• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
nevets88

Camera experts - what do you think of this article about high frame rate cameras?

9 posts in this topic

From the Guardian

It mentions models from Canon, Panasonic and of course Casio.

I didn't know there was software that slow motions your video after the fact, but it's expensive and I'm dubious of the quality.

A commenter noted that the Galaxy Note II does slow motion. Dunno if true or not. Do any smartphone cameras do high frames per second yet?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

I agree, for the most part, about getting a digital camera with the best resolution that shoots 120 or 240fps. I actually do own the Casio EX-ZR100 and up to 240fps is all that's needed for me. The resolution is as decribed, just below standard but it's still pretty detailed. Biggest issue is you do need good lighting for HS. It was also pretty hard to find in the US. I actually got mine off ebay shipped from Japan.

I just downloaded an app called SloPro for the iPhone (it's free if you want to check it out) just to test it out. It's not high speed so don't expect too much. It most just slows the video down a certain percentage whichever you choose before you record.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know some Android phones can do slow motion, this is a video from my EVO 4G LTE on the slow-mo setting.  I had no idea it had it when I bought the phone, but I was impressed with it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYaxMKZ5WJc

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, but now I really want to know if THIS camera can do manual shutter speed...

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-FZ200-Digital-Camera-Optical/dp/B008MB6ZX0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid;=1357842580&sr;=8-1&keywords;=Panasonic+Lumix+FZ200

60 FPS is useless, 120 is good a good portion of the time, and 240 is where it's at.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Originally Posted by iacas

I don't know, but now I really want to know if THIS camera can do manual shutter speed...

It doesn't.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Originally Posted by Unforgiven93

I know some Android phones can do slow motion, this is a video from my EVO 4G LTE on the slow-mo setting.  I had no idea it had it when I bought the phone, but I was impressed with it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYaxMKZ5WJc

I have the HTC EVO 4G, how did you find out it had slow mo? I'm interested to see if my phone has this fucntion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't.

You beat me too it. I went to the Panasonic booth and told the marketing guy I met there during CES this week he needed to add this function. He mentioned there were getting a number of requests for that feature. So hopefully in the next model.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Originally Posted by cooke119

I have the HTC EVO 4G, how did you find out it had slow mo? I'm interested to see if my phone has this fucntion.

I'm not sure if the original EVO has it, I have the LTE, but for me there was a little "A" in the upper left corner while the camera was open.  You touch that and then scroll down and slow-motion video was one of the options.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      Look at Ben Hogan. He played in exactly one Open Championship. Before Arnold Palmer brought it back into the fold as something you should be playing every year it was just too expensive for such a little purse to win. There wasn't much prestige in winning it during that time.  Look at the US open. Since 1993, only 52% of the time a non-US golfer won the US Open. From 1950 till 1993 only 92% of was won by US golfers.   Same with the PGA Championship. Since 1993 the US has only won 56% of them. From the time they went to stroke play (1958) till 1992 the US won 86% of them.  Same with The Masters. Since 1993 the US has won 56% of them. From 1950 till 1992 the US won 77% of them.  It just goes to show you that the influx of non-US golfers to the PGA Tour field of players has made it that much more difficult for US golfers to win a major.  Could I say that it was 30% easier for Jack to win those majors because of the non-US golfers who stayed away from traveling to the US to play?  US Open: 40% less likely US player wins after 1993
      PGA Championship: 30% less likely a US Player wins after 1993
      The Masters: 20% less likely a US Player wins after 1993
       
    • Great golfing quotes
      You're Never a 14 handicap! Hitting balls like that!!! End of round Nice playing with you, you scored net 80, you know you should really stay out of bunkers! Attributed to my fellow members, all of them did any one see that? No I hate golf Probably happens to everyone
    • Nike hyperflight golf balls
      Thanks for the hidden gem!!! Thats encouraging stuff. I really like the ball Ive been playing, but after reading that, Im looking forward to giving them a shot.
    • How Do You Decide Where to Play Golf
      Decision matrix: Course quality, then time available, then cost. dave
    • Longer or More Accurate?
      That doesn't make it a trick question. People aren't so lousy with accuracy that they're off 200 yards, but their tee shots travel 200 yards toward the target fairly often. The 10% thing helps to adjust them to the proper scale. I hit my driver 270, but I don't miss by 1/4 of that distance (67.5 yards). The wildest 100-shooting golfers are about +/- 10°. Their average is about 7°. 80-golfers are around 6°. 70 golfers probably about 5°. PGA Tour pros are around 3.5°. So 10% of those numbers are 0.7, 0.6, and 0.5°, with 0.35° for PGA Tour players. And yet, give each of them a full 1° (or  14% more accuracy for 100-golfers, 17% more accuracy for 80-golfers, 20% more accuracy for 70-golfers, and nearly 30% more accuracy for PGA Tour players… and they still come up short (or, at the PGA Tour level, only begin to break even). This means that the poll is biased, indeed, but in the opposite direction you think, @Marty2019. The poll could have said "would you choose 25% more accuracy or 10% more distance" and everyone (generalized to groups, not individuals) would STILL be better off choosing the distance. The only "trick" is that people value accuracy way, way too much, to the point where many are happy to take only a 10% improvement in accuracy while even a 25% improvement still can't account for the added value of driving the ball an extra 10% farther.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. TessaEdin
      TessaEdin
      (24 years old)
  • Blog Entries