Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/07/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]this would be the one that gives top quality in still and movement <http://www.red.com/> ;~) Fond regards, George george@imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Jul 20, 2008, at 8:10 AM, Sonny Carter wrote: > They are working on it . . . > > http://www.ambarella.com/news/press_releases/pr_01282008.htm > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Howard Ritter <hlritter@bex.net> > wrote: > >> OT, but maybe of general interest, and maybe answerable by someone >> with >> more knowledge than I. >> >> I like to shoot both still and video targets of opportunity that I >> may >> encounter in daily life. For this purpose I have two very nice >> pocketable >> digital cameras that I like to carry with me or keep in the car, a >> Canon G9 >> still camera and a Sony HDR-TG1 miniature HDTV camcorder. Both are >> about the >> same size and weight, of comparably high quality, autoeverything >> digital >> point-and-shoot, recording to a memory card, and if both were >> manufactured >> by Canon in the same quantities as the G9, both would cost about >> the same. >> Much the same thing can be said for any of a few dozen other >> digital still >> P&S cameras and at least a couple of miniature camcorders. >> >> The G9 takes excellent still pictures and as a bonus takes video. The >> video, while serviceable, is comparatively crude and suitable only >> for >> amusement and last resorts, not as the intentional permanent >> record of >> important events. >> >> The TG-1 takes excellent high-def video and as a bonus takes >> stills. The >> stills, while serviceable, are comparatively crude and suitable >> only for >> amusement and last resorts, not as the intentional permanent >> record of >> important events. >> >> WHY? >> >> Why doesn't anyone produce a camera of comparable size that will take >> stills of the quality of the G9's and HD videos of the quality of the >> TG-1's? Admittedly the sensor chips are much different, 12 Mpix v. >> about 2 >> Mpix, and the larger chip of the G9 can't readily be read out at >> the 30 fps >> demanded by video. However, a central 16:9 rectangle of the G9's >> 4:3 chip, >> comprising about 8.3 Mpix and extending very nearly the full width >> of the >> chip, could be "binned" 2x2 for readout, in order to give it >> functionally >> the 2,073,600 pixels of the HDTV picture. This seemingly can't be >> beyond the >> limits of affordable technology, so why isn't it being done? It's >> logical >> and do-able, and would be a boon to people like me. >> >> Surely the big mfrs aren't so crass as not to make dual-purpose >> cameras >> simply because this would dent their sales...instead offering >> cameras that >> do one thing well and the other thing not so well, because >> everyone else's >> camera does, but not well enough to deter purchases of the other >> type of >> camera by those who need to do the other thing well also, thereby >> preserving >> profits? >> >> Never mind. >> >> --howard >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > > -- > Regards, > > Sonny > http://www.sonc.com > Natchitoches, Louisiana > USA > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information