I order frequently from this company, and am always happy with their service. I do not know much about water proof video cameras, but the price seems right. Check it out. http://www.sportsman...b.aspx?a=818360
Water proof video camera
Started by
Guest_Skipjack_*
, Jun 26 2011 10:24 AM
16 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_pylodictis_*
Guest_pylodictis_*
-
- Guests
Posted 26 June 2011 - 10:55 AM
Could be good, but I'd bet that some of the name brand items are better. I'd get a GoPro or Kodak Play Sport. Though for most people's proposes a still camera with a video function is far beyond adequate. Panasonic Lumix cameras are my personal favorites, but they're a little more costly. These are just photos but are easily representative of the video this camera shoots:
PS: I also hear very good things about the Pentax Optio W90.
PS: I also hear very good things about the Pentax Optio W90.
Edited by pylodictis, 26 June 2011 - 11:05 AM.
#3
Guest_daveneely_*
Guest_daveneely_*
-
- Guests
Posted 26 June 2011 - 02:26 PM
PS: I also hear very good things about the Pentax Optio W90.
I think the W90 has been discontinued. My own experience has not been very positive; a co-worker just flooded a W90 after ~2 months of not-very-intensive use...
#4
Guest_EricaWieser_*
Guest_EricaWieser_*
-
- Guests
Posted 28 June 2011 - 02:42 PM
Wow, $110 for 1280x720p, good for up to 10' underwater? That's an excellent deal. Thank you for telling me about it.
The only downside is the still image quality is 5 megapixels (that's very low) and there doesn't seem to be an optical zoom available. But still, for a $110 camera, that's really good video quality, especially underwater. It's a low enough price that you could buy that just as an underwater video recorder, and use your normal camera for above water still shots.
The only downside is the still image quality is 5 megapixels (that's very low) and there doesn't seem to be an optical zoom available. But still, for a $110 camera, that's really good video quality, especially underwater. It's a low enough price that you could buy that just as an underwater video recorder, and use your normal camera for above water still shots.
Edited by EricaWieser, 28 June 2011 - 02:44 PM.
#6
Guest_WoodRiverTroutBum_*
Guest_WoodRiverTroutBum_*
-
- Guests
Posted 01 August 2011 - 02:57 AM
Dang...I was hot to buy one too
After losing my last camera I decided I needed a waterproof camera for when I go surf casting. I checked walmart just to see what they had and found the Olympus X-560WP for $49!!!! I bought it just to hold me over until I could buy something better, now I see no need to upgrade. I may even buy another if they are still this price as a back up. 10mp with optical and digital zoom and all the features of more expensive point and shoot cameras, including video and all kinds of shooting modes. Water proof to 10 feet and a DURABLE metal housing. I have dropped ours a few times on the sidewalk and it still works perfect!
#7
Guest_pylodictis_*
Guest_pylodictis_*
-
- Guests
Posted 01 August 2011 - 04:41 PM
Wow, $110 for 1280x720p, good for up to 10' underwater? That's an excellent deal. Thank you for telling me about it.
The only downside is the still image quality is 5 megapixels (that's very low) and there doesn't seem to be an optical zoom available. But still, for a $110 camera, that's really good video quality, especially underwater. It's a low enough price that you could buy that just as an underwater video recorder, and use your normal camera for above water still shots.
Megapixels aren't that important. They're only really relevant to how large you can blow up the image, but brands market them as the end all measure of a camera's quality which it's not. 5 megapixels was considered huge just a few years back.
#8
Michael Wolfe
-
- Board of Directors
-
- North Georgia, Oconee River Drainage
Posted 01 August 2011 - 07:15 PM
Megapixels aren't that important. They're only really relevant to how large you can blow up the image, but brands market them as the end all measure of a camera's quality which it's not. 5 megapixels was considered huge just a few years back.
Have to disagree here... extra megapixels allow for finer detail when zooming in to count fin rays or caudal peduncle scales... also considering that we sometimes have a hard time getting as close as we might like in situ, extra pixels allow us to crop pictures while still maintaining an adequate level of detail (and since pixels are a sqare function, if you crop a picture to half its size you only have one fourth the pixels).
Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing. - Benjamin Franklin
#9
Guest_frogwhacker_*
Guest_frogwhacker_*
-
- Guests
Posted 01 August 2011 - 07:45 PM
Have to disagree here... extra megapixels allow for finer detail when zooming in to count fin rays or caudal peduncle scales... also considering that we sometimes have a hard time getting as close as we might like in situ, extra pixels allow us to crop pictures while still maintaining an adequate level of detail (and since pixels are a sqare function, if you crop a picture to half its size you only have one fourth the pixels).
I think you're both right. I kind of feel that around 8-10 megapixel is where the usefulness tops out in regards to a balance of detail, space, and ease of use in photoshop. There does seem to be a point where finding details by zooming or cropping is limited by your focal capabilities. My old SLR that I used for professional landscape and scenic photography does a 6.3 megapixel. I was printing borderless 19"X13" prints and it would shoot a 4foot by 6foot image on the wall through the projector without any pixelation. I've worked with larger images in photoshop and could see some benefits when cropping and zooming, but those benefits don't seem to increase in a parallel manner with the number of megapixels. All that being said; if you have space to store them and the power to keep you're photo editing software from dragging, then you certainly can't damage an image by going with more megapixels.
#11
Guest_pylodictis_*
Guest_pylodictis_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 August 2011 - 11:38 AM
I think you're both right. I kind of feel that around 8-10 megapixel is where the usefulness tops out in regards to a balance of detail, space, and ease of use in photoshop. There does seem to be a point where finding details by zooming or cropping is limited by your focal capabilities. My old SLR that I used for professional landscape and scenic photography does a 6.3 megapixel. I was printing borderless 19"X13" prints and it would shoot a 4foot by 6foot image on the wall through the projector without any pixelation. I've worked with larger images in photoshop and could see some benefits when cropping and zooming, but those benefits don't seem to increase in a parallel manner with the number of megapixels. All that being said; if you have space to store them and the power to keep you're photo editing software from dragging, then you certainly can't damage an image by going with more megapixels.
Fair enough, I just feel like brands are marketing megapixels as the be all end all in camera quality, which they're not. I think they use it to appeal to non-camera savvy people buying point and shoots, not serious photographers. Actually the highest res cameras are old film cameras, and they're cheap to boot.
#12
Guest_Casper_*
Guest_Casper_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 August 2011 - 12:36 PM
See my forum notice, from 1 or 2 months ago, on the $50 Olympus camera at...
http://forum.nanfa.o...er-camera-sale/
Though focus issues still come up way too much with these point and shot cameras, this Walmart closeout deal can not be beat, if any are still available. I bought 4, gave 2 away, sold one and using the 4th. I shot video Saturday of 4 Logperch frenzy feeding that turned out very well, superior to my 2 previous and more expensive Olympus cameras. The video is smooth, fluid and at a reasonable resolution and maintained a nice macro and super macro focus. ( I may try and do a youtube post of them later. )
However while shooting stills Saturday, i had unknowingly altered my ISO setting from 400 to 100 which ended up causing a lot of slow shutter speed which resulted in way too much blurring. From my 35mm days one should not go below 1/60th of a second unless using a tripod.
Martin... check your local Walmart. I plan on stopping by mine on Thursday and getting a couple more, if they are still available. I will be glad to help you.
Clumsy TroutBum said he dropped his several times on concrete and it still works? Amazing. I dropped my 2nd water camera, the Olympus Stylus Water, once and now its all clunky and erratic with its on / off and auto lens cover action.
These pictures show you the quality and various issues that occur...
The hand held Hellbender turned out very detailed using the macro setting. 1/100th shutter speed.
The Hellbender Gang shows how nice an out of the water group shot can be, but you gotta always check for water droplets on the lens first.
The in the water, hand held Bender shows the problem with the lens fogging up internally when going from warm air to cool water, this was one of the first shots of the day before the camera's internal temp matched the water.
Nice Green Sunfish, he was proud of his nest site. A little murky but at 1/100th of a second, pretty crisp.
The Devil Dog swimming, making his getaway after being documented. Shutter speed only 1/40th, blurring due to me drifting in the river's slow flow.
All these photos have been reduced to 20% for ease of emailing and posting. I have yet to have any leakage with this model and i have had it underwater for prolonged periods about 20 times. BUT you gotta keep a sharp eye on those 2 seals, one little hair or a grain of sand may let water in.
http://forum.nanfa.o...er-camera-sale/
Though focus issues still come up way too much with these point and shot cameras, this Walmart closeout deal can not be beat, if any are still available. I bought 4, gave 2 away, sold one and using the 4th. I shot video Saturday of 4 Logperch frenzy feeding that turned out very well, superior to my 2 previous and more expensive Olympus cameras. The video is smooth, fluid and at a reasonable resolution and maintained a nice macro and super macro focus. ( I may try and do a youtube post of them later. )
However while shooting stills Saturday, i had unknowingly altered my ISO setting from 400 to 100 which ended up causing a lot of slow shutter speed which resulted in way too much blurring. From my 35mm days one should not go below 1/60th of a second unless using a tripod.
Martin... check your local Walmart. I plan on stopping by mine on Thursday and getting a couple more, if they are still available. I will be glad to help you.
Clumsy TroutBum said he dropped his several times on concrete and it still works? Amazing. I dropped my 2nd water camera, the Olympus Stylus Water, once and now its all clunky and erratic with its on / off and auto lens cover action.
These pictures show you the quality and various issues that occur...
The hand held Hellbender turned out very detailed using the macro setting. 1/100th shutter speed.
The Hellbender Gang shows how nice an out of the water group shot can be, but you gotta always check for water droplets on the lens first.
The in the water, hand held Bender shows the problem with the lens fogging up internally when going from warm air to cool water, this was one of the first shots of the day before the camera's internal temp matched the water.
Nice Green Sunfish, he was proud of his nest site. A little murky but at 1/100th of a second, pretty crisp.
The Devil Dog swimming, making his getaway after being documented. Shutter speed only 1/40th, blurring due to me drifting in the river's slow flow.
All these photos have been reduced to 20% for ease of emailing and posting. I have yet to have any leakage with this model and i have had it underwater for prolonged periods about 20 times. BUT you gotta keep a sharp eye on those 2 seals, one little hair or a grain of sand may let water in.
Edited by Casper, 02 August 2011 - 12:52 PM.
#14
Guest_WoodRiverTroutBum_*
Guest_WoodRiverTroutBum_*
-
- Guests
Posted 03 August 2011 - 05:14 AM
Optical zoom is important. WAY better than digital.
But for $49, I just might bite...
If you are referring to my post, the camera has both optical and digital. It is optical up to a certain point, probably 3x or 4x I will have to check for sure, then it turns to digital to zoom any more. I will try to get a couple pics posted if you are interested.
#16
Guest_frogwhacker_*
Guest_frogwhacker_*
-
- Guests
Posted 04 August 2011 - 07:49 PM
If you are referring to my post, the camera has both optical and digital. It is optical up to a certain point, probably 3x or 4x I will have to check for sure, then it turns to digital to zoom any more. I will try to get a couple pics posted if you are interested.
If possible, I'd prefer to turn off the digital zoom as it only cuts down your resolution. It's usually better to only use the optical zoom and crop later in your photo editing software.
#17
Guest_Casper_*
Guest_Casper_*
-
- Guests
Posted 05 August 2011 - 10:34 AM
The 10 megapix Olympus X-560WP has a 3x optical zoom. It has an additional digital zoom that you can turn off or leave on as a redline feature. I leave it off. Even the optical zoom requires additional bracing so one must be careful when using it, but at times it does come in handy.
I picked up the last 2 cameras from a regional Walmart last night. Same $50 price but with bonus packaging that included a carabinered case and a wrist float strap. If i drop or lose my camera i do not want it to float downstream but modifying the case to fit my wrist would be handy.
10 megapixels seems to be a good overall count. Trying to get a consistant, accurate focus... now that is the challenge.
I picked up the last 2 cameras from a regional Walmart last night. Same $50 price but with bonus packaging that included a carabinered case and a wrist float strap. If i drop or lose my camera i do not want it to float downstream but modifying the case to fit my wrist would be handy.
10 megapixels seems to be a good overall count. Trying to get a consistant, accurate focus... now that is the challenge.
Reply to this topic
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
NANFA Youtube Channel 
