Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Comprehensive Camera for Filming your Golf Swing Thread


Note: This thread is 3864 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hey guys and gals, does any one have a review on a inexpensive recorder that can pick up a golf swing? I would like to be able to look at my swing  or a buddies.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I think a lot of people really like some of the Casio cameras for videoing their swings but your best bet is to use the search bar above and search for "cameras" and sort the results by relevance. There's loads of information on different cameras so you'll be able to figure out what's best for you based on your budget etc.

SWING DNA
Speed [77] Tempo [5] ToeDown [5] KickAngle [6] Release [5] Mizuno JPX EZ 10.5° - Fujikura Orochi Black Eye (with Harrison ShotMaker) Mizuno JPX EZ 3W/3H - Fujikura Orochi Black Eye Mizuno JPX 850 Forged 4i-PW - True Temper XP 115 S300 Mizuno MP R-12 50.06/54.09/58.10 - Dynamic Gold Wedge Flex Mizuno MP A305 [:-P]


Posted

Thanks for the reply. I have looked around a bit. The issue in the Casio is indoors filming. I am fortunate enough to work at a golf club and we have a great indoor hitting facility. The quality out side is great but nothing shows up inside. I even hung 4- 300 watt lights just above the mat.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

That ZR200 really looks good, especially for the price.

The Casio website says that the resolutions are a bit poor though as the FPS increases?

Quote:
1920 x 1080 (30 fps)
1280 x 720 (15, 30 fps)
640 x 480 (30, 120 fps)
512 x 384 (30, 240 fps)
224 x 160 (480 fps)
224 x 64 (1000 fps)

To be fair to the camera I think most people would be happy enough videoing their swing in 240 FPS and a resolution of 512 x 384 is more than adequate. For reference, this is 512 x 384:

DSCN3148.JPG

SWING DNA
Speed [77] Tempo [5] ToeDown [5] KickAngle [6] Release [5] Mizuno JPX EZ 10.5° - Fujikura Orochi Black Eye (with Harrison ShotMaker) Mizuno JPX EZ 3W/3H - Fujikura Orochi Black Eye Mizuno JPX 850 Forged 4i-PW - True Temper XP 115 S300 Mizuno MP R-12 50.06/54.09/58.10 - Dynamic Gold Wedge Flex Mizuno MP A305 [:-P]


Posted

Do any of you have info. on capturing video indoors? I know the casio works great outside.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I've been looking around at casio cameras too. Im sure the quality would be fine as long as you have good lighting.


Posted

hey joe thats the problem. How much light will you need to shoot indoors

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I've been hoping someone with more photography experience than me would chime in before I volunteered my inexpert opinion, but I've heard you can shoot up to 300fps just fine indoors. Your best option to make sure would be to borrow a camera to see if you can get usable footage before spending money. You might also consider PM'ing Erik (username iacas) - he's a photography buff and I'm sure he can answer this question.

Bill


  • Administrator
Posted

You need a LOT of light to shoot 300 FPS indoors. Your eyes are good at adjusting for lots of light levels, and most people wouldn't believe how bright something has to be to match "outside" light.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted


Originally Posted by iacas

You need a LOT of light to shoot 300 FPS indoors. Your eyes are good at adjusting for lots of light levels, and most people wouldn't believe how bright something has to be to match "outside" light.



Ok, but the question I think he's asking is can you get any usable high speed footage indoors. I.e., whatever the minimum frame rate is for swing analysis (120?), can that be used to get reasonably good footage?

Bill


  • Administrator
Posted

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

Ok, but the question I think he's asking is can you get any usable high speed footage indoors. I.e., whatever the minimum frame rate is for swing analysis (120?), can that be used to get reasonably good footage?


Yes, he can. He just needs a lot of light. More than one might think is necessary. We can record at 1/1000 indoors, but we also have four $150 lights above our instructional bay and nine $100 lights in our 24-foot general hitting area.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Sorry, I went away for a few days. What constitutes a $150 light. I also work at a higher end golf club and we have built a great indoor practice facility  our pro is struggling with this problem also. Maybe I can win favor with him for a few lessons!  LOL

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I don't think there is anything really special about the light (well maybe if you have 20'+ ceilings). It is just a matter of getting a lot of it in ways that don't cast a lot of shadows. Go to most photography websites (or think about the last time you went to a professional photo studio) and you will see a bunch of high powered directional lights.

Originally Posted by evan01

Sorry, I went away for a few days. What constitutes a $150 light. I also work at a higher end golf club and we have built a great indoor practice facility  our pro is struggling with this problem also. Maybe I can win favor with him for a few lessons!  LOL




Posted

Might be a good idea to just borrow a camera to see if your existing light is sufficient, before doing a lot of research and/or spending on lights.

Bill


Posted

thats why I am here 3bill. I know of someone that has tried indoors at our facility and the 1st go around with the basic didn't work thyen I added 3 300 watt lights just over head that didn't work so I am hoping the golf gods here on the trap will help me out!

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

What was your light meter reading?

Originally Posted by evan01

thats why I am here 3bill. I know of someone that has tried indoors at our facility and the 1st go around with the basic didn't work thyen I added 3 300 watt lights just over head that didn't work so I am hoping the golf gods here on the trap will help me out!




Posted

I guess my next quest to to get me a light meter and come back with some info. Is there a particolar number I am looking for?

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3864 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.