S2 Video Quality

[danrweaver]

I have been seriously considering buy an S2 to replace my SLR film camera, my small point and shoot digital camera and my 4 year old digital 8 cancorder, (I'm tired of carrying around 3 cameras). The S2 will definatly handle my needs for stills, but I am a bit confused about the video resolution of the S2 as it compares to a typical digital camcorder. Can anyone answer that question?

Is the S2 a good camera for video or is there a better choice?

DRW

[Severin]

For a camera, it also takes good video. The easy access button is nice, and the dual stereo recording is nice, so is wind noise reduction. However it is not primarily a video camera and does have some limitations, I don't think I would buy it as a video camera, but I use it all of the time for getting short clips. I wouldn't want to film a movie with it, but a kid blowing out the candles at a birthday party that is a different story.

[JTL]

As far as a camera with video capability, it is amomg the best. But, it's a camera not a camcorder...

Not sure from your post what you're really looking for...

[cat]

there are several samples of the movie mode available on the web - one here http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/pss2is/sample-e.html for example. Personally I wouldn't consider the S2 a suitable replacement for a standard camcorder.... it is however a useful camera for those of us that don't have, or don't want, a seperate camcorder... ;)

[ale_g]

:) I do use my S2is for movies ( I have an Adata 2G SD card). It works great. The only concern is when recording movies indoor, you will see the noise in the movie. I use to clean it with VirtualDub and the results are very good.

B. Regards
Ale_G

[tim11]

Can someone tell me if the video footage from S2 IS editable with programs such as Pinnacle Studio? Adobe Premiere; etc?

[tim11]

Nobody knows [or cares]?

[JTL]

Nobody knows [or cares]?Never used those programs...but the S2 creates standard AVI files, so, if those programs can edit an AVI file, then they can edit S2 videos...

[tim11]

It is editable.
I downloaded Jeff's review video footages from S2 IS and A620 and edited them in Pinnacle Studio 9 as a test and added soundtrack and title.
There was some minor hiccups that could be due to NTSC and PAL difference. The end result was okay.

[danrweaver]

thanks for all of the input, but no one has answered my main question yet. I am aware that this camera will not fully replace a camcorder, but how does the video quality campare to a digital camcorder, (Digital 8, for example)? the S2 records at 640 x 480 30 fps, but I haven't found any place that can tell me how that compares to what a digital camcorder records at?

Any ideas?

DRW

[tim11]

I download video footage from DCRP S2 review and tested out of curiousity. After Pinnacle's complaint of different format (PAL - NTSC, I guess) I managed to encoded and put it into DVD.
The quality? I think it's fantastic but inconclusive. The sample I had was only a few seconds and it was a guy on some kind of sail - it was a very fast moving subject.
I suggest you take a SD card to camera shop and ask the salesperson to test out. Bring it back home and see the sample for yourself.
Edit: I have a digital8 and I think what I saw on my test footage was no less in quality. But as I said it was inconclusive. Sorry, I can't give you direct answer.

[shoalhaven]

danrweaver--

I can give you a non-technical impression.

Last month I took a cruise to Mexico, carrying both a digital Panasonic camcorder and my S2.

I didn't plan on using the S2 as a Camcorder, but on many occasions, I had to do so. My impressions, after editing with Ulead, were that the S2 clips, mostly shot outdoors, were as good as or slightly better than the Camcorder.

I would not use it as a primary, but it does a very good job as far as brightness and resolution. Make sure your memory card is adequate, and of high quality.

Good luck.

[aldouse]

out of all the currently available digital cameras (with the exception of the sony dsc-m1 and dsc-m2 and the panasonic sv-av family) it is the best at capturing video. when compared to a traditional video camera, it still is clearly no match.
even though the frame rates for both digital cameras and video cameras are the same @ 30fps (by NTSC standards) the quality still differs greatly between the 2 mainly in part due to the different technologies applied to the matter.

[bluejive]

I'll take a stab at it...

The S2 (and most other decent digital cameras) record at 640X480 and hopefully atleast 30 frames per second, which the S2 does both and very well to me. Your TV (unless you have some awesome HDTV or something) displays 640X480, so, if you are used to a camcorder then the S2 will probably be the same if not a lot clearer. The drawback is since it records AVI files the space it needs is a lot greater than say, a Sony Digital that records MPEG files. In my opinion the S2's AVI movies are a good bit better than the Sony MPEG's but take up more room on your media. Here's an example of two camera's which I own...

Canon S2: Records a little over 7 minutes using a 1GB SD card.

Sony Cybershot 3MP: Records a little over 11 minutes using 256mb memory.

That's a pretty big difference but the quality of the S2 is definitely better. But, if the quality of the MPEG format is okay to you then you could probably get a Sony with a 1GB memory stick and be able to record around 40 minutes of video on the highest setting.

Just go shopping and do the math and you may find a camera that does what you want...replaces all those devices. Just remember, the human eye registers around 26 frames per second, I think, so get one that records at no less than 30 frames per second otherwise it will be really choppy.

I hope that helps and wasn't too confusing. :)

If you want some help email me or something.

[prego_lala]

i had the canon s2is, and a 'low-end' minidv video camera Sony dcr-hc21. (~300$)

quality of s2is videos is better than the videocam, sharper, better contrast, saturation (especially indoors where the sony videocam desaturated the colors and looked very ugly) the sony videocam had some minor motor noise, the s2is had some minor zooming noises :)

as far as i know, the s2is captures video in progresive mode 640x480, while videocameras/camcorders capture ~720x480 but its INTERLACED = 1 frame has half the info (except progressive hdtv cameras)

the MOST important problem is: you will slap the video to dvd, which depending on your converting software might trash the quality of any video source.

[luma46]

I wonder if anyone has done some tests (subjective or objective) comparing the S2 IS’s quality of 640x480 video at 30 vs. 15 fps. I can imagine that for the fast moving objects the 15 fps might be a bit “jaggy” but for a more static or a slow panning shots it should be OK. I used to shoot 640x480 clips at 15 fps on my previous A75 and they turned out fairly good on Ulead Video Studio DVDs. In fact some were better than shots from my low end Sharp DV camcorder.

Lumir

[JPW2020]

Let me add my thoughts having journeyed from an S1 IS to a Konica Minolta A200 ''back to'' a S2 IS.Firstly,you do need to decide whether your priority is stills or Video given that the perfect hybrid is not yet with us.If the latter or you place both equally then for a 'combi' you cant go wrong with the S2.The A200 is a good camera .However I'm back with Canon which I guess shows my preference.Given Minolta's recent announcement an A200 is possibly not a wise investment anyway.
As to movies I use cards of 1gb or 2gb and will typically shoot a number of stills with say 15-20minutes of movie which I will edit down. I have edited video from the S1 (mainly) and S2 (briefly so far) and A200 in Premiere Elements 1 and Windows Movie Maker 2.Both can be used without difficulty.Yes the S2 files are big but this does mean not too much loss in quality when editing.I do wonder if MPEG 4 files with smaller file sizes are capable of editing with similar minimal quality loss.
No doubt someone will know.
Dont even consider the A200 if movies are your priority as the video is not comparable.With these Avi files Premiere Elements is effective but chronically slow, on my pc anyway(which is reasonably new and up tp spec) Movie Maker is quicker but basic and you can only save to WMV as you probably know.Either way I have been happy with the quality of projects burnt to DVD.I guess its not quite up there with a good DV Camcorder but its good enough for me.As i say work out your priority and if you want an excellent digicam with top movie mode that you intend to edit then I cant see further than the s2.

[Montana]

thanks for all of the input, but no one has answered my main question yet. I am aware that this camera will not fully replace a camcorder, but how does the video quality campare to a digital camcorder, (Digital 8, for example)? the S2 records at 640 x 480 30 fps, but I haven't found any place that can tell me how that compares to what a digital camcorder records at?

Any ideas?

DRW


IMHO the S2 output quality is as good as most 300 to 400$ digital video cameras. However, the IS in video mode is not as good, and the S2 has a nice clicking noise when zooming in and out. I have had people drop their jaws when I told them the footage I was showing them on a 26 inch tv was from my digital camera.

Again, IMHO if you own an S2 there's no need for another low end digi video camera. Bump up to $1000+ cameras and now your talking a difference.

There is a large difference IMHO between 30 fps and 15 fps on the S2. The reduced FPS is VERY easy to pick up on the S2, especially when filming vegetation in wind or moving objects.

As for storage, I would get a couple 1 gig cards (or a 2 gig card) and back it up with a nice speedy 100$ PSD device. There are huge benefits to having your video cam the same as your still image cam. It's part of what makes the S2 great. It's an all around very useful multimedia tool.