Image quality not that great, but good enough for VR applications when you stack them in an array? (or maybe I’ve been spending too much time reading about the Oculus Rift)
It’s a niche within a niche. I’m guessing the kind of user who needed a GoPro-style rugged sports cam but thought the regular one was not tiny and light enough (hint: it’s super tiny and light already) won’t care what the rest of us think.
My personal interests lie more toward the opposite direction: action cams that are a tad less tiny and indestructible, but allow for interchangeable lenses and better image quality for crash/drone/gymbal use to edit along bigger-camera footage. The best example seems to be the Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera, but it’s not out yet in the finest Blackmagic Design tradition of announcing awesome cameras and then taking a long time to deliver them.
Looking forward for more competition-driven innovation in this field. GoPro has pushed quite a few boundaries but may have been a bit too reliant on its strong brand name lately. Sony, Garmin and some others are closing in, and that’s no bad thing for us customers.
I’m wondering how large the niche market is for bicycle-spoke-mounted videography these days.
For $400 a pop, you need at least 4. For about that price you can get the Sphericam 2, mentioned here - with all the stitching issues already solved for you. It will go into production as its Kickstarter went over the threshold this morning.
To be fair, rapidly-spinning rolling-shutter-sensor camera footage can look pretty neat in a psychedelic way.
It’s also a nice illustration why, especially for Gopro-class cams that are expected to shoot rapidly moving scenes, a global shutter image sensor should be a must. That it is not, because the vendors are too cheap, is quite a problem…
I’m wondering how large the niche market is for bicycle-spoke-mounted videography these days.
Unless you have a Cannondale Lefty fork, it would probably make up a fair proportion of the repeat purchasers of the camera.
Just seeing the boxy Go Pros on the TT bikes during Stage 1 of the Tour De France shows the advantage the Shimano camera has in some applications. Go Pro can see some parts of the market aren’t dominated by them and are trying to fill these niches.
Also for $400 you could get 4 Polaroid cubes and have fun. 1080p video, 124 degree FOV. It is most assuredly less capable than the gopro, but it’s affordable and fun!
I wonder what constraints caused them to go with an inferior sensor? Does new design mean cramming the battery and support electronics behind the camera and forced going with a lousy-but-thin camera from the made-for-cellphones bin? Are worse sensors less power hungry and better suited to the tiny battery? Are they just trying to increase their margins by cutting BoM and hoping nobody calls them on it?
Generally speaking, more awesome sensors 1) are larger, heavier and more expensive themselves, 2) use more power, requiring larger and heavier batteries 3) require larger and heavier lenses, 4) require larger and heavier cooling systems and better, more expensive processors. So it kind of adds up fast.
It doesn’t surprise me at all that that a super tiny GoPro has worse image quality than a regular-tiny one from the same vintage. This is rapidly improving tech, though.
Are there that many people interested in reshooting 1966 Batman transitions?
(Edit: sorry, just realized the spinning GIF was… probably too spinny)
Or is there some method of spoke-mounting a camera of which I’m unaware, that would give a useful image that would somehow be preferable to mounting on the handlebars, frame, or otherwise non-spinning section of the bike?
(What do I know, I haven’t watched a single stage of the Tour in fifteen years.)
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
