The worst DV camera ever

[Rouxenator]

A while back you would find cameras like these on bidorbuy and other local sites for anything between R600 and R1500. If you bought one of them with the idea of buying a nice digital video camera then you probably cried your eyes out after you played around with it.

This is what our culprit looks like :

Yep - it sure looks fancy - but in my next post I will give the evidence that will undoubtedly condone this sucker to the lowest rank any digital video camera can get.

As a taster - here is the technical details on what files are produced by this camera

 

[mercurial]

Well that's what you get when you go the El Cheapo route

 

[Rouxenator]

The DV-182 Camera is marketed mainly as a video camera (Camcorder) - it even looks like a DV Cam (digital video camera).

Unfortunately video recording is its main weakness. Videos are record at an extremely choppy 9 frames per second at 320x240 - that is sub CIF quality.
In order to achive TV quality video you require a camera that can record VGA (640x480) at 30 frames per second.

The codec used by the DV-182 for video is Motion JPEG (MJPEG). This is basically a sequence of jpeg photos that forms a video. The compression is not that great and a 1 minute video takes up 7 megabytes. Sound is mono and captured at 8Khz. That is worse that telephone quality (11khz).


Indoor video. (2,541 Kb)


At the mall video. (3,664 Kb)


Outdoor video. (5,444 Kb)


Outdoor video using Zoom feature. (6,856 Kb)

And there you have it - the worst digital video camera... ever. Anyone here owned one or played around with it ? Please share your user experiences and opinions on this camera.

 

[mercurial]

LOL. It's crap. End of story.

 

[Rouxenator]

Ah, what's that I hear you think ? Does it take pictures ? Yes - it does indeed, infact, that is what it is better at. But don't get all excited because while it is marketed as a 3 or 5 megapixel camera the sensor is a 2 megapixel CMOS one. The quality of pictures produced by this camera is about the same as you get from a 2 megapixel phone camera. It also has this nifty date and time stamp feature that you cannot turn off -ever-.

So lets have a look then at the photos you can take with this thing :


Certainly no good as well - now then - the only thing that remains to be seen is does it blend.... Anyone that can help with that ?

 

[mercurial]

LMAO. This is quite a funny thread

 

[arf9999]

WTF would make anyone think that they'd get a good quality camera for R600? Seriously, this should be filed under "There's one born every minute".

 

[PeterCH]

Its a cheap, low spec camera but if it's durable you could give it to your kids and let them play with it. It would make a great toy for a kid.

Good cameras are pricey.

You need :

1. 3CCD 1/3" or better sensor
2. Good lens Leica, Canon, Fujinon or Zeiss
3. Optical Image stabilisation (not digital, digital = cr@p)
4. Progressive output if possible (not progressive scan, but genuine progressive capture)
5. MiniDV or DVCam tape support. Solid state media is coming for HD.

The ideal price/quality camera at the moment which does all the above and in full HD (not HDV which is not full HD)
is the SONY PMW EX1. It retails for $8.000 USD and captures 1920by1080 video at 30 fps progressive.
http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/product-PMWEX1/

 

[mercurial]

Have a look at http://www.orms.co.za/

 

[bwana]

WTF would make anyone think that they'd get a good quality camera for R600? Seriously, this should be filed under "There's one born every minute".

I cant wait to get one of those Flip Video camera's and they're priced pretty close to that. With two kids (always doing the darndest things ) it would be great for the missus to keep one in her handbag - I'd even find space in my camera bag for one.

 

[arf9999]

I cant wait to get one of those Flip Video camera's and they're priced pretty close to that. With two kids (always doing the darndest things ) it would be great for the missus to keep one in her handbag - I'd even find space in my camera bag for one.

Please note the words "good quality". Those flip cameras have awful video quality, barely youtube quality. You'd get better results with your canon compact camera.

 

[bwana]

Please note the words "good quality". Those flip cameras have awful video quality, barely youtube quality. You'd get better results with your canon compact camera.

I think the whole purpose of them is straight to web so Youtube quality doesnt sound too bad to me. Which model have you used?

 

[arf9999]

I played with the original "FLIP" which it came out last year (family friend from the states brought one out in December)... it was cheap, but not so cheerful. I'm not sure if they've improved since version one, but I wasn't impressed.

 

[bwana]

I played with the original "FLIP" which it came out last year (family friend from the states brought one out in December)... it was cheap, but not so cheerful. I'm not sure if they've improved since version one, but I wasn't impressed.

As I mentioned above I'm just looking for simplicity and a means of sharing video clips with the family overseas so a flickr level of quality is ideal. I spend enough time editing photos - the last thing I was to do is have to edit video as well. Plus it needs to be simple enough for the missus to want to operate it.

 

[arf9999]

I'd look for a nice compact camera with a video function rather. At least the lens is better quality...

... but that's just me.

 

[Rouxenator]

For video (and pictures) the Kodak Z812IS is extremely good (just a bummer about the sound). It takes "HD" videos 1280x720 at 30fps. These look very nice when you make a DVD of it and it gets scaled down to 720x480 wide. I was a bit skeptic moving to Kodak after I have a long line of Canons but seriously - Kodak does video very nicely.

 

[bwana]

I'd look for a nice compact camera with a video function rather. At least the lens is better quality...

... but that's just me.

Not really in the mood for another compact - the missus doesnt seem to be keen on carrying the Powershot we have around as it is. Also one strength that the Flip apparently has (according to the countless positive reviews) is a decent low light capability. Its simple, cheap and small enough that my missus wont balk at carrying it around.