Affordable high speed camera? How to select?

[bph7]

[quote name='JustTheTips' timestamp='1385392469' post='8203816']
The sony has higher resolution. The Casio has a faster shutter speed. You have to pick what you want. The high FPS is not hard to find. The fast shutter speed is.

[/quote]

This is the correct answer. I don't understand these camera threads. Every time one gets started, people try to point out how shutter speed is really the key to avoiding blur in the videos (especially for face on around impact). It's explained that the Casio's are really the only ones out there with this capability. Then, someone finds another camera and tries to explain why it's better, while ignoring the original reason why the Casios were recommended (which is their shutter speed). I'm sure the Sony is a great camera, and I bet there wouldn't be a difference in most videos, but it just isn't as good as the Casio for the specific job of filming the golf swing. It just isn't.

[thepinkbomber]

At this point I am brand independent trying to get the best bang for the buck at 120fps.

serious question, if casio's fh25/100 were so good for high speed action video why are they discontinued? are they replaced by newer versions but the older versions are less expensive and do the job? I can't find the version that replaced the fh100.

Doesn't mean too much, but I just came across a review by titliest performance institute on the sony dvr-as15 and they highly recommended it for golf swing analysis.

[bph7]

[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385566493' post='8215902']
At this point I am brand independent trying to get the best bang for the buck at 120fps.

[b]serious question, if casio's fh25/100 were so good for high speed action video why are they discontinued?[/b] are they replaced by newer versions but the older versions are less expensive and do the job? I can't find the version that replaced the fh100.

Doesn't mean too much, but I just came across a review by titliest performance institute on the sony dvr-as15 and they highly recommended it for golf swing analysis.
[/quote]

I actually don't think these cameras are generally considered good for high speed video. Casio marketed them more as point and shoot cameras, apparently, which is maybe why it didn't work out. The reason that the FH series is good is that, for whatever reason, there is a manual shutter option. These allows for less bluriness. This, as I stated before, makes it IDEAL for the act of filming a golf swing, because shutter speed is most important for such a fast motion (FPS/resolution less so). Again, the sony would probably be not much of a dropoff, but it's just not as ideal for the golf swing as the Casios.

[Kiwi2]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1385568055' post='8216030']
[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385566493' post='8215902']
At this point I am brand independent trying to get the best bang for the buck at 120fps.

[b]serious question, if casio's fh25/100 were so good for high speed action video why are they discontinued?[/b] are they replaced by newer versions but the older versions are less expensive and do the job? I can't find the version that replaced the fh100.

Doesn't mean too much, but I just came across a review by titliest performance institute on the sony dvr-as15 and they highly recommended it for golf swing analysis.
[/quote]

I actually don't think these cameras are generally considered good for high speed video. Casio marketed them more as point and shoot cameras, apparently, which is maybe why it didn't work out. The reason that the FH series is good is that, for whatever reason, there is a manual shutter option. These allows for less bluriness. This, as I stated before, makes it IDEAL for the act of filming a golf swing, because shutter speed is most important for such a fast motion (FPS/resolution less so). Again, the sony would probably be not much of a dropoff, but it's just not as ideal for the golf swing as the Casios.
[/quote]

Perhaps people need to consider why they are using the camera.

If they want aesthetically perfect pictures then total removal of blur is understandable. If they are looking to see what is happening at certain points of the swing then mild blur is ok. It isn't as if the videos are being shot for publication in some media. They are being made to observe motion, and identify error or confirm positions, as a teaching or learning aid. Whilst a perfect picture might be visually pleasing, it isn't necessary to analyse a swing.

Maybe there are more important things, such as camera set up positions, that need to be addressed because they can result in distortion and incorrect feedback.

We have all seen video where there is significant bur and you can't see where the shaft is. No one would argue that is acceptable, if that is what you are looking at. But if you can see where the club shaft is, albiet it with a little blur, removing it, in my opinion achieves nothing when considering why the video is being shot.

Accepting the above opens up a wide range of alternatives when considering a camera purchase for golf swing analysis.

[JustTheTips]

Because the high speed camera market isn't big enough to matter. Getting 20k golf nets to buy your camera once isn't enough to drive product development [size=4]Some of the casio stuff is "snob appeal" of getting to show off your camera knowledge. There are very few of us who need HD and 240fps of crystal clear video to find out golf swing faults. I can see my over the top and early extension just on just about any camera.[/size]

Personally I like the camera on my iPod. Yeah it is only 60fps and the videos are blurry. But not having to mess around with transferring the videos more than makes up for it. I am not taking video for some film class. I am taking it to get feedback. Good enough is all that I need.


[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385566493' post='8215902']
At this point I am brand independent trying to get the best bang for the buck at 120fps.

serious question, if casio's fh25/100 were so good for high speed action video why are they discontinued? are they replaced by newer versions but the older versions are less expensive and do the job? I can't find the version that replaced the fh100.

Doesn't mean too much, but I just came across a review by titliest performance institute on the sony dvr-as15 and they highly recommended it for golf swing analysis.
[/quote]

[Hstead]

I think Kiwi hit the nail on the head, what do you want to see? Some guys want to see the basic motion, the body positions, and some guys want to see the clubface in very slow motion.

I have had quite a few cameras, all the way back to Panasonic Camcorders that used Hi8. Back then, there were only so many cameras that could do over 1/2000 fps shutter speeds. The key to less blur is not resolution nor frames per second, reducing blur is all about the shutter speed.

The reason the old discontinued Casios are so good is they have manually adjustable shutter speeds which can be set as high as 1/40,000 fps. You really need at least 1/4,000 in my experience and really something north of 1/8,000. With a Casio FH, you can go as high as 1/40,000 like I said. Most of the cameras on the market today have an auto selection on shutter speed, and most only go as high as 1/2,000 fps and they base the selection on lighting conditions. I have a Canon that is highly touted on this site as being acceptable. It does not have manual shutter speed and will auto select 1/2,000 with good lighting. It was acceptable in good light, but I am one of those guys that wanted to see the club face etc. For guys that just want to see the shaft and body, it was a good camera and can be had for $125.

Now I use the FH25 and I picked it up off a member here for $275 if I recall. I like it because I can manually set the shutter, so I am not dependent on sunlight, and the editing is awesome, I can play it back real easy and fast forward, go frame by frame, etc. I then take the SD Card out and throw it in a SD Card reader and then I have it on my laptop where I can use V1 when I get home. So I use the camera at the range, and the computer at home.

I also just upgraded to the iPhone 5S and it has a great camera and will do 120 fps but it is not as easy to mount and get a perfect shot like the Casio on a tripod.

Like Kiwi mentioned, the camera placement is of utmost importance. I try to be pretty meticulous where I place the camera.

[bph7]

[quote name='Kiwi2' timestamp='1385578020' post='8217018']
[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1385568055' post='8216030']
[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385566493' post='8215902']
At this point I am brand independent trying to get the best bang for the buck at 120fps.

[b]serious question, if casio's fh25/100 were so good for high speed action video why are they discontinued?[/b] are they replaced by newer versions but the older versions are less expensive and do the job? I can't find the version that replaced the fh100.

Doesn't mean too much, but I just came across a review by titliest performance institute on the sony dvr-as15 and they highly recommended it for golf swing analysis.
[/quote]

I actually don't think these cameras are generally considered good for high speed video. Casio marketed them more as point and shoot cameras, apparently, which is maybe why it didn't work out. The reason that the FH series is good is that, for whatever reason, there is a manual shutter option. These allows for less bluriness. This, as I stated before, makes it IDEAL for the act of filming a golf swing, because shutter speed is most important for such a fast motion (FPS/resolution less so). Again, the sony would probably be not much of a dropoff, but it's just not as ideal for the golf swing as the Casios.
[/quote]

Perhaps people need to consider why they are using the camera.

If they want aesthetically perfect pictures then total removal of blur is understandable. If they are looking to see what is happening at certain points of the swing then mild blur is ok. It isn't as if the videos are being shot for publication in some media. They are being made to observe motion, and identify error or confirm positions, as a teaching or learning aid. Whilst a perfect picture might be visually pleasing, it isn't necessary to analyse a swing.

Maybe there are more important things, such as camera set up positions, that need to be addressed because they can result in distortion and incorrect feedback.

We have all seen video where there is significant bur and you can't see where the shaft is. No one would argue that is acceptable, if that is what you are looking at. But if you can see where the club shaft is, albiet it with a little blur, removing it, in my opinion achieves nothing when considering why the video is being shot.

Accepting the above opens up a wide range of alternatives when considering a camera purchase for golf swing analysis.
[/quote]

Look, if you want passable video, the iphone 4s or later or pretty much any recent phone will be more than adequate in light. So there is the answer. If you want to spend money on a camera, however, I think its pretty clear: If willing to spend around 300 bucks, go on ebay and get a casio and have the best. If you don't want to do that, I guess you can still get a camera that's cheaper, but if the shutter can't get to 1/4000 fps, the results just aren't going to be practically any different than your phone. So, if that's the case, you not just use your phone? Both your phone and any cheaper camera will have the same constraint (shutter speed), so I just see no point in buying a camera that's not a casio unless you don't have an adequate phone.

[lv_2_hack]

I'm still trying to find the best cameras for an indoor hitting bay. The cameras would be stationary and hard wired to the computer or a video monitor for immediate play back. Not finding many options.

[thepinkbomber]

The sony hdr-as15 specs do show its auto for shutter. Below are the exact words which show the range which is not helpful since I need to know what it is at 120fps.

Shutter Speeds : Auto Control Range: 1/30 - 1/10,000 (30fps)

Can anyone decipher what this means if anything?

I put a call into sony tech support and they were not helpful. I sent an email but suspect that will be the same.

[TheMackDaddy]

What camera is the best for under $150? I don't care about seeing the club face, but I would like something easy to use, and durable. And clear quality. Thanks!

[Hstead]

[quote name='TheMackDaddy' timestamp='1385606014' post='8219238']
What camera is the best for under $150? I don't care about seeing the club face, but I would like something easy to use, and durable. And clear quality. Thanks!
[/quote]

For something under $150, the Canon Power shot 300 HS is probably the best bet. I will auto select to 1/2000 in good lighting. These were both on good sun light days and you can see how much blur there still is.

Here are some videos from youtube.
[media=]http://youtu.be/durBfVVBwlE[/media]
http://youtu.be/nQZHf0-wRXQ

[Hstead]

This are from a Casio FH25 at 120 fps and 1/40,000 shutter. Much better I think,

http://youtu.be/lavAkB6OmHU

[thepinkbomber]

My application is for indoor use. I will not have the sunlight advantage you have. Think of bedroom lighting with a few extra lights.

Does it make the higher shutter speed useless without the light?

I have a Nikon D5100 camera that does video at 30fps in HD with an adjustable shutter to 1/4000. In the house it says its too dark. This is not my golf camera (yet) so maybe I am doing something wrong with shutter speed and the need for bright light.

Please advise. Tx.

[Hstead]

If there is not enough light the auto selecting cameras, which almost all are except Casios, will select a lower shutter and you are guaranteed blur. As you can see in my videos, even with good light with the Canon at 1/2000 the shaft is still blurry. In the darker indoor room, you are going to get blur. With a Casio, you could manually adjust the shutter to whatever speed you want until you reduce the blur. The video will be darker, but again the Casio is going to be way better in the low light too. Every setting is manually adjustable on the Casio so I could have adjusted the ISO to make it brighter.

Like someone else posted above, your cell phone is going to be as good as the other cameras.

Here is a video with the Casio at very low light, it was shot at sunset and almost dark outside. I manually set the shutter around 1/6,500 if I recall.

[media=]http://youtu.be/X_-gW_kYsek[/media]

[thepinkbomber]

[quote name='Hstead' timestamp='1385647134' post='8220764']
If there is not enough light the auto selecting cameras, which almost all are except Casios, will select a lower shutter and you are guaranteed blur. As you can see in my videos, even with good light with the Canon at 1/2000 the shaft is still blurry. In the darker indoor room, you are going to get blur. With a Casio, you could manually adjust the shutter to whatever speed you want until you reduce the blur. The video will be darker, but again the Casio is going to be way better in the low light too. Every setting is manually adjustable on the Casio so I could have adjusted the ISO to make it brighter.

Like someone else posted above, your cell phone is going to be as good as the other cameras.

Here is a video with the Casio at very low light, it was shot at sunset and almost dark outside. I manually set the shutter around 1/6,500 if I recall.

[media=]http://youtu.be/X_-gW_kYsek[/media]
[/quote]Thank you. Very helpful to see it in low light settings.

[Hstead]

You are welcome. Good luck and keeps us posted on what you end up with.

[Chas Tennis]

[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385645838' post='8220702']
My application is for indoor use. I will not have the sunlight advantage you have. Think of bedroom lighting with a few extra lights.

Does it make the higher shutter speed useless without the light?

I have a Nikon D5100 camera that does video at 30fps in HD with an adjustable shutter to 1/4000. In the house it says its too dark. This is not my golf camera (yet) so maybe I am doing something wrong with shutter speed and the need for bright light.

Please advise. Tx.
[/quote]

Direct outdoor sunlight has roughly 100X the light level of indoor tennis lighting. Your lighting level is less than indoor tennis court lighting. For details including internet references on lighting levels see
[url="http://www.kinovea.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=2033#p2033"]http://www.kinovea.o...?pid=2033#p2033[/url]
[url="http://www.kinovea.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?id=435"]http://www.kinovea.o...opic.php?id=435[/url]

This was taken in an outdoor pro tennis court stadium using the lights. Camera was a Casio FH100, telephoto zoom seting, Shutter speed: 1/1000 sec, ISO 3200. The camera was using a long telephoto zoom setting which make the lens very slow compared to the wide angle setting. Illustrates the value of being able to set the shutter speed. [url="https://vimeo.com/27528522%20%20There"]https://vimeo.com/27...27528522[/url]
There would be no chance to get this useful video using an automatic exposure control camera.

For golf swings, you can always place the camera close to the golfer so telephoto is not as important unless you want to video golf/other from a diatance. However, using the behind-the-golfer view, telephoto will allow the golf ball to be tracked farther out because the image of the golf ball stays larger for a greater diatance.

It is often said that many autmatic exposure control cameras produce videos with small motion blur of the club shaft and head in good sunlight. I tested a low cost Canon Powershot 110 HS/ IXUS 125. [b]The wide-angle and telephoto settings were very important for the motion blur. [/b]
[url="http://www.kinovea.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=3059#p3059"]http://www.kinovea.o...?pid=3059#p3059[/url]
There are probably many automatic exposure cameras that have the similar shutter speed setting characteristics....but that is often difficult to determine.

Check this iPhone 5s thread for some nice 120 fps golf swing videos with small motion blur.
http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/935220-iphone-5s-120fps-camera/
Does anyone know if you can do stop-action single-frame on the iPhone 5s? Or the Sony Action Camera?

[xxjonesyxx]

Hstead, I thought you were going to crack the driver into the camera on the follow through then!

[Hstead]

[quote name='xxjonesyxx' timestamp='1385657037' post='8221494']
Hstead, I thought you were going to crack the driver into the camera on the follow through then!
[/quote]

LOL. That is my son. I normally set the camera about 12-15 feet behind me DTL and then sometimes zoom a little if need be. The FH25 has a little better lens than the FH100 and FH20 for wide angle shots so you can set the camera a touch closer.

[Chas Tennis]

[quote name='Hstead' timestamp='1385647134' post='8220764']
If there is not enough light the auto selecting cameras, which almost all are except Casios, will select a lower shutter and you are guaranteed blur. As you can see in my videos, even with good light with the Canon at 1/2000 the shaft is still blurry. In the darker indoor room, you are going to get blur. With a Casio, you could manually adjust the shutter to whatever speed you want until you reduce the blur. The video will be darker, but again the Casio is going to be way better in the low light too. Every setting is manually adjustable on the Casio so I could have adjusted the ISO to make it brighter.

Like someone else posted above, your cell phone is going to be as good as the other cameras.

Here is a video with the Casio at very low light, it was shot at sunset and almost dark outside. I manually set the shutter around 1/6,500 if I recall.

[media=]http://youtu.be/X_-gW_kYsek[/media]
[/quote]

In low light there is a quirk with my Casio FH100 when I have it in MANUAL and leave the ISO setting on "ISO Auto". The ISO Auto selects a low ISO (default?) that makes the video much darker than necessary. In high speed video mode, never use MANUAL + "ISO Auto" but always select the ISO yourself.

[url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/422606-casio-fh-100-problems/page__p__2805273__hl__+casio%20+fh100%20+dark%20+videos#entry2805273"]http://www.golfwrx.c...os#entry2805273[/url]

Hstead, Does this same quirk apply to your FH25? Test in low light levels.

[Hstead]

I haven't tried auto ISO. I have my ISO on manual.

[PJ72]

[quote name='LittleLeftToRight' timestamp='1385351145' post='8202538']
That little Kodak looks pretty decent. I couldn't find any specs on the video quality at 240fps though. It is fuzzy enough to bother someone like me (photographer).

You could take a look at the GoPros. I think their middle model does 720p at 120fps. I think 120fps is enough. I am half thinking about getting one because they are pretty slick. Keep in mind you will have to store the files somehow. Video can take up a lot of space real fast.
[/quote]

The video above looks pretty good, whatever the resolution. In fact, you wouldn't even need it that fast and sharp. 120fps and 480p is easily enough.

Btw, the new Motorola G mobile phone has a 120fps/720p video camera. A friend at work has one and he's shown me a few videos he's made (although not golf) and I was really impressed - easily good enough for golf swings.

[thepinkbomber]

[quote name='Brian Manzella' timestamp='1385342088' post='8201762']
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIYYDwTlfCA
[/quote]Are you sure the Kodak Zi12 has 240fps? Each site I check the specs show max is 60fps. Am I looking at the wrong version. Regardless video looks great but still would like to know.

[dha]

if anyone is looking for a casio fh20, feel free to pm me.

[nepatriotsfan]

[quote name='Hstead' timestamp='1385607459' post='8219330']
This are from a Casio FH25 at 120 fps and 1/40,000 shutter. Much better I think,

[media=]http://youtu.be/lavAkB6OmHU[/media]
[/quote]

What settings do you use to get such a great picture with the camera set at 1/40,000? I always seem to get blur at the higher shutter settings. Also, do you have your camera set to Manual or Shutter priority? Thanks.

[Hstead]

Manual shutter and ISO 1600. I use 120 fps because I think 240 is almost too slow when reviewing on the range. 120 fps is fine. If the image is too dark, I back the shutter down from 1/40,000 to whatever I need, but if there is much sun at all 1/40,000 works well.

[nepatriotsfan]

[quote name='Hstead' timestamp='1385774257' post='8226686']
Manual shutter and ISO 1600. I use 120 fps because I think 240 is almost too slow when reviewing on the range. 120 fps is fine. If the image is too dark, I back the shutter down from 1/40,000 to whatever I need, but if there is much sun at all 1/40,000 works well.
[/quote]


Thank you.

[JustTheTips]

60fps at 1080, 240 at 720p. You can google and get a bunch of review of prerelease units like http://camcorders.reviewed.com/content/kodak-playfull-dual-zi12-first-impressions-camcorder-review/other-features .




[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385677996' post='8222698']
[quote name='Brian Manzella' timestamp='1385342088' post='8201762']
[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIYYDwTlfCA[/media]
[/quote]Are you sure the Kodak Zi12 has 240fps? Each site I check the specs show max is 60fps. Am I looking at the wrong version. Regardless video looks great but still would like to know.
[/quote]

[thepinkbomber]

[quote name='JustTheTips' timestamp='1385782255' post='8227094']
60fps at 1080, 240 at 720p. You can google and get a bunch of review of prerelease units like http://camcorders.reviewed.com/content/kodak-playfull-dual-zi12-first-impressions-camcorder-review/other-features .




[quote name='thepinkbomber' timestamp='1385677996' post='8222698']
[quote name='Brian Manzella' timestamp='1385342088' post='8201762']
[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIYYDwTlfCA[/media]
[/quote]Are you sure the Kodak Zi12 has 240fps? Each site I check the specs show max is 60fps. Am I looking at the wrong version. Regardless video looks great but still would like to know.
[/quote]
[/quote]Kodak looks like a viable option. Wish it had wifi then I would be sold. Curious if you have any videos of a swing inside the home at 240fps to see how that looks given the indoor light.

[thepinkbomber]

For indoor applications I have limited lighting compared to a sunny day.

Question - given two cameras that have auto shutter (Kodak zi12 and sony hdr-as15) do you think I would see less blur at 240fps (Kodak) versus 120fps (sony)? Both shoot at 720p resolution. I believe now blur is controlled by shutter speed and not fps/resolution. Since both are auto they may have the same blur indoors.

I don't need to see the face on every frame.

Even though I am told fps doesn't control blur I would think by having double the fps it should look clearer? Any advise?

Think I am going to pull the trigger by cyber Monday.

The advantage Kodak has for me is 1) 240fps versus 120fps like sony, 2) screen on unit that I can use outdoors and easy indoor alignment. Advantages sony has is 1) wifi to ipad (not sure if too small to view), 2) Its still supported by Sony.

I am still researching and this is based on my first look over the last couple days.