Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (23,444 visits to this link)
17,298 topics in this forum
-
- 1.2k replies
- 473.3k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.9m views
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.7m views
-
- 0 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 700 replies
- 311.8k views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 766.9k views
-
- 4 replies
- 98 views
-
- 99 replies
- 77.3k views
-
- 60 replies
- 5.6k views
-
- 20 replies
- 663 views
-
- 12 replies
- 402 views
-
Internal 32-bit float stereo paired with lossless 120mm reach from a 20mm lens — all inside a genuinely pocket-sized 10-bit 1-inch sensor gimbal camera? 1 2 3
- 41 replies
- 2.3k views
-
- 6 replies
- 3.2k views
-
- 19 replies
- 12.8k views
-
- 563 replies
- 265.4k views
-
- 24 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 11 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 1 reply
- 480 views
-
- 14 replies
- 8.8k views
-
- 49 replies
- 3.7k views
-
- 14 replies
- 7.4k views
-
- 2 replies
- 392 views
-
- 0 replies
- 393 views
-
- 11 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 20 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 2 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 82 replies
- 9.2k views
-
- 127 replies
- 62.7k views
-
- 121 replies
- 66.3k views
-
- 0 replies
- 512 views
-
- 0 replies
- 582 views
-
- 0 replies
- 586 views
-
- 5 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 314 replies
- 152k views
-
- 12 replies
- 6.1k views
-
- 30 replies
- 34.3k views
-
- 1 reply
- 547 views
-
- 8 replies
- 13.9k views
-
- 45 replies
- 13.5k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.3k
-
Total Posts352k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
I've heard that this is quite common, although from larger cameras with more camera-like shapes. I wonder how many people have done this... -
The example pictures online are actually cherry-picked. The images I'm seeing from mine are worse, to the extent I wondered if I got a fake. When I looked closer I just think they chose the nicest ones, which is really just how social media works! You'd be forgiven for thinking it's the lens, but it's really not. Here is a sample image so you can see what I'm seeing. Charmera - 1440x1080 - SOOC - 280K file size: For reference, here's a 1440x1080 280K image from my GX85 with matched FOV: The level of detail is incomparable. What happens if I take the GX85 image and 2x downscale it to 720px then upscale it to 1440 280K again? It's a lot closer, and obviously I haven't sharpened the crap out of it (just doing this quickly in Preview on Mac). But what happens if I take a 3x downsample 480px, then upscale to 1440 280K again? This is definitely lower resolution (the artefacts from the lower res are larger compared to the Charmera). Charmera crop: GX85 -> 3x downsample -> 1440px: GX85 -> 2x downsample -> 1440px: That's much closer. What does all this mean? The limitation is the processor. I believe that they're using a 1440x1080 processor (as they claim) but they're using it in a 720x576 20p readout mode, then sharpening the crap out of it, then upscaling it to 1440x1080, converting it from 20p to 30p, then compressing it to ~15Mbps. The colour isn't that great either, this may be a processing thing too, I'm not sure. The issue is that for them to use the sensor in a 1440 readout mode would require 4x the data rates, which is 4x the processing. If you want the file in real 30p instead of 20p padded out to 30p, that's another 50% again, so 6x the processing. As we know from compact cameras that try and be 4K or 6K and also small, that's overheating territory. It's also "batteries only last how long?!?!?!?!?!" territory. So it would need to be 6x more powerful. I'm not really sure how much extra space those things would require, although GoPro can now do 8K30, which is 16x the data rates of a 2K30 camera, plus its doing all kinds of stabilisation processing etc on top of that, so I'd imagine there is room for these things in such a device if someone was to make one. Someone said that this circuit is likely a very common circuit in all kinds of cameras like dash cams etc, so it's probably only through economies of scale that this can be done. There were quite a number of action cameras and other common cameras that had a real 1080p30 readout, so maybe the pro version could leverage one of those existing architectures of existing chips. That would be pretty awesome!
-
Some kid will use that camera and make a short film and upload it to YT, then he'll get a Hollywood deal. A couple will buy 30 of them and put then on the wedding guest's tables for people to snap photos and take some video. The groom will edit them all together on his phone while sitting on the beach during his honeymoon. He will also upload it to YT and probably get a Hollywood deal. lol. -
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
Yikes! I'm so sorry about your dad. 😔 I hope things improve! -
By Clark Nikolai · Posted
Me too. I see them and they look fun but the picture examples are so bad. The sharpening is the worst part of it (but likely to make up for the low quality lens.) Being the age I am, I don't get any nostalgia for the look of early digital cameras. I want a better image (even if it's small by today's standards.) It doesn't have to be raw but a higher bitrate JPEG would be great. The option to save two files, one raw (or log high bitrate JPEG) and a JPEG with an in camera filter applied would be good. Unlike the days of early digital cameras, there's no need to save storage space anymore. I once had a little spy pen camera, no viewfinder, only 1 megapixel. It only held 12 pictures but they were pretty good quality considering the size. It was fun because you just pointed in the general direction and clicked. Only later when you got home you found out what you got. Not a design thing, just the limitations of the time. I got it for ten bucks or something and it was totally worth it for a bit of fun a few times. It sat in a drawer for twenty years and now doesn't hold a charge. It's not worth it for me to replace the battery.
-
