Canon A70 movie limits....

[IanthePez]

Why is there a limit of the movie length on the a70? Is there a hardware reason for this, or is it just the way Canon decided it should be?

The real question I have is whether or not there is a way to remove this limitation. I know I could always make two videos and put them together, but I would miss a few seconds in the middle because of that. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? The movie length I want is about 4 min...

 

[BoberFett]

The camera has a limited amount of memory. To capture video, you need to have a fast writable media, and CF is not fast. While it's writing the already captured video and sound to CF, it's still filling its buffer. When it gets to the point that the memory is full it has to stop.

 

[IanthePez]

I suppose that's true....why doesn't it allow longer movies with a faster speed cf card though?

 

[thorin]

Perhaps this question would be better directed to support/development/design at Canon?

If you really wanna record movies get a MiniDV camera. Recording movies isn't what Digial Stills are really made for it's just a fluffy extra they add to amuse people.

Thorin

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: thorin
Perhaps this question would be better directed to support/development/design at Canon?

If you really wanna record movies get a MiniDV camera. Recording movies isn't what Digial Stills are really made for it's just a fluffy extra they add to amuse people.

Thorin

I agree. If you wanted to take movies, why didn't you just get a MiniDV camera?

 

[JustMike]

It's not a video camera...

 

[thorin]

Originally posted by: JustMike
It's not a video camera...

Yup it's one of those things like:

router != firewall
raid != backup
digital P&S camera != video camera

Thorin

 

[Bonesdad]

Originally posted by: thorin
Perhaps this question would be better directed to support/development/design at Canon?

If you really wanna record movies get a MiniDV camera. Recording movies isn't what Digial Stills are really made for it's just a fluffy extra they add to amuse people.

Thorin

I disagree...some of the best videos are "moments"...only lasting a few seconds...I got the A70 because it has this nice feature. Many of us cannot shell out 600-1000 for a good MiniDV. I personally hate those friggin long boring movies relatives foist on me...I just wanna capture those few seconds that are the most important.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Bonesdad

Originally posted by: thorin
Perhaps this question would be better directed to support/development/design at Canon?

If you really wanna record movies get a MiniDV camera. Recording movies isn't what Digial Stills are really made for it's just a fluffy extra they add to amuse people.

Thorin

I disagree...some of the best videos are "moments"...only lasting a few seconds...I got the A70 because it has this nice feature. Many of us cannot shell out 600-1000 for a good MiniDV. I personally hate those friggin long boring movies relatives foist on me...I just wanna capture those few seconds that are the most important.

Your financial argument makes sense, but if you don't like long movies that can be handled with some constraint on the part of the person taking the movies, and a little editing afterward.

 

[Bonesdad]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Bonesdad

Originally posted by: thorin
Perhaps this question would be better directed to support/development/design at Canon?

If you really wanna record movies get a MiniDV camera. Recording movies isn't what Digial Stills are really made for it's just a fluffy extra they add to amuse people.

Thorin

I disagree...some of the best videos are "moments"...only lasting a few seconds...I got the A70 because it has this nice feature. Many of us cannot shell out 600-1000 for a good MiniDV. I personally hate those friggin long boring movies relatives foist on me...I just wanna capture those few seconds that are the most important.

Your financial argument makes sense, but if you don't like long movies that can be handled with some constraint on the part of the person taking the movies, and a little editing afterward.

I'm just saying that a $250 dollar hand held camera is all you really need to get some cool little movies...

 

[IanthePez]

I only plan on occasionally using the movie feature, but when I do, I can see 4 minutes being the max I would do. I was just checking, but it seems there is no way. I will not buy a minidv cam because I do not have that kind of money to waste on video

 

[billandopus]

Originally posted by: thorin
Perhaps this question would be better directed to support/development/design at Canon?

If you really wanna record movies get a MiniDV camera. Recording movies isn't what Digial Stills are really made for it's just a fluffy extra they add to amuse people.

Thorin

I highly disagree.

It's certainly not "fluffy" at all. What's everyone smoking? Can I have some?

Keep in mind that the VGA mode is 640x480. That's the same resolution as a Canon zr60/70 et al.

I was interested in both a miniDV and a digicam and I knew that the A70 could do VGA for 30 secs, 320x240 for up to 3 mins and so forth. I was deciding whether I wanted to go digicam first or miniDV and i'm very glad I went for the A70.

The A70 overlaps the Canon zr60/70 to a certain degree. 30 secs isn't long but it's long enough for "moments" which is really what I want. I don't need to shell out 500 bucks US to find that out. I knew that already. I don't think anyone would think that way.

Furthermore, digicam size allows mobility and flexibilty benefits that a miniDV does not allow. Tell me - how many people take their miniDV around wherever they go as opposed to their digicam? I take my A70 in it's case with a an extra set of 4xAA NiMh batteries and a gig of CF memory and i'm all ready to rock. I don't see people carrying around their camcorder case on a whim. What's the point of being able to capture moments and being in the right place at the right time when you're hamstrung by size and portability?

I had a long discussion with a friend who was in the same boat and he ended up getting both miniDV and digicam and regretted it. He ended up not using much of the miniDV in lieu of the digicam which had a great movie mode (the Fuji f700 with unlimited VGA movie mode). Now, that's a waste of money for the miniDV sitting around collecting dust.

If I wanted to do real double duty erring to the side of video then i'd go for a Canon Optura Xi with it's 2.0mp CCD and digital still. But that's ~ 1200-1300 bucks and it's still the size of a camcorder.

I also don't know about all these deep pocket people around here but people have budgets you know. Like mortages, family, car payments and computer crap!

So, a digital camera with movie mode is not fluff. It's a very valuable thing to have. It's people who've discovered how useful it is that understand this.

Now, i'm just waiting for Canon to release a decent cam with unlimited VGA mode like the Fujis or the Sonys. I went A70 because it was pretty much the price point/performance leader in it's class.

However, the CF arguments of limitations may restrict Canon unless they explore further with the SD memory like they now use in a few of their models. Note that the Fujis and Sonys use xD and MemoryStick respectively. Now, the latest Kyoceras use mpeg4 compression for even better file management which is a real step up - however only at 320x240 currently.

 

[billandopus]

In any case - here's a pretty good summary of what I just said.

What's better: A camera that shoots movies, or a videocam that records still pictures?

 

[thorin]

The A70 overlaps the Canon zr60/70 to a certain degree. 30 secs isn't long but it's long enough for "moments" which is really what I want. I don't need to shell out 500 bucks US to find that out. I knew that already. I don't think anyone would think that way.

If you only need 30sec then why are we having this conversation? The A70 handles that just fine.

My point was (and obviously lost on most of you):
Just because something can be done doesn't always mean it should be done.

If you're trying to save money (er whatever) why don't you just buy one of those camera phones I'm sure they take great pics and wonderful movies, and you can likely play games on it two. Hell why even bother with just a phone, or just a game console, or just a computer for that matter ... get something with all the fluffy extras that does it all. While you're at it save some money sell your comp and get one of those wonderful set top boxes that changes your TV in to a web browser and email client.

Remember "Jack of all trades, master of none".

Damn where's that old 35mm camera I had that took wonderful cimema quality movies

Thorin

Edit: Yes obviously alot of that was exageration so take it with a grain of salt. Read the meaning not the words.

 

[billandopus]

Thorin, no one ever said that 30secs is enough per se. Just that it's good for what it is but that it's certainly possible to get better so that you don't need or want a MiniDV camcorder. Other manufacturers do it so why doesn't Canon?

You suggested MiniDV. I'm saying that there are many people that disagree with you.

As for why we are having this conversation - it's because of your comment about "fluffy ... blah, blah, blah ... only to amuse people ... blah, blah, blah."

Well, it may amuse you but it certainly doesn't amuse me or many others. In fact, we find it highly useful and that's why the thread was posted and that's why there are responses. The fact that you saw fit to "joke" about it and or suggest MiniDV only highlights this point further.

As for your "intentions" and "reading between the lines" that's certainly subjective and an easy way out.

You put it out. People respond and retort. That's the way it is. Can't take it back.

I'm not trying to be inflammatory but your "reading between the lines" comment is off base thus this reply.

 

[thorin]

Originally posted by: bill_n_opus
Thorin, no one ever said that 30secs is enough per se.

That's exactly what you said > "30 secs isn't long but it's long enough"

Just that it's good for what it is but that it's certainly possible to get better so that you don't need or want a MiniDV camcorder. Other manufacturers do it so why doesn't Canon?

My guess is they don't bother because it's a Digital Still camera but that's just my guess. Perhaps this question would be better addressed by the designers/engineers @ Canon.
Edit: Maybe I can clarify with another example. Videos on a digital still camera are like the Flower Holder in the new Volkswagon Beetle. It's functional and nice yer not overwhelmingly useful to the majority of users. That's no to say no one ever puts flowers in it, simply that a flower display in your car isn't the primary intended use (of your car) nor the most useful feature (of our car). Dunno of that clarifies or not....if it doesn't then just ignore the whole flower holder thing......

You suggested MiniDV. I'm saying that there are many people that disagree with you.

Which is well within their right.....did I say people shouldn't dis agree with me??????? I don't remember saying so.

As for why we are having this conversation - it's because of your comment about "fluffy ... blah, blah, blah ... only to amuse people ... blah, blah, blah."

Well, it may amuse you but it certainly doesn't amuse me or many others.

It must amuse you (to some extent) if you're using it, I find it very suspicious that you suggest you'd use something you don't find amusing.

In fact, we find it highly useful

Perfect!

and that's why the thread was posted

Actually it appears that the thread was started (if you go back and read) because someone didn't find it useful/

and that's why there are responses.

Yes threads are usually started in order to generate responses....thanks for clearning that up

The fact that you saw fit to "joke" about it and or suggest MiniDV only highlights this point further.

There was a point in there? And when did I joke?

As for your "intentions" and "reading between the lines" that's certainly subjective and an easy way out.

Uh I'm not sure what you're quoting....I don't see those phrases anywhere in my posts.

You put it out. People respond and retort. That's the way it is. Can't take it back.

Wow thanks for clearning that up yet again

I'm not trying to be inflammatory

Yes you are but we don't mind.

but your "reading between the lines" comment is off base thus this reply.

Interesting opinion......thanks for sharin.

Edit: Hmmmmm perhaps it's my use of the word "amuse" that's bothering you. It's just that I was thinking of these short clips, "moments" as you refer to them as being things that people would usually find some personal enjoyment in. I'll try to find a better word.

Thorin

 

[adlep]

raid != backup

?
You need to clarify your statement dude.
Raid 0 != Backup, but
Raid 1 = Backup
Raid 3 = Backup
Raid 5 = Backup
The entire purpouse of Raid 1 through 6 (I guess) is to have a.. backup...

 

[thorin]

Originally posted by: adlep

raid != backup

?
You need to clarify your statement dude.
Raid 0 != Backup, but
Raid 1 = Backup
Raid 3 = Backup
Raid 5 = Backup
The entire purpouse of Raid 1 through 6 (I guess) is to have a.. backup...

No I meant exactly what I said.
RAID = Fault tolerance (and/or imporoved performance in some cases)
RAID != Backup

Thorin

 

[Rectalfier]

The reason Canon doesn't have unlimited record time is because that would eat away at their video camera products. I have a Minolta X20, and with my slow ass CD card, I am able to record large movies, only limited by my SD card size.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Video on still cameras is as useful as stilsl on video cameras. It works in a pinch, that's it. And comparing video quality from a digital still to that of a MiniDV camera is pointless. Even if you use a camera that captures at full frame res it will still have to compress the hell out of that footage to keep the file size down. Video from a still is just ugly. It works in a pinch, it's better than nothing, but it is ugly video. Same applies for video cameras that take stills.


Lethal

 

[billandopus]

Well, Thorin, i'll agree to disagree with ya because i'm not going to bother to get into this game of quoting each other's quotes. We'll leave that to the Elites fair enough?

But I do have an itch to scratch and that is your analogy ... which I think is still loopy ... and funny enough - based on your previous loopy opinion. Volkswagen Beetle ... flower holder? Nope. I have another analogy for you based on your VW/flower holder ... it's like those chocolate bars and miners in Dakota ...

Doesn't make sense does it? Exactly!

In any case I do agree with Rectalfier in that Canon certainly has the ability to engineer unlimited VGA movie mode in their digicams but that it would encroach on their digicamcorder market - so they don't. I mean, then people wouldn't tell others to go MiniDV then right? Cheers Thorin.

 

[thorin]

Originally posted by: bill_n_opus
Well, Thorin, i'll agree to disagree with ya

That's kewl....though it's hard to have a half way decent debate or discussion when people give up....but Whatever

because i'm not going to bother to get into this game of quoting each other's quotes. We'll leave that to the Elites fair enough?

Whatever u say dude.....there's no quoting to dicuss because you didn't quote....thanks for realizing that we all appreciate tit

But I do have an itch to scratch and that is your analogy ... which I think is still loopy ... and funny enough - based on your previous loopy opinion. Volkswagen Beetle ... flower holder? Nope. I have another analogy for you based on your VW/flower holder ... it's like those chocolate bars and miners in Dakota ...

Doesn't make sense does it? Exactly!

Ya it does make perfect sense but since you're digressing we won't bother to try and explain.

In any case I do agree with Rectalfier in that Canon certainly has the ability to engineer unlimited VGA movie mode in their digicams but that it would encroach on their digicamcorder market - so they don't.

Rectalfier the voice of reason hehehehe

I mean, then people wouldn't tell others to go MiniDV then right?

Exactly!

Cheers Thorin.

Cheers bill_n_opus

Thorin

 

[Rectalfier]

"Rectalfier the voice of reason hehehehe"

You don't trust a guy named Rectalfier?

 

[arsbanned]

I agree the movie feature on digi-cams is useful only in a very limited sense. However, my Fuji s602z will record 640x480 with sound until your media is filled. It also accepts microdrives.
But I never use it for that, I use my Mini DV unit.

 

[Black88GTA]

Video on P&S digicams is very useful for some things, but a $250 P&S digicam will not take the place of a $800 DV camera. It's definitely more than just a useless feature. When I was in the market for a digital camera, I wasn't even considering any models that didn't have a video w/sound feature, because I knew I'd kick myself later if I got a camera that didn't have it when I needed it. I ended up going with a Canon Powershot A40. I made sure it had the video for those times when you just can't capture what you need to record with stills.

For instance, when I had a problem with my 4 cyl Mustang, I took a short vid of what it was doing, and posted it on a Mustang forum. I had a couple ideas what was wrong, but wanted more opinions, and I got them based on the video I took. The car had sparks shooting under the hood, and it turned out to be a broken insulator on a spark plug. There's obviously no way I could have easily captured that with still shots.

The movie mode is nice to have, but will not replace a DV camera any way you cut it. It's a nice alternative to dropping nearly 1k on a DV camera when you don't have the cash for it.