Archive for the ‘Hardware’ Category (feed)

7D vs 5D vs 500D/Ti1 vs GH1 vs D90

Don’t know which VdSLR to buy? Here’s a rundown of common knowledge and in my experience (both hands-on, and based on footage/tests found online):

Canon 5D
Noise: 9/10
Resolution: 8/10
Frame rate: 5/10
Bitrate/format: 7/10
Manual controls: 8/10
Audio gain control: 5/10 (requires firmware hack)
Live HDMI-out: 5/10
Rolling shutter: 6/10
Ergonomics: 6/10
Mic input: 7/10
Focusing: 5/10
Average Rating: 6.45

Canon 7D
Noise: 8/10
Resolution: 8/10
Frame rate: 8/10
Bitrate/format: 8/10
Manual controls: 8/10
Audio gain control: 3/10
Live HDMI-out: 6/10
Rolling shutter: 7/10
Ergonomics: 7/10
Mic input: 7/10
Focusing: 5/10
Average Rating: 6.81

Canon 500D/Ti1
Noise: 7/10
Resolution: 8/10
Frame rate: 4/10
Bitrate/format: 6/10
Manual controls: 2/10
Audio gain control: 1/10
Live HDMI-out: 5/10
Rolling shutter: 5/10
Ergonomics: 5/10
Mic input: 4/10
Focusing: 5/10
Average Rating: 4.72

Panasonic GH1
Noise: 7/10
Resolution: 8/10
Frame rate: 6/10
Bitrate/format: 2/10
Manual controls: 8/10
Audio gain control: 5/10
Live HDMI-out: 5/10
Rolling shutter: 6/10
Ergonomics: 7/10
Mic input: 6/10
Focusing: 8/10
Average Rating: 6.18

Nikon D90
Noise: 6/10
Resolution: 5/10
Frame rate: 3/10
Bitrate/format: 2/10
Manual controls: 2/10
Audio gain control: 1/10
Live HDMI-out: 5/10
Rolling shutter: 2/10
Ergonomics: 5/10
Mic input: 1/10
Focusing: 5/10
Average Rating: 3.63

The average rating puts the Canon 7D ahead the 5D with only a few points. However, when you also put into account the fact that the 5D costs an additional $1000, then the 7D is the clear winner. The 5D will stir clear the GH1 competition when the promised firmware upgrade comes out next year.

UPDATE: Just for fun. You get what you pay for:

RED One
Noise: 9/10
Resolution: 10/10
Frame rate: 10/10
Bitrate/format: 10/10
Manual controls: 10/10
Audio gain control: 10/10
Live HDMI-out: 8/10
Rolling shutter: 8/10
Ergonomics: 7/10
Mic input: 10/10
Focusing: 9/10
Average Rating: 9.18

The Kodak EasyShare M420

Geeks.com, home to 10 MP digital cameras and other cheap digital cameras, sent over the consumer Kodak M420 digicam for a quick look.

This is a 10 megapixels camera, shooting at a 3648×2736 resolution. It features a sensor of 1/2.3-inch CCD, a 3.0-inch wide angle color LCD display, a 4x optical zoom, digital image stabilization, 64 MB internal memory, SDHC slot, face detection, high ISO support up to 6400, text and sound tags, records continuous VGA video (640×480) at 30 fps and QVGA video (320 x 240) at 30 fps (MJPEG), and it comes with many scene modes.

According to the specifications it has a Schneider-Kreuznach Variogon lens, 28 – 112 mm (35 mm equiv.), f/2.6 – 5.8, shutter speed of 8-1/1000 sec., auto focus modes at normal, macro, infinity selectable, white balance with auto, daylight, tungsten, fluorescent, open shade options, a flash range of 0.2 – 4.0m at wide, ISO 400; 0.5 – 1.8 m at tele, ISO 400. Flash modes: auto, fill, red eye reduction, off, burst modes: self-timer (2 sec/10sec, 2 shots), burst 3 shots, scene modes: portrait, sport, landscape, close-up, night portrait, night landscape, snow, beach, text/document, fireworks, flower, museum/manner, self-portrait, high-ISO, children, backlight, panning, candlelight, sunset, panorama (right-left), panorama (left-right), blur reduction, program. There’s also AV output with NTSC/PAL selectable support.

The package came with a wall charger, which is pretty rare for Kodak cameras. Charging the battery for the first time took a whopping 7 hours. Battery life was so-so with this camera, mostly because of the large screen it had to power up.

On paper this camera’s abilities look good, but the quality we got out of it was sub-par. As you can see from the sample pictures, there’s fringing, and a very grainy look — reminiscent of interpolated cams. We also found it impossible to focus close enough in our macro shooting experiments. More over, the camera over-exposes like crazy in auto mode. The only good thing about its actual shooting abilities is the wide-angle aspect of the lens.

The ergonomics for the camera are not good either. I usually don’t complain about ergonomics on digicams, but this one is worse than usual. The flash/on-off/shutter buttons are glued next to each other, and more often than not I kept clicking the wrong button. The trash/menu/info buttons are very small and round, and so I needed to use my fingernail to press them — using just the thumb would press the wrong button. The D-pad’s round and stiff nature is as problematic too. Only good thing about the ergonomics was the zoom rocker buttom, which in fact I found it better than in most other digicams.

On the plus side the flash was pretty powerful and had an effect even from pretty far as you can see below in the without and with flash example:

The video mode is very basic (30 fps VGA MJPEG .mov) and there are no manual controls for it. In fact, the only manual control that the camera has is in its “P” mode, where there’s exposure compensation. When manually reducing exposure we were able to shoot a few acceptable pictures that weren’t hopelessly over-exposed.

Overall, I don’t think most people would be happy with this cam. Even every day people who just snap random pictures and don’t care about controls won’t be very happy with it. The pictures produced are too grainy, and the cam over-exposes way too much. If you need a cheap digicam I would suggest the Kodak Z1285 instead, which shoots better pics, has good manual controls when needed, has 720p HD video recording support, and it’s much cheaper too!

Rating: 5/10

My editing desk

This is my editing desk: a 2.4 Ghz Core2Duo DELL PC, 6 GB of RAM, an nVidia card, Vista 64 bit, with Sony Vegas Pro 9 32bit (for plugin/codec compatibility reasons), and two monitors. The 28″ one runs the main Vegas interface at 1920×1200, and the secondary 22″ one previews the actual video in 1:1 ratio size at 1920×1080 (so I can see all pixels as they truly are and edit/color-grade accordingly).

The video project loaded is a music video that I am working on for a Bay Area singer/songwriter. I used 18 tracks there. The look I chose for this video is a green-ish low-contrast look. I am hoping to have the video released by Sunday, after we re-shoot a few scenes on Saturday.

On the left side you can see my Canon HV20, 120 GB iPod, and my new smartphone, the HTC Hero. I still need to use better speakers with that PC system though. We have some very good high-quality Logitech speakers in storage, we just haven’t taken them out to connect them. So I am still editing with these $10 speakers (although most of the time I am using some very good headphones, so it doesn’t really matter much).

Regarding Litl’s Webbook

Litl’s super-secret product, the Webbook, that the company was working for 2 years now, was announced yesterday. It’s a netbook-style laptop, with a TV-like presentation mode when in “easel mode”, HDMI TV-out, and custom user interface — where the web browser is the interface. A lot of the information is stored in the cloud, and the laptop auto-maintains itself at night when not in use. It’s using Linux underneath, with some highly-modified Gnome technologies on top. More info and videos from here.

The reason I originally got interested about it last night was because it kind of reminded me Be’s “internet appliance” touch tablets back in 2001 which were running the BeIA operating system (based on the BeOS). Kind of reminded me that romantic era in terms of operating systems and new emerging technologies and whatnot.

Then, after the 2 minutes of day dreaming, I flash-forwarded myself back to 2009. And I realized what a stupid idea this is.

From the get go, the Webbook is simply over-priced at $699. It has no additional hardware that a $300 netbook doesn’t already have, and I am willing to pay an extra $100 for the special software that did cost money to develop. But 700 bucks? No freaking way. Especially for a non-touchscreen device like this (touchscreen that you would expect in this day and age), this is an overpriced item. Given the kind of homes shown in the marketing pictures on their web site, this feels like it’s geared towards the kids and grandmas of filthy rich people who try novelties like this for the fun of it (“oh honey, daddy can’t be in your birthday party tomorrow, he’s got work to do [see: whoring in Vegas]. But I bought for you a lovely present, your friends will be so jealous of your new toy computer!“).

Then, you will have to think about how *useful* this computer is. Interestingly, not much. It does WAY LESS than what an iPhone can do for once (both in terms of third party apps and basic functionality). And at least in the Bay Area (which is where most of the potential rich suckers for the Webbook live), everyone and their dog has a freaking iPhone (in fact, yesterday at Google’s headquarters I saw a lot of people using an iPhone, even if Google gave a free Android phone to all of its employees last year). And then there’s the AppleTV for the HD TV-out abilities, and even the PS3 and XBoX360 can show movies and pictures. Not good enough? Think that a REGULAR netbook, one that costs $300, can do everything that the Webbook can, and then some! In other words, the functionality offered by the Webbook is commoditized today, and easy to come by with cheap — or better understood — alternatives.

The only thing that the Webbook has for it, is its “easy to use” custom interface, but I think that custom interfaces that don’t offer a real (non-HTML) platform underneath for developers to really tap in, can simply not sustain themselves in the big picture. And heck, what is wrong with LiTL not offering a 3G connection? I mean, these devices are home-bound without a 3G connection, and given that they use the cloud so much (much more so than normal computers), it makes them utterly useless when wanting to take them with you. Or are we to believe that this webbook is supposed to be home-bound, and act as a middle ground between your stationary normal PC and your mobile cellphone? Because honestly, I don’t think there’s a market for that since a regular laptop can do most of that. And if not, Apple’s upcoming tablet will, in 3 months time.

So basically, my opinion is that LiTL has spent money on a product that simply can’t sustain itself. It couldn’t in 2001, and it can’t in 2009. Maybe if the netbook explosion hadn’t had happen 1.5 years ago, maybe — just maybe — there was some glimpse of hope for the Webbook. But the way things are now, it’s a lost endeavor. And it’s sad really. Especially for the engineers who worked on the software of this device.

And don’t get me started about that remote control (optional addon). Instead of really breaking new technological ground and creating a system like Natal (or at least a Bluetooth-based battery-powered touchpad device), users have to use that butt-ugly right-out-of-the-’60s remote control with its cumbersome “I am feeling blue” wheel-button. I honestly don’t know what the hell these people were thinking.

AppleTV as our audio server

Back in April I wrote a blog post about what solution would be ideal to feed our 65 GB of music library to our main speaker-set and amplifier. There was nothing that was doing exactly what we needed to do, so we were thinking of buying a second 400 CD-changer appliance, to fill it with our existing CDs and burned iTunes purchases.

The Sonos system was also discussed as a possible solution, but we were not happy with the fact it could not hold our library in the device itself, and needed constant streaming. We were not looking for a streaming system, but on a device that could hold all of our music in its internal drive, and get easily updated when we need it to.

Eventually, we added an intermediate step. We held back from the 400 CD-changer purchase, and bought a 120 GB iPod Classic with an Apple dock that featured a line-out. The problem with that solution is that we could not see what the heck was playing in the iPod’s 2.5″ screen while we were sitting on the couch, 2.5 meters away. Not to mention that for some reason the “back” key on the remote for the dock did not work with the Classic. Add to that the fact that the iPod line-out audio quality was below par (low volume compared to other input sources in our amplifier), and so sooner than later we were again in the market for a solution. Our Zune 120 GB and its dock had the similar usability/volume problems btw.

What made us root for the AppleTV was its “Remote” application for the iPhone/iPodTouch. There we are now, sitting on our couch, using the exact same UI as in the iPod Touch’s amazing music UI to control our AppleTV. We don’t even have to turn ON the HDTV to control it, it’s headless (that was one of our requirements)! We simply turning it ON once using its remote, then the iPod Touch’s “Remote” application takes over for the music control, and when we need to turn it OFF we just use the AppleTV remote again (long press on the play button puts the AppleTV on standby). Audio quality is punchy, CD-quality, much better than the iPod/Zune dock’s line-outs.

So far, so good! Only thing missing from the “Remote” app is the ability to rate songs (the UI is there but the rating mechanism is not implemented — maybe it comes in a future version)!

I don’t use the AppleTV for video playback, since the Sony PS3 is a much better solution for that (better support for formats and 1080/30p). But it’s perfect for our music, and maybe even for some streaming internet radio (new feature in the AppleTV 3.0 firmware).

Some have suggested that we could use a small laptop/PC with MPD in it, but there is a certain installation/configuration/annoyance associated with that. Turning ON the laptop/PC from standby would require to physically go close to the device, and then we would have to use MPD remote applications that simply don’t have the elegance of an Apple-designed app. Instead, the AppleTV just works, and we are able to _easily_ sync it with our iTunes installation too. That’s a major bonus since we use iTunes. Even more interestingly, the AppleTV is *cheaper* than a dedicated small laptop/PC running MPD.

So basically, for us at least, the “Remote” application is what made the whole difference for us, not necessarily the AppleTV itself. It’s one of these times that a side-project like that app is, brings value to other products!

RED needs a kick in the butt

Disclaimer: The following is meant as an analysis of the situation based on my experience as a tech journalist for some 8 years, and on my own personal opinion. It’s not meant to disrespect RED, or its founders. In fact, as a true tech geek, I am a fan of the whole RED project!

UPDATE 2: And now I am BANNED from the REDUser forum, for discussing my points VERY CALMLY with others. I was name called, but I never name called back. I simply explained my points, civilized, as you can read there.

UPDATE 3: Re-instated at the forum. Thanks everyone who spoke up about it.

RED just published an update on their vaporware line. You can read about it here & here.

Basically, these are hyperbole vaporware products, made by hype machines rather than engineers. Oh, I don’t dispute the fact that maybe 1-2 of these products announced last year and today will see the market at some point, but I do dispute the fact that they will be able to create all that stuff they are promising, and at the prices that they are promising. Already, now it’s becoming obvious that getting a usable Scarlet model is a $10k affair, and not a $3.5k as they had you to believe last year.

All this made me remember of my mother who used to tell me about an old man in her mountain village (I believe he’s long dead now) who had this moto: “promising is gaining, giving is losing”.

Basically, RED is a dream. Not your dream. But Jim Jannard’s dream. The guy’s a billionaire, and so he put together the RED company on the side. It’s obviously his “hobby” (it certainly feels that way). If the company goes nowhere eventually, oh well, at least he had fun doing it. But I keep thinking that all the millions he had poured into this, he could have either:
1. Simply make small modifications on the original RED while continuing R&D on new technologies without promising the most crazy things to his customers. Instead, follow a more traditional path regarding R&D and production.
2. If he just wanted to pour money down a hole, he should have given the money to people who need it instead, e.g. via Unicef.

Not all is bad from the whole story though. RED *has* contributed in the move from film to digital in Hollywood. I give them credit for that, and I thank them for that. But unfortunately, 99% of the time, it’s never that “first” company with the vision that ends up taking over that market. Instead, it’s the second or the third company in that sector who will learn from RED’s mistakes and dominate.

What I am saying here is that RED is going to die. There’s no way Jannard and his zillions can sustain this crazy business model they have. Just like the Xerox Alto was the first graphical personal computer of its kind but never went anywhere, RED will be seen the same way in 10-20 years from now. We would see RED with this romantic eye, but there won’t be any RED left at that point.

Who’s going to steal their thunder? In my opinion, it’s Canon. To create such complex technology, and especially at competitive prices, it requires an already established company with vast experience of both the technology and the market. Canon has the ability to simply evolutionize (rather than revolutionize) their existing technologies and catch up with RED — and even become better than them. Evidently from their recent VdSRLs and the rumored large-sensor prosumer cameras coming next Spring, I personally see Canon taking over Hollywood with as of yet un-announced offerings sooner than later.

But RED? It is Jim’s dream, and we were all in it. But I just woke up. I just hope Jim does too. Jim, save your money. That’s all I can say to you. Because I am a fan!

Update 1: A lot of people have a problem with the word “hobby”. Let me be clear about this. I believe that Jim does have a genuine interest about what he’s doing! He’s not an amateur. When someone has a serious hobby doesn’t mean that it’s just something he/she does on weekends.

But what it also means, in my book, is that he/she could be starting the business based on the interest about the technology in itself, and from pure curiosity, and for the cool factor, and not to create an actual profitable business. To me, a lot of things RED feel like “if it becomes profitable, even better — if not, well, we had fun researching and playing engineers”. While this is all fine if you’re a billionaire, it doesn’t strike me very nice if I was to be a customer.

I simply — for the life of me — can not take seriously RED when they spread themselves too thin over so many products. I just don’t see these as actual final products, I see them as beta stuff that someone put together in an R&D lab. Proof that the RED One had so many firmware upgrades so far. A “product” with the traditional sense, in that price, should have been bullet proof from Day 1. And I just don’t see this happening with the new line of cameras — if they ever come out.

In other words: In my own opinion, RED doesn’t know how to release PRODUCTS. There’s a difference between breaking new technological ground, and actually putting that new technology in an actual product. A product that is meant to be a product, and not a lab unit.

Will VdSLRs Drive Prosumer Camcorders to Next Level?

Traditionally, shooting a movie or a music video that had to exhibit the magical “Hollywood look” meant that the filmmakers had to rent expensive, professional cameras. Buying such a camera is still today prohibiting because of the high price tag.

Interestingly, the prosumer market of $2,000-$10,000 camcorders never fulfilled the particular job adequately since they have very small sensors and not interchangeable lenses. When adding third party accessories to make them behave more like their professional siblings (e.g. 35mm adapters, lenses), the prices end up getting higher, and there’s usually a quality hit too.

Suddenly, when no one was really expecting the development, dSLRs started carrying video capabilities, with the Canon 5D and Panasonic GH1 becoming the first “serious” such cameras. For a package that costs less than $3000 we could now enjoy full manual control, shallow depth of fied, and a high-bitrate codec at full 1080p.

Shooting something more than basic video with these cameras results in very beautiful footage that easily attracts the attention of indie filmmakers and enthusiasts with their relatively low prices. For example, the enthusiasts who fell in love with the very popular Canon HV20/30/40 series (the first consumer HD cameras to shoot in 24p), and the indie pros who were battling with inadequate prosumer camcorders for years, now they have new toys that could produce pleasing images at a low cost.

This undoubtedly puts a lot of market pressure to both high-end consumer camcorders and most prosumer models. Personally, I already know a lot of filmmakers, and filmmaker-wannabes, who are getting ready to sell their current camcorder so they can get a Canon 7D, for example. This is something that will have to naturally push the engineering and camcorder product teams at Canon, Sony and Panasonic to offer decent products in the future, decent-enough to compete with the new wave of VdSLRs: bigger sensors, lenses, maybe even 4:4:4 RAW codecs.

Of course, traditionally-built camcorders will continue to sell for corporate and wedding usage, but it’s clear right now that when it comes to filmmakers and artists, they require something more advanced than yet another 1/3″ camcorder.

I do expect that the next big batch of new models by Canon will feature the cameras that filmmakers always wanted, and we probably have to thank — in part — the video dSLR market for it.

Hurrah for competition!

Regarding the Canon 7D

(Updated below.)

Online rumors today place Canon 7D’s tomorrow announcement to mention 1080p at 24p/25p/30p, and 720p at 50p/60p. *If* this is true, and if the bitrate used is the same as 5D’s (~40 mbps), then we are looking at the best video dSLR in the market today.

Sure, quality-wise and low-light won’t be as good as in the 5D, but by the time you resize down to 1080p the 18 MP of native sensor’s image capturing, the quality difference will be almost visually eradicated between the two cams. And given that the 7D will purportedly have audio-in, HDMI-out, all the manual controls as the 5D, overall it makes it a better camera (because of the added frame rate choices, which are so important for video).

I already talked to JBQ about the 7D, and he agreed with me that this is the camera I need. This is the major step up I needed over my HV20. And since we already have EOS lenses, it will be a “relatively cheap” upgrade for me.

There is no way Panasonic or Nikon can match any of that in the near future. End of story. Who ever went with the GH1, and its horrendous 17 mbps bitrate, made a mistake (especially since the 7D will have a similar price, according to rumors). Sure, the Panasonic cams have continuous AF, but that’s the only thing they do better, and it’s not enough to save them from the unfortunate situation. The low bitrate, and the need for pulldown removal for its PF24 footage are the reasons I decided to not go for the GH1. I like the products I actually buy to be near-perfect and convenient, and the 7D comes closer to that ideal than the GH1 does.

And I know a lot of people who already have the 5D Mark-II, and won’t be happy if they don’t get the same frame rate support too (although it might be impossible in their case, because of the 5D’s hardware design). Make sure to check the video below, right on the spot about the situation:

I will update this post tomorrow, after getting the real scoop from the official press release and not rumors.

UPDATE: And so the official specs are out. The 7D can do all of what the rumors said, and even more:
1. It now shoots in REAL 24p and real 30p (meaning, 23.976 and 29.97 fps). Canon has just gain my respect back for doing that. It shows that whoever is managing their dSLR department LEARNS FAST.
2. The 7D can shoot at 50 mbps, while the 5D “only” does 42 mbps (compare this to HDV/AVCHD ~25 mbps). This, according to dpreview’s preview article. I will know for sure when I get some real footage directly out of the camera. But so far, it seems that indeed, the 7D has even more bitrate than the 5D! Update: The bitrate is actually 48 mbps. Still, better than in the 5D, and way better than HDV/AVCHD.
3. The camera can do both PAL and NTSC frame rates. This is VERY important for Europeans who want to either shoot 24p/25p slowed-down music videos, or theatrical motion pictures.
4. It costs just $1900 with a kit lens, or $1700 without. This is DIRT CHEAP for what you get for your next video camera. Think that a consumer camcorder like the HF-S10 had an MSRP of $1500, and it is such a bad camera compared to the 7D in terms of visual quality and manual controls. The only thing a camcorder can do better than the 7D is continuous autofocus.

The only thing missing for me though from the 7D, or at least not mentioned in reviews so far, is zebra support. It’s the only additional feature I would like, and it’s easily fixable by software alone.

In conclusion, let me say this: BUY THIS CAMERA. This is NOT ONLY the BEST video dSLR in the market, but also, the BEST video camera/camcorder in both its price range and a price range up to $7000, hands down. So basically, you get an amazing camera, that has SUPERIOR image quality than any of the prosumer camcorders below $7000, it has shallower depth of field, it is smaller, and it costs a FRACTION of what these camcorders do. Sure, prosumer camcorders can do other stuff that dSLRs don’t do, but when taking into account only the BASIC MUST-HAVE features in a video device, the 7D simply does them better.

And let me say something else too. I think that RED with their upcoming Scarlet camera has a huge competitor now. Not only the basic Scarlet model is much more expensive, but it also has a smaller sensor than the 7D. Sure it does 3k, but unless you use it for cropping to reframe a bad shot, *you don’t need* 3k. I think that the 7D is the camera that will give RED a really, really, really hard time in the lower-end market. Jim Jannard, RED’s billionaire and very active in the community founder, already started a forum post complaining about his 5D not having all what the 7D does in video mode. I felt by reading his message that he wasn’t really talking about his 5D (he’s a billionaire anyway, he can buy whatever he wants), but he tried to make existing 5D owners to despise Canon for releasing the cheaper 7D and offering more video features in it. At least, this is how his comment stroke me as. Sneaky. Update: That forum thread is now deleted, hah!.

As for the GH1. It’s a complete joke compared to the 7D. Completely and utterly a joke. 17 mbps and pulldown removal simply kill the usefulness of this camera. Unless you already have a buttload of lenses for it and so it doesn’t make sense to switch to Canon, you better sell the bloody thing and get a 7D. Same goes for any other Panasonic and Nikon existing *or* upcoming camera. They just don’t compare to the 7D. And especially for Nikon, the future looks gloomy since they haven’t been able to do anything useful with video so far. They still use MJPEG for Christ’s sake.

Pre-order a 7D at Amazon.

Review: The Kodak Zi6

Geeks.com sent us over the popular Kodak Zi6 digital camcorder along a PEAK 16GB Class 6 SDHC Memory Card, Samsonite C441 mini backpack and a Samsonite TM90BK molded digital camera bag.

The Zi6 is Kodak’s answer to Flip’s ultra-popular line of digirecorders. It is able to shoot in VGA, 720/30p and its main distinctive feature is its ability to also do 720/60p. It can also capture 3 MP interpolated still images.

The Zi6 incorporates a USB male port in its body, so you can connect it to a PC without a USB cable. It has an SDHC card slot, an RCA-out and a component-out. It also wrist-wrap and tripod holes. Finally, there’s a slide-in ON/OFF button, and a macro/normal focus mode for the fixed lens that the camera comes with. On the front of the camera there’s the joystick that controls playback, recording, zooming digitally 2x, volume up/down, and cycling through the various modes. The button on the right switches from recording mode to playback mode, while the button on the left deletes or pauses the currently actively clip when in playback mode.

Overall, there is a good ease of use with the Zi6. The controls are simple and to the point. There are no manual controls whatsoever, or advanced notions. The device does the job as it was designed to do, and adding the 60p feature makes it more valuable than the Flip (even for more advanced video users this can be a useful feature at times).

Quality is what you would expect too, from a low-bitrate 720/60p cam. Not very good and not terrible either (I’ve seen worse). My main complain is that the footage is so over-contrasty that it can’t take any color grading in post. The lens is only a hair better than a good cellphone lens, while the binary nature of the focusing system doesn’t help with shooting versatility. I also noticed that in low-light conditions the camera drops frames (so you will only get a real 60p shot under a very good light). Interestingly, the microphone is not too bad at all, it is in fact better that Flip’s.

Battery life is so-so, with shooting capability of about an hour. The Zi6 comes with the rechargeable batteries and a charging station.

A Zi6 video by Karen Abad ♥s Dinosaurs:

My biggest complaint about the Zi6 is that it doesn’t make sense. Like the Flip, it is a product that offers no value other than ease of use. I placed the Zi6 next to the Kodak V1073 that I reviewed a few weeks ago, and the V1073 is almost half the size! I can’t understand why anyone would buy the Zi6 rather than the V1073, when the V1073 can shoot 720/30p too, it has 3x optical zoom, more controls, and it can shoot very nice (for the price) still images.

So it makes no sense to buy a brick like the Zi6 (or the Flip) when for the same money you can get a real digicam that does the job much better, and it’s physically smaller too! In fact, the Samsonite TM90BK camera bag did not fit the Zi6, but it did fit easily the V1073 and the Panasonic FX150. It fit nicely on the Samsonite C441 bag though, along a dSRL and two lenses.

Overall, the Zi6 has one and only one good point: its 60p ability. If you are in desperate need of some good slow-motion, on the budget, then this isn’t a bad deal. But don’t expect this camera to make it easy for you to shoot small masterpieces like some on Vimeo. It’s possible for some types of videos, but it won’t be easy.

The new Canon digicams

Canon announced today a few new consumer digicams. Some plain digicams, some super-zooms, and two somewhat higher-end ones. The two interesting ones are the higher-end ones, the S90 and G11. They have large sensors (1/1.7″), and somewhat faster lenses (the S90’s aperture size is almost as big as the HV20’s, which can mean quite some background blur). And coupling this with the fact that they allow for the same amount of manual image controls as the SX200 IS, they could make them the best sub-$500 video digicams in the market.

And that’s where Canon screwed up.

They offer HD 720/30p support to their cheap new models and their super-zooms, but only VGA to the G11 & S90. This is where HD video would have made some good difference with the big sensor and faster lenses. But noooo… Canon had to segment this new product line. I would have bought the S90, even if I just bought the SX200 IS a few weeks ago, but now, no way I’d buy any of that. That’s money lost for Canon.

Especially for the two high-end models, they could easily make it such as it could do 30 mbps 1080/720p at 30/25/24p (selectable), and with some manual controls (aperture, shutter, ISO) in addition to the current auto modes (that already include exposure compensation/locking, and manual focus/locking). Now, that would be a great stills-video combo gadget that most people would have loved to take with them on holidays.

Product segmentation sucks.

And don’t let me start on their “refreshed” camcorder line (which they do every August traditionally). The new “features” added on the HF-S11 (more flash storage, better OIS) are useless for most video enthusiasts (who already carry bags of SDHC cards and use tripods anyway). Instead of adding native 24p support to FREE US from the pulldown removal HELL, they added the “Advanced Video Snapshot Mode which allows you to create the perfect highlight movie to share with family and friends by recording a series of four second clips when in shooting mode as well as in playback mode.” Really? Really now?