Mark Derail
Contributor
Good points Interceptor.
My breakdown was a generalization. Yes, MOV is a container like MKV, I'm thinking back in the 2003-5 era where all P&S cameras were either .MPG .AVI or .MOV format. Easy to mixup codec with file extension.
A Kodak 8MP P&S (2006), made beautiful .MOV files, say 30-ish seconds a 26MB file. To be able to put on a DVD or USB stick to play back on the TV, I had to convert. 400-500MB files for the same video, and it looked like crap.
I had to buy expensive software to get the "codec" necessary to properly export.
Was cheaper to get a non-Kodak camera.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
A "true" video camera has larger pixels than a camera sensor (if you measure with a ruler and determine DPI) and needs less lumens, also most vid cams can only take 1.x or 2mp stills. However its sensor and electronics are maximized for video, better focus & zoom.
On a P&S like a S100, only certain parts of the sensor is used, and there are way more pixels available. The software of the camera (dedicated hardware chips have software flashed onto them or burned) still has to make a compromise.
I was disappointed years ago that a 8MP camera could not do better video than 640x480 often with a lousy framerate, compared to dedicated video cams. Even my Nikon D90 just does 1280x720 max with a non-impressive framerate, which was considered "high end" back in 2008.
FWIW, at 60 fps, fast moving/tracking UW isn't that bad. As the newer cams phase out the older ones, say 5 more years, I can imagine crystal clear videos designed for 1080p 120Hz TV's to look amazing and cost under 500$.
My breakdown was a generalization. Yes, MOV is a container like MKV, I'm thinking back in the 2003-5 era where all P&S cameras were either .MPG .AVI or .MOV format. Easy to mixup codec with file extension.
A Kodak 8MP P&S (2006), made beautiful .MOV files, say 30-ish seconds a 26MB file. To be able to put on a DVD or USB stick to play back on the TV, I had to convert. 400-500MB files for the same video, and it looked like crap.
I had to buy expensive software to get the "codec" necessary to properly export.
Was cheaper to get a non-Kodak camera.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
A "true" video camera has larger pixels than a camera sensor (if you measure with a ruler and determine DPI) and needs less lumens, also most vid cams can only take 1.x or 2mp stills. However its sensor and electronics are maximized for video, better focus & zoom.
On a P&S like a S100, only certain parts of the sensor is used, and there are way more pixels available. The software of the camera (dedicated hardware chips have software flashed onto them or burned) still has to make a compromise.
I was disappointed years ago that a 8MP camera could not do better video than 640x480 often with a lousy framerate, compared to dedicated video cams. Even my Nikon D90 just does 1280x720 max with a non-impressive framerate, which was considered "high end" back in 2008.
FWIW, at 60 fps, fast moving/tracking UW isn't that bad. As the newer cams phase out the older ones, say 5 more years, I can imagine crystal clear videos designed for 1080p 120Hz TV's to look amazing and cost under 500$.