is at the same as the high bandwidth TV applications. I agree completely. MPEG4 in itself is completely insuficient to draw a conclusion as to the clarity of the picture. I'm very curious to see an actual unit, or read a good evaluation. The codec itself clearly is "good enough" for broadcast, so the codec itself is good enough for our use. The actual compression may or may not be. Time will tell. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #13 April 1, 2005 OK you made me do it. I now know way more than I need to about MPEG4 (you can too at http://www.m4if.org/ ) So it depends on the compression. Now we'll have to wait for something with a usable compression rate.illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #14 April 1, 2005 Camera? Oh, okay I see it, it is on the righthand page, couldn't take my eyes from the lefthand page"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sylvain 0 #15 April 24, 2005 Seems to be available right now in the US. Anybody got a chance to see it or test it ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #16 May 12, 2005 I noticed this about it which I did not like 640K video 320 with external optic... but for someone who just wants a quick fix on seeing thier perpective, it is 400 something dollars on ebay or so I saw. Cheers Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Av1ator 0 #17 May 17, 2005 i BOUGHT THIS CAMEA KEEP IT TWO DAYS AND RETURNED IT. POOR VIDEO, VERY SHORT BATTERY LIFE. WHEN YOU TURN THE CAMERA OFF TO CONSERVE BATTERY LIFE, THEN TURN IT BACK ON YOU HAVE TO GO BACK INTO THE CAMERA MENU TO RESELECT THE EXTERNAL CAMERA MODULE, SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THAT EASY JUST BEFORE A SKYDIVE...IN MY OPINION THIS THING IS NOT READY FOR MARKET. THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT WITH IT TO BE USEFUL FOR SKYDIVING. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reginald 0 #18 May 17, 2005 Well, I’m not ready to throw this to the curb just yet. I tend to agree it’s probably not sufficient for professional video like tandem video or 4-way video, however, it may be just fine for first person POV video. I have no desire to put a camera on my head as I just don’t have the neck for it. I have a Sony mini DV unit (which although it is small is still heavy and a little bulky) but putting it in a fanny pack and running a bullet cam is a bit of a pain to say the least. A friend of mine bought the Samsung unit and while he has not used it yet I have taken a gander at it. It is small enough and light enough to put in the inside chest pocket of my jumpsuit and the run the cable up to the helmet mounted “bullet” cam. So it could be very easy to get to on jump run to turn on. Sooo, even though the video quality may not be the greatest, at the lowest level of compression (i.e. high quality video) it may be good enough. It is the smallest unit on the market and is potentially very easy to rig up for use in skydiving. So what that it has no firewire port; it does have a high speed USB 2.0 port so it is easy enough to transfer the video to a computer and burn to DVD. I’m not giving up just yet. I’ll let you guys know as soon as I see it in action and see a DVD of the footage on my TV."We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #19 May 18, 2005 Well, I guess it comes down to what you want to do with it. I do a lot of first person video too, most of the video I do for shits & giggles, maybe hopefully I'll sell a few prints. At the end of the year I like to make a 'year end' video. When I bought my first camera I was nowhere near ever getting paid to jump video, I was in a position a lot like you are. I had a few hundred jumps and wanted to start exploring video work. I bought a good camera. I'm still jumping that same camera. For me, I take pride in the work that I do, even if for the most part I'm not doing it for a living. When I do make that end-of-year video, or when somebody wants a dub of a dive, I want it to look good. On the odd occaision that I get pulled into doing tandem work, I want gear that's up to the task. For me, that camera is completely useless. For the same money, (or less!), you can buy a perfectly good Sony HC20 that is almost just as small, but with a far superior image quality that I would not be embarassed to put my name on. Don't fixate on the handful of features that makes that camera attractive to you. Look at the whole picture, and compare it to other products on the market. To me, choosing to pass this one by is a nobrainer. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reginald 0 #20 May 18, 2005 Well, I have an HC 30 and trust me it’s not that small or light relative to the Samsung. And by the time you add in a camera helmet $300 or a bullet cam plus rigging $400 a mini DV isn’t cheaper, IMHO. I'm pretty sure I don't have the neck for wearing a camera helmet and a bullet cam degrades the resolution anyway…. While the Samnsung may turn out to be crap it does solve a lot of problems. I’m really curious to see the video quality of it first hand. I mean how many people really play skydiving video off a mini DV tape? They tape it to VHS or burn it to DVD (with MPEG compression) neither of which are near the quality of a mini DV. I’ll wait and make my own judgment on the Samsung based on actually seeing it in action. Heck, I’ve got a friend that bought one so it’s no skin off my nose."We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedyG942 0 #21 May 18, 2005 The Samsung unit peaked my interest too. Sure it has limitations but it seems to be a pretty neat turn key package. I ride motorcycles as well as skydive ....always have wanted a practical helment cam. Av1tar: you mentioned battery life- are you talking about the remote lens battery or the unit itself? Right now, my opinion is that it probably isn't worth the ca$h...but it's a great idea that hopefully will see further development. The 2nd generation will probably kick ass. Keep us posted Reginald...I'm curious too about what it really looks like on a TV--------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Av1ator 0 #22 May 18, 2005 Both the camera and external module have a short battery life. The camera unit is rechargeable, while the external module requires two AAA's. Attached is a short video shot with the camera at highest quality Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #23 May 18, 2005 No attachment. Try uploading to www.skydivingmovies.com but the ad still looks looks nice...illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #24 May 18, 2005 Finally got this month's Parachutist. Had to smile when I saw the giant two page ad, followed by a 'review,' even though they hadn't see a unit yet. If it gets discounted decently from its $600 list, it might work just fine for a lot of purposes. (so long as it has a 30 day return policy to examine the video quality) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Av1ator 0 #25 May 19, 2005 I don't know why I the video didn't upload...anyway the video is about the same quality as my sony cybershot camera in the "movie"n mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
