Sony HDR-GW77: waterproof, dustproof, shockproof small HD camcorder - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 639 Old 07-28-2012, 07:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Mark, earlier you wrote "it is using a new (to consumers) military technology used for surveillance that uses AI to upscale resolution, by a lot." Maybe we will see more of that kind of stuff and cameras will get smaller and work in less light.
bsprague is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 639 Old 07-28-2012, 08:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Somebody posted a GW77 "test video" doing a trip to a zoo in Australia. Enjoy it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNBXYQfUM7Q
bsprague is offline  
post #93 of 639 Old 07-28-2012, 08:51 AM
Senior Member
 
spyker1212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

So, what do we get two years from now?

fento photography in sony gw77XX

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y_9vd4HWlVA
spyker1212 is online now  
post #94 of 639 Old 07-28-2012, 04:27 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
For those who are unfamiliar with the GPS capabilities of the GW77, this is one example of a map view of one of the video clips I took in a local garden that was part of the posted garden video:

Gardenmapview.jpg

This is a screen grab of the satellite view (you can also just choose a regular map view). The red icon is where the flower in the top left left was shot. As you can see, the GPS is very precise; it does not just tell you what town you are in but, in this case, where in the approximately one square block garden that particular flower was located.

The GPS gets a fix almost instantly, you can see on the camera LCD screen the map of where you are on a scale of about 100 feet (with zoom) or satellites! And even if you do not care about location, the GPS will set the clock automatically for your location.

Map view is a feature of the included PlayMemories Home software.
markr041 is offline  
post #95 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 04:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
rjeffb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi folks, I've had my unit (wanted it in white, but only the black was shipping fulfilled by Amazon and I've run into issues returning products "sold by Amazon" but fulfilled by somebody else) for a week but so far only had time to play with it a few times - the tag and label are still attached. I feel that I have to point out something that nobody seems to be talking about here or in any review I've seen - this thing has bad still performance in low light. As in really really bad - bloody huge splotches of reddish and yellowish bubbles. I can't really distinguish what the Low Lux setting does, if it is just an ISO adjustment (I don't think this has an ISO setting per se, at least none that I have found) or if it's supposed to be doing some sort of correction. Thing is, it takes a pretty decent flash picture (no shoe and nobody will mistake it for an SLR with a shoe-mounted bounce flash) and low-light video at full HD @ 60p is really quite good - you probably won't need a video light (which is good because there's no simple way to attach one).

The three pictures were taken at the 10MP (middle resolution) wide-format size (photo mode, not a photo snapped in movie mode). These are 2440x1440 crops, saved with no (further) loss.This is a fairly bright lamp (mini fluorescent 60 watt incadescent equivalent) with a 120 watt equivalent fluorescent ceiling fixture about 20 feet away partly illuminating through a doorway. So not even what I would consider very low light, it's not like I'm expecting good results by candlelight.

Auto white balance. Medium flash, no flash, and no flash/"low lux." All fully automatic, with the low-lux taken with the instruction booklet selected as the spot focus/metering point.

First, medium flash:


Next, no flash:


And finally, low lux:


Click on the pictures to see the full crop and note the blotches. Any comments or suggestions? Other than the "low lux" setting, is there an ISO, gain, exposure, or shutter setting hidden on this thing?
rjeffb is offline  
post #96 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 07:50 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
"something that nobody seems to be talking about here or in any review I've seen - this thing has bad still performance in low light."

No it does not.

1. A true low-light picture was posted in this thread and compared with a regular Sony camera. There were no splotches or bubbles. The low-light performance is good. Your scene is not an example of a low-light problem (see below).

2. The camera does have manual exposure and manual white balance. They are not "hidden." And low lux mode is for video: it slows down the shutter to 1/30th, from the minimum default (for video) of 1/60th. It will not affect stills.

3. Your scene:

It is not an example of low-light. It is an example of mixed-temperature and uneven lighting: clearly there are multiple light sources of different temperatures and intensities, with the lamp having the lowest temperature (more yellow) and the brightest light. So, when you used flash, the flash overwhelmed the original light sources (not completely) and evened out the light of one color. It also filled in shadows and obliterated reflections.

Without flash, when you focused on the white Sony manual (which is the correct thing to do) but which had a different light source than the table lamp, the manual comes out white and reasonably exposed but the table, lit by the low-temperature lamp, comes out yellow and overexposed - one big yellow blob with a hot spot. The yellow splotches on the pillow are reflection from the yellowish-light of the lamp. Now, here's where the camera comes in: the camera took the reflections on the pillow as real objects and sharpened them up, making them look unnatural.

None of this has anything to do with low-light performance. And no camera can deal with different temperature and intensity light sources in one frame and look good. Your example picture is a camera nightmare. Flash is a good remedy. Your photos do show how the new AI pixel technology of the GW77 can sometimes lead to a strange result. It would be useful to have a comparison of the same scene taken by another camera. And try a real low-light scene with only one light source; you will see the performance is fine, or at least as good as other good cameras with smaller sensors.

Relatedly, I watched a televised olympic soccer match on a pitch (field) that was half in shade and half in sun - the same nightmare! The video looked awful at times: when a player's body was in shade but the face was lit by sun, the body looked fine but the face was blown out and yellow and splotchy; when the full player was in shade, the background was often completely blown out (the sun part) and yellow. Different light intensities of different temperatures, and $30,000 video cameras could not produce a pretty video. If I see this again, I may take a picture of the screen.
markr041 is offline  
post #97 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 08:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"..... the new AI pixel technology of the GW77..".
I've googled myself silly trying to find out what the AI pixel technology is. Earlier you wrote it was borrowed from the military. Can you point me to where I can read about it?

Thanks.

Bill
bsprague is offline  
post #98 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 08:59 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
markr041 is offline  
post #99 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 04:31 PM
Senior Member
 
spyker1212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 13

new advanced tecnology....new feature soon on next version of gw77....a 15sec cache recording..

link below

The PMW-200 camcorder also comes with an invaluable 15-second cache recording feature, a function unique among handheld camcorders. Its internal memory can capture images even before the recording button is pressed (maximum of 15 seconds), allowing users to record important moments that would have otherwise been missed.

http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/07/sony-brings-hd422-workflow-to-its-xdcam-handheld-camcorder-line/
spyker1212 is online now  
post #100 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 04:34 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Actually, this pre-record feature has been around a long time. I believe it is an option on Panasonic consumer camcorders. However, it is something like 3-4 seconds, not 15 seconds! Does burn up the battery.
markr041 is offline  
post #101 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 08:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
rjeffb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
>It is not an example of low-light. It is an example of mixed-temperature and uneven lighting:

Fair enough. I'm a big believer on eliminating sources of variability from experiments, so the following photos were taken using only the 60-incadescent watt equivalent nightstand lamp, at night with all other lights off. The camera was mounted on a tripod and the white balance (by the way I never said the white balance was hidden), focus, exposure, spot metering all set to automatic. The only difference from shot to shot is whether or not the camera was set to VIDEO or STILL mode (to see whether or not shooting a still from still mode is identical to shooting a still from video mode, no ongoing video being shot); low-lux on or off; and stabilization on ("active") or off (to see if electronic pixel shifting could be affecting smearing or blotchiness). All shots were centered on the instruction manual from about one meter away, with the booklet about 30 degrees incident to the light source. Image size is 10MB (middle option); to be able to reasonably upload, they were all resized to 50% of original and saved to lossless (no additional loss) jpeg.

Observations:

The low lux setting cannot be a shutter speed change - or more precisely, cannot be ONLY a shutter speed change. Between pix 1 and 2 (stabilization on, video mode) turning on Low Lux brightens the picture while reducing blotchiness (but the blotches remain in the same places); but between pix 7 and 8 (stabilization off, still mode) there's no difference I can discern, and between pix 3 and 4 (stabilization on, still mode) turning on Low Lux made the image considerably blotchier. Wouldn't slowing the shutter down on a tripod-mounted still photo, ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL, consistently decrease noise? I suspect there's something else going on here.

The image is slightly different magnification in different snaps. I cannot explain how that's possible (perhaps I accidently tapped the zoom button while pressing the mode button but I was being very careful not to). Could changing settings affect the zoom level? Needs more experimentation.

>low lux mode is for video...It will not affect stills.

That's only a partially true statement. I see no difference between pix 3 & 4 and 7 & 8 (snaps taken in still mode) but a significant difference in brightness and clarity between 1 & 2 and 5 & 6 (snaps taken in video mode). A more accurate statement might be "Low Lux does not affect still MODE." Again, blotchiness decreased when turning on Low Lux between pix 1 & 2; but between pix 5 & 6 I can't tell for sure (seems to me that it got worse but it might be that it just became more obvious).

In most cases, stabilization does not seem to affect blotchiness. In fairness, pix 1 & 5 and 2 & 6 are at different magnifications (see above); Pix 5 with stabilization turned off seems less blotchy but that may not be fair since they are at different zooms. 3 & 7 look identical to me. There was a definite DECREASE in blotchiness when stabilization was turned off between pix 4 and 8. But here's something interesting: the patterns of blotchiness between pix 2 and 6 appear in identical areas of the instruction booklet (even though it is different sizes in each). That tells me that this is not a pixel issue but some sort of odd color processing.

Are these same results repeated at different image sizes? If I get a chance I'll try that or someone else can give it a go. Click on the images to open full (well, 50% anyway) size.

1. Stabilization on, Video mode, Low Lux off:


2. Stabilization on, Video mode, Low Lux on:


3. Stabilization on, Still mode, Low Lux off:


4. Stabilization on, Still mode, Low Lux on:


5. Stabilization off, Video mode, Low Lux off:


6. Stabilization off, Video mode, Low Lux on:


7. Stabilization off, Still mode, Low Lux off:


8. Stabilization off, Still mode, Low Lux on:
rjeffb is offline  
post #102 of 639 Old 07-29-2012, 08:42 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
I certainly see the "blotchiness". Do you know what settings these were taken at? That is, how dim? Under bright light, does the blotchiness go away? The auto WB is not doing the job - the booklet is far from white. Might you try to manually set WB?

Again, I did a low-light photo (in photo mode) and got this:


DSC00031.jpg


There is noise, but not the same blotchiness - the noise is multicolored, not one color (yellow) and the white balance (set to auto) is correct here.. So, why the difference? The light source in this case was natural light, at dusk. For another camera, the reading was ISO 800 at 1/8th of a second at f3.3 - really dim.

I suspect that the GW77 does not carry out the the high level of noise reduction of Sony's other cameras. The result is a sharper image with more noise.

And here is my replication of your test:

DSC00045.jpg

One overhead 60-watt FL bulb - and same blotchiness (1/60th, f1.8, manual WB just like the figurine photo). It is clearly the digital noise, as we see it on the wood as well. It is less attractive on the white paper than on the wood or on the figurine.

Now, how does this compare to a comparable Sony stllls camera - the Hx9v:

DSC00609.jpg

This was shot at f3.3, 1/30th, ISO800, full auto. It has the yellow blotchiness as well, but not as pronounced. This is presumably because there is more noise reduction, and thus also less detail in the wood.

Here is the same shot from the Hx9v using manual WB:


DSC00610.jpg

Less blotchiness, but all color is reduced, so a flat image that is not accurate.
markr041 is offline  
post #103 of 639 Old 07-30-2012, 12:30 AM
Newbie
 
Gyorgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

Somebody posted a GW77 "test video" doing a trip to a zoo in Australia. Enjoy it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNBXYQfUM7Q

That somebody was me. smile.gif I found this forum and wanted to post my video, but you were quicker. biggrin.gif

I will upload more videos soon.

As you can see at the end of the video, sharpness drops quite significantly in low light conditions, but it's still pretty good considering that the lens was zoomed in and I the image stabiliser worked hard to compensate my shaking hand. I didn't use a tripod but the software stabiliser seems to be doing a good job.
Gyorgy is offline  
post #104 of 639 Old 07-30-2012, 05:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
rjeffb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Next round of Sony HDR-GW77 review of low-light photo capability.

I had the following hunch (based on experience with Sony misrepresenting their products in the past - like 1440x1080 interlaced advertised and labeled as "Full HD!"): what if that sensor is interpolating even at medium size? I know that should be impossible, even the cheapest cameras now have 10MP sensors and there should be no reason to interpolate or at least not to always interpolate in all settings...but just for giggles I tried a little experiment.

These are all shot in Still mode, with if it makes a difference (I suspect not but I did not test it) the video mode previously set to 60i. Everything except white balance set to auto. The white balance is either auto or manual set to match the cover of the instruction booklet. Again, single light source (I don't know the lux but I will try to get a different camera with a known ISO setting and determine the equivalent shutter and aperature) about a meter away, 60 watt-equivalent fluorescent, picture taken from 1 meter, subject 30 degrees incident to light. The main difference here is the pictures alternate between "Small" (1920x1080) and "Medium" (4224x2376) pixels. If that was pixel-to-pixel, we'd be talking 2MP and 10MP - certainly not an unreasonable expectation for modern cameras. The "20MP" I already knew was just typical Sony nonsense so I didn't even bother including it. Small pictures were uploaded at native, medium pictures were resized to 50% to save space. I'll attest that the resized photos are accurate representations of the original snap.

Comments:

Manual white balance plus medium size picture is a killer.

The only decent picture in the bunch is small, automatic white balance (although it is indeed the wrong color) - almost completely blotch-free. Raising the picture size while keeping everything else the same introduces blotches, which if I am not mistaken happen to coincide with shadows in the small snap. Can you say "post-processing errors"? This tells me that either a) Sony is performing (poor) processing on a photo that doesn't need it or b) that's not really a 10MP sensor and even at "medium" size it's (poorly) upscaling. Oh, and even though I previously proved that it doesn't make a difference, for the record this is with stabilization turned off so there's no anti-shake compensation going on.

Just for fun check out the last picture - "night mode" with everything set to auto. Apparently auto-focus and auto-exposure are deactivated in this mode? Really?

Click on the pictures to open full scale.

1. Small, manual white balance:


2. Medium, manual white balance:


3. Small, automatic white balance:


4. Medium, automatic white balance:


5. Small, Night Mode:
rjeffb is offline  
post #105 of 639 Old 07-30-2012, 06:47 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
"even the cheapest cameras now have 10MP sensors."

Sorry, but the GW77 is a camcorder. The top-of-the line Sony camcorder has 8MP; the top of the line Canon camcorder has 2.7MP(!). Sony is not misrepresenting anything. You do not have to do your test to know what the sensor size is: the specs clearly show the sensor is 5MP.

Professional video cameras do not have large numbers of pixels either - for a reason: Full hd (1920x1080) needs only 2-3MP. Packing in more pixels does nothing good for video quality, and can make video worse. If the small sensor packed in more pixels, low-light video would be compromised, because the pixels would have to be much smaller. And the priority is video.

And see: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1045&message=42150608


Thus, the "large" and "medium" still pictures are made using interpolation alogrithms ("ByPixel Resolution"). That is why the GW77 is a camcorder, not a camera with video. Cameras with video compromise video quality - the RX100, for example, has a big sensor packed with pixels; it takes great still pictures but its video resolution is lower than a budget camcorder and filled with artifacts. This is also (more) true for DSLRs - poor resolution in video with artifacts.

The Hx9v (and its successor Hx20v) and the Panasonic Z150 (Z200) are perhaps the best compromise cameras - their video is almost as good as an equivalent-priced camcorder (but not in low light) and their still pictures are pretty good too, perhaps better in low light than the GW77, but not as good as the RX100 in any light.

Did you see the Hx9v photo in the same lighting conditions? its is really not much better, and that camera does *not* interpolate. All modern cameras post-process the RAW image. The Hx9v applies heavy noise-reduction, for example.
markr041 is offline  
post #106 of 639 Old 07-30-2012, 06:59 AM
Senior Member
 
spyker1212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjeffb View Post

Next round of Sony HDR-GW77 review of low-light photo capability.

sony came out with 2 product on same day. the sony rx100 and sony gw77.

the sony rx100 is best pocketable point and shoot camera and
the sony gw77 is best pocketable point and shoot camcorder.

the guys at dp review sony talk forum loved their sony rx100... but having hard time with the rx100 video cause apple does not support avchd 1080p

while guys here loved their sony gw77 video... but having hard time with gw77 photo adjustment because only a few people use lightroom
spyker1212 is online now  
post #107 of 639 Old 07-30-2012, 11:34 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Yes, Lightroom can take care of noise in stills quite well.
markr041 is offline  
post #108 of 639 Old 07-30-2012, 09:56 PM
Newbie
 
Robertron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello, i'm new. I found this forum after looking extensively at the GW77.

I'm from Australia, looking to purchase one VERY soon, as I go overseas in less than a month (for 7 weeks) and am looking for something to capture a lot of footage on the go.

As far as I can tell, this is the camcorder i'm looking for. HOWEVER everywhere I have looked - no one seems to ever mention the battery life. How long can you record for (generally, standard settings) from full battery life to dead?

Would it be worth my while to purchase a couple of spare batteries to charge up and keep in my pocket with the camera? I will be trying to record as much as possible.

thanks for your help
Robertron is offline  
post #109 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 02:22 AM
Member
 
vadislav22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have had my GW77 for a couple of weeks now and am strictly a non professional. I was wondering the same thing about the battery life so after using and charging the battery a few times I timed the life of the battery with continued recording to about 45 minutes. During this period there was no movement of the camera and no use of the zoom. Not very scientific though as there are so many variables. Given this I will be getting additional batteries and a charger as I don't want the camera being unavailable while batteries are being charged. ,
vadislav22 is offline  
post #110 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 05:18 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Did you leave the GPS on? That makes a significant difference to battery life.

Btw, 45 minutes of video is a lot of video, but I definitely advise having an extra battery (as for any camcorder).
markr041 is offline  
post #111 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 05:36 AM
Newbie
 
Robertron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
mark, apparently we're only allowed 2 private messages per day on here? that's just ridiculous

1 more question with what we were talking about, the PAL & NTSC thing - i'm not too knowledgeable on that, i understand they're regions but not sure how or what it would affect etc? I believe australia is PAL?

Does the "E" in GW77VE mean Euro? just having a guess here now... Just not sure where to buy the camera from... am going overseas in less than 3 weeks
Robertron is offline  
post #112 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 05:46 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
E means PAL - 50i, 50P, which is the system for Australia. GW77VEs from Hong Kong would be ok.

The European version is the GW55VE, which is the same as the GW77V without the built-in 16GB of memory. So if only a GW55VE is available, that's really ok (cheaper). The V indicates the built-in GPS.
markr041 is offline  
post #113 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 06:03 AM
Newbie
 
Robertron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So the GW77VE is the way to go?

What would happen if I ordered the NTSC GW77V from america exactly? Confused as to why it matters that's all
Robertron is offline  
post #114 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 06:24 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Start another thread on PAL versus NTSC, or search. This is no longer a GW77 issue.

PAL (Australia) version=50p, 50i in HD. NTSC (USA)=60i, 60P. For SD, PAL is the system in Australia; NTSC is the system in the US.
markr041 is offline  
post #115 of 639 Old 07-31-2012, 02:13 PM
Member
 
vadislav22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The GPS was turned off. I had a live chat with a Sony tech rep and one of the questions I asked was what impact the GPS use has on battery life. I could not get an answer on that, just saying that it should be left "on". As I am using a Mac apparently the GPS function does not work with video although it seems to work with iPhoto. I suppose there is no reason to leave it on for video then.
vadislav22 is offline  
post #116 of 639 Old 08-05-2012, 07:42 PM
Newbie
 
tkohsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello,

I'm a sailing coach and I'm looking for a good waterproof camcorder for training analysis. Can someone kindly explain to me why some websites state that the GW77 is 1080/60p and others are 1080/50p? My basic knowledge is that 60p is better than 50p in terms of smoothness but is it that big a difference? I'm looking to do some slow-mo replay if it helps. Thanks in advance!

T.
tkohsk is offline  
post #117 of 639 Old 08-05-2012, 07:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
slimoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Miami area
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkohsk View Post

Hello,
I'm a sailing coach and I'm looking for a good waterproof camcorder for training analysis. Can someone kindly explain to me why some websites state that the GW77 is 1080/60p and others are 1080/50p? My basic knowledge is that 60p is better than 50p in terms of smoothness but is it that big a difference? I'm looking to do some slow-mo replay if it helps. Thanks in advance!
T.

50P for the European model, 60P for the American model.

Standard Definition Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy
slimoli is offline  
post #118 of 639 Old 08-05-2012, 08:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
It has to do with how TVs are designed to work with the electricity. Half the world gets 50 cycle per second AC at 220 volts and the other half gets 60 cycles per second AC at 120 volts. So, the 50 cycle world has "PAL" video and the 60 cycle world has "NTSC" video. The systems don't work well. You can take your 60 cycle camcorder to Europe and take video, but you will probably have to come home to watch it on a TV. I think you might be able to watch it on a European computer, but I'm not sure because I've not tried it.
bsprague is offline  
post #119 of 639 Old 08-05-2012, 11:10 PM
Newbie
 
tkohsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the replies! So am I right to say that I can watch the videos anywhere in the world if I transfer the videos from the "PAL" camcorder to my laptop and in turn use a cable to connect my laptop to a monitor? Sorry for being so ignorant!

All I want is to shoot some vids, download it to my laptop and broadcast it on a bigger screen to a class of athletes. If only technology was as easy as sailing...
tkohsk is offline  
post #120 of 639 Old 08-06-2012, 07:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkohsk View Post

Thanks for the replies! So am I right to say that I can watch the videos anywhere in the world if I transfer the videos from the "PAL" camcorder to my laptop and in turn use a cable to connect my laptop to a monitor? Sorry for being so ignorant!
All I want is to shoot some vids, download it to my laptop and broadcast it on a bigger screen to a class of athletes. If only technology was as easy as sailing...
You probably can. And, it will probably be amazingly simple the second time you do it. I used to sail a 16 foot Hobie in the surf off Oahu. Keeping it from pitchpoling on 20 foot waves was not always that easy. I wish I could take a GW77 back to that time.

I have Sony and Panasonic cameras and it is easy to get their 60p files to my Toshiba laptop in a variety of ways, including the simple step of removing the data card from either camera and putting it into the built in card reader on the laptop. I don't think the laptop cares what kind of files they are. 50p files should be no different.

Some Windows laptop owners will say that 60/50p files run "jerky" on the default video players they have. That is usually solved by installing a different player. A popular one is called Splash Lite. Another way is to use the software that comes with the camera. The 60p/50p files are massive, so performance can vary depending on the laptop. Mine is two years old and has an i5 brain.

My laptop has an HDMI port. I think that is common now. I know that my 55" Sony TV displays a perfect duplicate of the laptop screen using a $20 25 foot long HDMI cord. I don't know how or why it works so good. As soon as I plug in to the TV the laptop blinks a couple times and then both screens show the same image. I have to push a button on the TV remote twice to get the TV image to expand to full screen. I have read that part of the HDMI standard will block the connection if I don't have legal permissions to play video. For example, if I tried to play an illegal copy of a hollywood video on the laptop DVD player and mirror to the TV.

For reasons I don't understand, the audio does not work through the HDMI so I have to plug a wire into the earphone jack and route it separately to the speakers. My laptop has the ability to use an Intel designed gadget to wirelessly connect to the TV but it was $100 and the cord works.

I have not tested 1080p50 PAL files on my laptop. If I was going to do what you want, I would get a 1080p50 PAL file somewhere and test it. I think I would look on Vimeo first because files put up by "premium" members can often be downloaded intact as originals.

If you have a Apple laptop, I have not a clue how you would do it.

The GW77 would be the perfect camcorder for shooting sail boat races.

Bill
bsprague is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off