sky-pimp 0 #1 December 22, 2005 now this has probably been talked about before , if so please point me to the link So video cameras , there are a lot out there , what i keep askin myself is why do people fly with a video cam and a stills cam. why not just pull stills of the video footage and have less clutter with you in the air ? is it because there is not a good enofe product (video cam) on the market ? or do most have a setup they like and do not want to replace it ? YeHaaaaaaaaaaa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paddyFrenchman 0 #2 December 22, 2005 Sony DCR PC330 - stills form the video are at 640 * 480 Canon EOS 20D or 350D 3456 x 2304 Just better quality... Simple... Maybe when thay start combining a very good video camera with a 8 or 12 megapixel still camera you'll start seing people changing their setup... P. "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sky-pimp 0 #3 December 22, 2005 so is such a thing not avalible yet ?? thanks for the reply , i'm do research as camera/video is the path i am interested in taking YeHaaaaaaaaaaa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atle 0 #4 December 22, 2005 A still pulled from video can't compare to the quality you get from a still camera. The difference is huge! The attached photo demonstrates the kind of quality you can get from a still camera. Not even a pro video cam can achieve this. AtleSee what I'm saying? Thats what I'm saying! What am I saying? I DON'T KNOW!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sky-pimp 0 #5 December 22, 2005 Nice picture , i guess all the pictures on ya home page were from stills what camera do you use . YeHaaaaaaaaaaa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teamhypoxia 0 #6 December 22, 2005 Think of it this way...... A video camera takes ~30 pictures every second for as long as your tape lasts (1 hour) A very nice, expensive digital still camera will take about 3 to 4 pictures a second and only for about 9 or 10 seconds. Full resolution digital images are simply too huge in terms of file size to be taking 30 of them per second. A typical still from my 10D is greater than 2mb. At 30 frames per second that would be 60mb/s (transfer rate problem) so a 1 minute video would be 360mb. An hour would be 21600mb or ~21 gig (storage problem). I'm sure someone will pick apart my math, what with rounding errors and all, but you get the idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #7 December 22, 2005 The camera's on the market now don't allow for stills AND video at the same time, it's one or the other. You can make "stills" from screengrabs from the video later but that's even lower quality. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plutoniumsalmon 0 #8 December 22, 2005 There are a few things out there that will allow you to get stills and moving picture from one device but I suppose that none of them will serve you for non professional usage as they are bulky or expensive or both. You can use a small 35mm film motion picture camera and print the stills from that ( I believe they used that for Prez Bush Senior), processing and telecine will be expensive. You can try using a DALSA 4K digital film camera but for that youll need one hell of a parachute to land safely. Or you can get yourself a new panasonic HD camera that shoots on P2 cards the 200 something model and pull stills of moderate quality from that. Other than that wait a while for technology to catch up. I am just bored thats why I postPointy birds Oh pointy pointy Anoint my head Anointy nointy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goobersnuftda 0 #9 December 22, 2005 I posted this before in another thread: 2 in one camera. Digital video and 5 MP still camera. Still very new technology and the drawback with this unit is that you can not use both at the same time. Sony has a huge following because of their proven track record and reliability. I dont know much about Samsung so I can't comment on the rigors that skydiving has on this equipment. http://tinyurl.com/dw3lo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MB38 0 #10 December 22, 2005 Unless you're flying a 4K motion picture camera [Arri D20 or a Viper], the answer has already been posted here. I really don't know what I'm talking about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbla4024 0 #11 December 22, 2005 Standard DSLR has much bigger CCD/CMOS than camcorder (I mean physical size). This makes huge difference. Fido Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #12 December 26, 2005 Too much shit for one object. Why not attach an MP3 player and PEZ dispenser while we're at it. If I'm walking around taking serious photographs I don't want a video camera attached. I'm walking around shooting video I don't want a camera attached."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sky-pimp 0 #13 December 27, 2005 QuoteToo much shit for one object. Why not attach an MP3 player and PEZ dispenser while we're at it. If I'm walking around taking serious photographs I don't want a video camera attached. I'm walking around shooting video I don't want a camera attached. emmmmm my intention for this thread was to find out if there was a video camera+stills camera that was an all in one unit good enofe and small enofe to use skydiving(not walking around) . from replys so far it look like there is not but any constructive remarks are all welcome , i quess my thinking behind 'why not have a system that is all in one ' was so your not carrying so much gear , and less snagging points on ya helmet ! Mp3's would be a silly distration to the job at hand , and over here in england we don't get PEZ dispencers !!!! YeHaaaaaaaaaaa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
