Comments on: Best web cam, Best good but cheap mike

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 23:32:24 +0000

I also want a green screen so I can show Time Square or The Mississippi River or something behind me.

By: Humberto

Humberto — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 18:55:37 +0000

Recently i bought a Logitech C270.
It records HD video with a very clear image and sound is fantastic (but mono).
If makes diference to you the video works well with linux (but i cant get audio working).
In Brazil it cost half the price of the ‘next models’ in family.

By: Chris Winter

Chris Winter — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:33:43 +0000

Barely relevant, but I just wanted to mention this camera with its 4800×3200 pixel foveon sensor:

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/100921_SD1.htm

It is to drool over.

By: Wow

Wow — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:30:22 +0000

For the professional market, it’s not even lights. It’s diffusion. Most of what you’ll see in a photo shoot are lights with white reflectors to fill in.

Amusing (to me) anecdote. In Sydney Aquarium and it’s dark and the fish are all in glass tanks. I, like other tourists, have a camera. I turn my flash off and get slightly blurred pictures of the creatures in the tank. The majority (all?) of the tourists have their flash on. I bet when they got home, 99% of their pictures have a *lovely* shot of the flash in the glass pane…

Back OT, the megapixel wars are mostly over now (12-16MP was figured to be appropriate to a film camera) so they’re (sensibly in my opinion) now working on lowering the noise, increasing the efficiency to differentiate their new product line from the old one and sell upgrades.

The next few years should be interesting for people wanting quality pictures..!

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 13:54:28 +0000

Wow, interesting advice. Which also brings up an interesting question: People speak of mikes and cameras, but what about lights?

By: Wow

Wow — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:09:05 +0000

For cheap cameras, the lens is probably the most likely bit to give you crappy pictures.

The built-in one in the iMac will likely have a glass element.

But the sensor in there will be a mm or so across, whereas the one in the logitech will be 3-5 mm across, about 4x the area. Therefore 4x more sensitive and less prone to thermal noise under the same lighting.

The nokia phones tend to use Carl Zeiss elements too. They too are expensive.

If you’re going to use it in uncontrolled lighting, you may want to consider that.

If you’re shopping, see if the lens elements are named. As with mountain bike kit, if it has a name (i.e. Shimano Acera rather than just Shimano), then it’s going to be better.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 23:23:13 +0000

I can report that in a relatively informal test the iMac built in camera did a much better job than the logitech camera. I think the latter failed to default to its highest res, which is the same (as I understand it) as the highest usable by G+ hangouts.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 23:22:59 +0000

Or maybe the lens is just cleaner.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:31:56 +0000

Well, I was wondering about that. That would certainly have a good lens. I may try that.

By: uriah heep

uriah heep — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:15:09 +0000

To expensive unless you already have one but I am able to use a feed from my DSLR and You folks who have motion picture cameras probably can use them.