Get yourself two batteries and a wall charger from EBay for 13.45.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/B149-2-x-...38?pt=UK_Camera_Batteries&hash=item2c67b2da32
The Sony Action Cam AS10/ AS15 review and users thread
- Thread starter Rezillo
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/B149-2-x-...38?pt=UK_Camera_Batteries&hash=item2c67b2da32
Blurb
Über Member
- Location
- Somewhere on the Edgware Rd.
Been trying the AS15 over the last couple of days and have noticed the artefacting in 1080/30 SteadyShot mode. As I said it's not my highest priority, so not an issue for me. Maybe a firmware update to give you some control, but don't hold your breath as I did hear a similar request for their compact cameras and I don't think they ever got it. Although at this resolution it's 4 hours recording on a 32Gb card, so reducing compression is going to result in some big files! Haven't been through the other modes yet.
On the plus side, I found the the SteadyShot is remarkably effective. Tested on the Minoura bar bount I linked to earlier on a Brompton and a Flip Video action tripod attached to the stem of the Tricross.
I haven't run the battery flat, but I got well over two hours today in the freezing cold, so I would expect an easy 2.5 hours on these settings.
All in all, very pleased so far.
On the plus side, I found the the SteadyShot is remarkably effective. Tested on the Minoura bar bount I linked to earlier on a Brompton and a Flip Video action tripod attached to the stem of the Tricross.
I haven't run the battery flat, but I got well over two hours today in the freezing cold, so I would expect an easy 2.5 hours on these settings.
All in all, very pleased so far.
I have just taken delivery of an AS15. Sometime today I may get chance to setup the device side by side with a Panasonic HDC-HS900 using a RAM mount fixed to the stalk of my tiller bar steering. It will be interesting to see how the camera performs against the best 2011 consumer camcorder available from Panasonic and "Which?" best buy. I'll do some low light comparisons as well.
(the RAM mount is visible on my avatar).
(the RAM mount is visible on my avatar).
Fortunately, it should be possible to improve quality without generating bigger files. The compression/artefacting issues are not just down to the bit rate (although maybe more of a factor for 720p) - its the way the video codec is implemented. There's a link on page 1 to a tech discussion on this in this post http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/th...-review-and-users-thread.117359/#post-2162509
but to quote a section (edited) from someone who knows far more about this than me:
"The big difference is that the AS10 is not using B-Frames. This is an absolute killer. Half the h.264 advantage is missing because of the lack of B-Frames. Without B frame the minimum picture size for any given frame is going to be fixed at the size of the P frame...........when the video is changing a lot the P frames can get quite large. This is because the P frame can only move forward and it ends up encoding more of the frame each time. The B frame is a bidirectional frame, it can contain references in both directions. Basically because it is pointing to information from the past and toward the future, you can describe a lot of what is going on with much less information resulting in greater efficiency.......In the above frame the video is panning wildly and you can see the AS10 compression engine panic, defaulting to just compressing everything wildly. Because every frame is basically new, the P frames get larger forcing the I frames to get smaller crushing the quality".
It's an explanation of why the Sony picture looks very good until there is rapid change of detail. I'm hoping that Sony should be able to improve the way they implement the video codec without having to up the bit rate.
Despite me bashing on about this particular issue, I still think the camera is a good buy!
Blurb
Über Member
- Location
- Somewhere on the Edgware Rd.
Hi, I read that article and it didn't fill me with confidence that Sony will be able/willing to do much about the compression and even less about changing the codec for a more efficient implementation, but it's not my field of expertise so I hope to be proven wrong.
Well, I did my first piece of night footage and captured a piece of bad driving on the first go. The incident wasn't a big deal but I posted it to give an example of the camera night capability.
The road is poorly lit so the image is quite grainy. I used powerdirector to edit the footage and applied the default video stabilisation and backlight correction.
The backlight correction made quite a difference.
I yelled out the reg number when the car passed but it is barely audible with the casing over the camera.
Powerdirector rendered the clip at 480P which is low resolution. I didn't bother changing it because the higher resolution doesn't improve much because of the poor light.
I was a bit disappointed that the reg plates don't render well at night.
View: http://youtu.be/MTGvADDxEm0
The road is poorly lit so the image is quite grainy. I used powerdirector to edit the footage and applied the default video stabilisation and backlight correction.
The backlight correction made quite a difference.
I yelled out the reg number when the car passed but it is barely audible with the casing over the camera.
Powerdirector rendered the clip at 480P which is low resolution. I didn't bother changing it because the higher resolution doesn't improve much because of the poor light.
I was a bit disappointed that the reg plates don't render well at night.
View: http://youtu.be/MTGvADDxEm0
If you want to take a small clip from a longer video to upload or further edit without changing the original picture quality at all you can use mpeg streamclip (free).
Open the mp4 file, select in and out points then apply trim. The trick is saving it as an mp4 file via the File/Save As command, not the File/Export one (which will re-render the clip and take ages). The process takes anything from seconds to a couple of minutes, depending on the size of the clip, but you will have a file without any re-rendering needed at all. I use this for Contour mov files but it works just as well on the Sony mp4s.
Open the mp4 file, select in and out points then apply trim. The trick is saving it as an mp4 file via the File/Save As command, not the File/Export one (which will re-render the clip and take ages). The process takes anything from seconds to a couple of minutes, depending on the size of the clip, but you will have a file without any re-rendering needed at all. I use this for Contour mov files but it works just as well on the Sony mp4s.
There is a new firmware out for the AS10 and AS15, adding 60fps 1080p, a white balance setting for underwater filming and a beep adjustment.
I've been doing some initial testing in a car and have some first impressions.
First, the annoyances that shouldn't be there but are. The blue tint problem has not been fixed - if anything it is slightly worse. It even adds a greeny-blue tint to a white cloudy sky. Secondly, 720p is still crippled by compression problems. It looks great when stationary but when moving, the picture dissolves into blocks whenever driving alongside trees and roadside bushes. The 6mbps data rate is at least partly responsible - it is much lower than competitors' settings. If 720p is essential, it seems best to have steadyshot on or 120fov - the slightly less detailed picture compared to using 170fov seems to compress better.
The new 60fps 1080p setting is both good news and a disappointment. It gives very smooth movement but seems prone to compression artefacts. 30fps 1080p suffers rather less from this and it seems to be down to the data rates once more. 30fps has a data rate of 16mbps wheres 60fps, twice the number of frames to handle, has 'only' 25mbps.
On a more positive note, the drop in picture quality from 170 to 120 degree fov, either set manuallly or automatically via steadyshot, looks to be less pronounced. It's still there but I have to say that steadyshot 1080p 120 degree fov movies do look good. Shot from a car, the view out of the screen is completely stable while the bonnet moves up and down with the road surface.
I would guess that the best compromise setting for image quality would be 1080p, 30fps, steadyshot on.
I've yet to test this on a bar mount but if there is any rolling shutter effect, there are now three alternatives to try -
1. 1080p 30fps 170fov, no steady shot, where the wide fov may help minimise rolling shutter.
2. 1080p 60fps steadyshot on (120fov), where the increased frame rate should minimise rolling shutter, but perhaps be more compression-prone.
3. 1080p 60fps 170fov where the wide fov may help but perhaps be more compression-prone than 2.
Helmet mounting has no rolling shutter problems so take your pick!
I've been doing some initial testing in a car and have some first impressions.
First, the annoyances that shouldn't be there but are. The blue tint problem has not been fixed - if anything it is slightly worse. It even adds a greeny-blue tint to a white cloudy sky. Secondly, 720p is still crippled by compression problems. It looks great when stationary but when moving, the picture dissolves into blocks whenever driving alongside trees and roadside bushes. The 6mbps data rate is at least partly responsible - it is much lower than competitors' settings. If 720p is essential, it seems best to have steadyshot on or 120fov - the slightly less detailed picture compared to using 170fov seems to compress better.
The new 60fps 1080p setting is both good news and a disappointment. It gives very smooth movement but seems prone to compression artefacts. 30fps 1080p suffers rather less from this and it seems to be down to the data rates once more. 30fps has a data rate of 16mbps wheres 60fps, twice the number of frames to handle, has 'only' 25mbps.
On a more positive note, the drop in picture quality from 170 to 120 degree fov, either set manuallly or automatically via steadyshot, looks to be less pronounced. It's still there but I have to say that steadyshot 1080p 120 degree fov movies do look good. Shot from a car, the view out of the screen is completely stable while the bonnet moves up and down with the road surface.
I would guess that the best compromise setting for image quality would be 1080p, 30fps, steadyshot on.
I've yet to test this on a bar mount but if there is any rolling shutter effect, there are now three alternatives to try -
1. 1080p 30fps 170fov, no steady shot, where the wide fov may help minimise rolling shutter.
2. 1080p 60fps steadyshot on (120fov), where the increased frame rate should minimise rolling shutter, but perhaps be more compression-prone.
3. 1080p 60fps 170fov where the wide fov may help but perhaps be more compression-prone than 2.
Helmet mounting has no rolling shutter problems so take your pick!
Bar mount tests with the new firmware:
Having Steadyshot on was not a good idea with a bar mount - I tried it and the vibration seemed to throw it; the picture jerks and bounces.
So, with Steadyshot off, I tried some other settings for bar mount use:
1. 1080p 30fps 120 fov - ok, very little rolling shutter, but quite a few jumps with bumps in the road surface.
2. 1080p 60fps 120 fov - same as 1, except for a little more artefacting (blocky squares passing roadside vegetation).
3. 1080p 30fps 170 fov - much smoother than 1 or 2, the wider field of view pushes foreground movement into the background, reducing its amplitude. Good picture quality but still has compression blocks.
4. 1080p 60fps 170 fov - no better than 3 in terms of vibration effects, compression blocks seem a bit worse.
The Sony is actually very good at handling rolling shutter with the narrower 120 degree fov at 30fps, certainly better than my Contour+ at 1080p and 125 degrees. It seems better than with the old firmware although it is difficult to be sure.
This means there is little or no advantage to moving to 60fps as a way of minimising rolling shutter because 1080p is handled ok at 30fps, with a slightly better picture quality. 60fps 1080p also seems to significantly shorten battery life. The problem with both 3 and 4 above is that while you get a decent picture, the wider fov brings your hoods well in shot.
Regarding blocking/compression issues - it is only a problem with leafy roadsides, or in other words, almost any rural location. It seems ok going past buildings, probably because there is less detail and colour variation to process. There's a new mounting frame coming out, so if Sony implemented better compression, particularly for 720p where the data rate needs almost doubling, and got rid of the blue/green tint the camera would be a much better market contender.
Bar mounting - my conclusion is that on a smooth road, I would choose 1 as it has better picture than 60 fps, smaller files than 60 fps, more natural fov, no hoods in view. On a surface-dressed lane I would go for 3 as it gives a smooth picture on a rougher road.
Having Steadyshot on was not a good idea with a bar mount - I tried it and the vibration seemed to throw it; the picture jerks and bounces.
So, with Steadyshot off, I tried some other settings for bar mount use:
1. 1080p 30fps 120 fov - ok, very little rolling shutter, but quite a few jumps with bumps in the road surface.
2. 1080p 60fps 120 fov - same as 1, except for a little more artefacting (blocky squares passing roadside vegetation).
3. 1080p 30fps 170 fov - much smoother than 1 or 2, the wider field of view pushes foreground movement into the background, reducing its amplitude. Good picture quality but still has compression blocks.
4. 1080p 60fps 170 fov - no better than 3 in terms of vibration effects, compression blocks seem a bit worse.
The Sony is actually very good at handling rolling shutter with the narrower 120 degree fov at 30fps, certainly better than my Contour+ at 1080p and 125 degrees. It seems better than with the old firmware although it is difficult to be sure.
This means there is little or no advantage to moving to 60fps as a way of minimising rolling shutter because 1080p is handled ok at 30fps, with a slightly better picture quality. 60fps 1080p also seems to significantly shorten battery life. The problem with both 3 and 4 above is that while you get a decent picture, the wider fov brings your hoods well in shot.
Regarding blocking/compression issues - it is only a problem with leafy roadsides, or in other words, almost any rural location. It seems ok going past buildings, probably because there is less detail and colour variation to process. There's a new mounting frame coming out, so if Sony implemented better compression, particularly for 720p where the data rate needs almost doubling, and got rid of the blue/green tint the camera would be a much better market contender.
Bar mounting - my conclusion is that on a smooth road, I would choose 1 as it has better picture than 60 fps, smaller files than 60 fps, more natural fov, no hoods in view. On a surface-dressed lane I would go for 3 as it gives a smooth picture on a rougher road.
Thanks for the info about the firmware update, hopefully Sony are already working on the next one to improve/sort out the artefacting
I hope so, and to fix the odd green/blue sky tint. It is very frustrating as otherwise the camera is very good. Its 720p setting knocks spots off the Contour+ but only when stationary! Sony's handling of 720p is a mystery - just upping the bit rate by 60% or so would fix it. The rate would be handled ok by memory cards while still creating much smaller file sizes than 1080p.
1080p is not as big a gap in quality - the Contour+ (and 2+ footage I have seen) gives a softer picture but with much, much fewer compression artefacts for a bit rate that is 30% less than the Sony. The Sony ought to be streets ahead with a 16mbps bitrate. There is a trade-off between sharpness and artefacting for a given bit rate, and Sony seem to have gone for sharpness for 1080p, plus not using the codecs to their full advantage as described in earlier posts.
The compression issue is annoying. It's like having a Rolls Royce with square wheels - most of it is superbly engineered but actually using it is being hampered by a fundamental problem.
It is almost the perfect camera, they just need to sort out the artefacting and helmet mounting(will not happen).
The artefacting is made worse by YouTube's new compression techniques, it seems to be ruining perfectly good clear video images.
These are due out this month:
http://www.sony.co.uk/product/cac-other-accessories/aka-sf1
http://www.sony.co.uk/product/cac-other-accessories/aka-wm1
http://www.sony.co.uk/product/cac-other-accessories/adp-bh1
I gather that this
http://www.sony.co.uk/product/cac-other-accessories/blt-hb1
is not that great because of camera movement up and down and lack of lens or mount rotation.
