crazy idea...digital zoom at DVinfo.net

Robert Mann Z. · March 23rd, 2005, 10:46 AM

i'm in the market for low cost pocket dv camera, shopping around and looking at features has been fun, its much easier to buy high end stuff due to the limited choices...

after going through my 8th choice i noticed all the cams have stupid digital zoom ratings, really absurd figures, so i tried some out...if the optical zoom is 10 and you zoom to 11 the image looks bad on a cam thats getting a little over 700 lines of resolution...

my crazy idea is this, it seems all the cams do the digital zooming after the image has gone through compression...

why not digitally zoom before compression for a cleaner image, i cannot be the first one to mention this...?

Mathieu Ghekiere · March 23rd, 2005, 11:39 AM

I think I'll be wrong, as I don't know a lot about it, but isn't that just the principle from the digital zoom what sets it apart from a optical zoom? That you don't zoom with the lens, but IN your image?
And dv is compressed, so I wouldn't know how they would zoom before compression. I think either way it looks bad.

But, as I said, I don't know really much about it, it's just what I think, probably someone will proove me wrong here.

Ed Smith · March 23rd, 2005, 12:46 PM

Mathieu you’re right.

The optical zoom, as it suggests uses optical lens to zoom in and out mechanically. Therefore the resolution from the widest point to the telephoto point will (should) be the same.

The digital zoom simply 'crops' into the image at certain increments, giving the illusion of zooming. Therefore the more you zoom in, the more the picture quality reduces.

Robert Mann Z. · March 23rd, 2005, 02:12 PM

it is my understanding that the image a ccd reads before compression is huge, you can very easily zoom in on a hig rez 2 or 4 meg image with no loss of resolution down to ntsc spec...isn't that what http://www.reel-stream.com/ is all about

...pretty soon we will liquid lenses anyway, but one can question

Jack Smith · March 23rd, 2005, 07:35 PM

I believe I read that they do , do the zoom prior to compression.
a progressively smaller area of the ccd is used to image then the image is stretch to the full screen size.But as digital zoom is incresed the effective pixel count diminshes.
Turn off the digital zoom, it's not very useful at present.I think finding a camera with better optics and no digital zoom would serve you better

Brandon Greenlee · March 23rd, 2005, 08:03 PM

I found a hi8 camera the other day with 990x digital zoom on top of a 12x optical.

What does that work out to.... like 20 lines of resolution?

Jimmy McKenzie · March 23rd, 2005, 08:07 PM

I suppose this point cannot be stressed enough since even some pro-sumer cams have digital zoom built in. I think it is a menu option on my xl1's but I forget.

The operative word in the preceding sentance: "forget"

Forget digital zoom. Just like vacuums that can pick up bowling balls, this is a silly size war among marketing departments at the various companies. Compressed dv is already soft enough.

Boyd Ostroff · March 23rd, 2005, 08:19 PM

But Robert was talking about inexpensive 1 chip cameras, and as he notes, some of them have pretty high resolution CCD's now. It's worth taking a look at the digital zoom on these, there's a chance it might actually be useful. Remember an NTSC frame only needs about 350,000 pixels so you have some room to play on a 3,000,000 pixel CCD.

Jimmy McKenzie · March 24th, 2005, 06:59 AM

Absolutely correct on the math Boyd. No argument here. But it comes down to the technology in place to capture the image in the first place. My digital camera was one of the first out of the gate at 8 megapix, and at 1300 bucks it looked like a decent buy. It is garbage. This is a paperweight useful only for vacationers.

So for a 2 megapixel array with a single cmos chip picking up the image from plastic? or sub-prosumer glass, me thinks that the result from pixel panning or re-sizing will offer little benefit.

I guess I'm more in the camp to pay a little more and get closer to how the pros work. But for holidaying and other not-for-production purposes, there is obviously a market need for this kind of tech. Otherwise they wouldn't offer it.

Boyd Ostroff · March 24th, 2005, 07:18 AM

Oh I agree that pixel count doesn't mean much if it isn't part of an overall good design and decent optics. Plastic lenses in and of themselves don't have to be bad... quite a sizeable part of the population sees the whole world through plastic glasses or contact lenses!

I really don't have any experience with these cheap camcorders, so I don't know how well they implement things like digital zoom. But higher pixel count CCD's can offer real benefits, especially in shooting 16:9 at full resolution. I have a Sony PDX-10 which uses three CCD's with about 1 megapixel each. This gives terrific 16:9 quality. And the digital zoom effect - while no match for optical - is pretty well implemented and I've found it handy a couple times for doubling the image size. Of course you can do this in post, but I think you gain a bit by performing the scaling prior to DV compression in the camera.

As always, "your mileage may vary."

March 23rd, 2005, 10:46 AM	#1
Robert Mann Z. Skyonic New York Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NYC Posts: 614	crazy idea...digital zoom i'm in the market for low cost pocket dv camera, shopping around and looking at features has been fun, its much easier to buy high end stuff due to the limited choices... after going through my 8th choice i noticed all the cams have stupid digital zoom ratings, really absurd figures, so i tried some out...if the optical zoom is 10 and you zoom to 11 the image looks bad on a cam thats getting a little over 700 lines of resolution... my crazy idea is this, it seems all the cams do the digital zooming after the image has gone through compression... why not digitally zoom before compression for a cleaner image, i cannot be the first one to mention this...?

March 23rd, 2005, 12:46 PM	#3
Ed Smith Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hampshire, England Posts: 1,545	Mathieu you’re right. The optical zoom, as it suggests uses optical lens to zoom in and out mechanically. Therefore the resolution from the widest point to the telephoto point will (should) be the same. The digital zoom simply 'crops' into the image at certain increments, giving the illusion of zooming. Therefore the more you zoom in, the more the picture quality reduces. __________________ Ed Smith Hampshire, UK Good things come to those who wait My Skiing web www.Frostytour.co.uk For quick answers Search dvinfo.net \| The best in the business: dvinfo.net Sponsors

March 23rd, 2005, 08:03 PM	#6
Brandon Greenlee Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: North Alabama Posts: 242	I found a hi8 camera the other day with 990x digital zoom on top of a 12x optical. What does that work out to.... like 20 lines of resolution? __________________ Brandon Greenlee

March 24th, 2005, 06:59 AM	#9
Jimmy McKenzie Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Waterloo Ontario Posts: 721	Mostly agree... Absolutely correct on the math Boyd. No argument here. But it comes down to the technology in place to capture the image in the first place. My digital camera was one of the first out of the gate at 8 megapix, and at 1300 bucks it looked like a decent buy. It is garbage. This is a paperweight useful only for vacationers. So for a 2 megapixel array with a single cmos chip picking up the image from plastic? or sub-prosumer glass, me thinks that the result from pixel panning or re-sizing will offer little benefit. I guess I'm more in the camp to pay a little more and get closer to how the pros work. But for holidaying and other not-for-production purposes, there is obviously a market need for this kind of tech. Otherwise they wouldn't offer it.

March 23rd, 2005, 11:39 AM	#2
Mathieu Ghekiere Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,195	I think I'll be wrong, as I don't know a lot about it, but isn't that just the principle from the digital zoom what sets it apart from a optical zoom? That you don't zoom with the lens, but IN your image? And dv is compressed, so I wouldn't know how they would zoom before compression. I think either way it looks bad. But, as I said, I don't know really much about it, it's just what I think, probably someone will proove me wrong here.

March 23rd, 2005, 02:12 PM	#4
Robert Mann Z. Skyonic New York Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NYC Posts: 614	it is my understanding that the image a ccd reads before compression is huge, you can very easily zoom in on a hig rez 2 or 4 meg image with no loss of resolution down to ntsc spec...isn't that what http://www.reel-stream.com/ is all about ...pretty soon we will liquid lenses anyway, but one can question

March 23rd, 2005, 07:35 PM	#5
Jack Smith Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: ontario Posts: 445	I believe I read that they do , do the zoom prior to compression. a progressively smaller area of the ccd is used to image then the image is stretch to the full screen size.But as digital zoom is incresed the effective pixel count diminshes. Turn off the digital zoom, it's not very useful at present.I think finding a camera with better optics and no digital zoom would serve you better

March 23rd, 2005, 08:07 PM	#7
Jimmy McKenzie Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Waterloo Ontario Posts: 721	I suppose this point cannot be stressed enough since even some pro-sumer cams have digital zoom built in. I think it is a menu option on my xl1's but I forget. The operative word in the preceding sentance: "forget" Forget digital zoom. Just like vacuums that can pick up bowling balls, this is a silly size war among marketing departments at the various companies. Compressed dv is already soft enough.

March 23rd, 2005, 08:19 PM	#8
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	But Robert was talking about inexpensive 1 chip cameras, and as he notes, some of them have pretty high resolution CCD's now. It's worth taking a look at the digital zoom on these, there's a chance it might actually be useful. Remember an NTSC frame only needs about 350,000 pixels so you have some room to play on a 3,000,000 pixel CCD.

March 24th, 2005, 07:18 AM	#10
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Oh I agree that pixel count doesn't mean much if it isn't part of an overall good design and decent optics. Plastic lenses in and of themselves don't have to be bad... quite a sizeable part of the population sees the whole world through plastic glasses or contact lenses! I really don't have any experience with these cheap camcorders, so I don't know how well they implement things like digital zoom. But higher pixel count CCD's can offer real benefits, especially in shooting 16:9 at full resolution. I have a Sony PDX-10 which uses three CCD's with about 1 megapixel each. This gives terrific 16:9 quality. And the digital zoom effect - while no match for optical - is pretty well implemented and I've found it handy a couple times for doubling the image size. Of course you can do this in post, but I think you gain a bit by performing the scaling prior to DV compression in the camera. As always, "your mileage may vary."