4 ms·

Still doesn't explain why a $300phone has a better camera than a $250 logitech BRIO. I recently bought a BRIO and in non optimal lighting the performance is jus

by tda 6y ago

Still doesn't explain why a $300phone has a better camera than a $250 logitech BRIO. I recently bought a BRIO and in non optimal lighting the performance is just as mediocre as a $30 C230 so I returned it immediately. In the en I convinced my wife to just use the DSLR (she was hesitant at first because of the extra hassle). A modern DSL had good IQ even ad candlelight, you really almost can't mess it up. Only way to destroy the image is to use different color lights (warm lightbulb on left side and natural light from a window on the right side will look weird on every camera I know of)

i_am_proteus 6y ago
A DSLR with a lens costs thousands of dollars. A cheap continuous light with a cheap softbox costs about $150, and gets the job done.
- tda 6y ago
  Of course, the point was more that regardless of price the following holds in poor light: webcam < phone < point and shoot cam < dslr. Why are there no webcams with actual optical zoom lenses and decent sensor sizes? Why doesn't Canon or Nikon have a go, or Sony? The market (at least now) is a lot bigger than that for camera's. Even in the longer run, I bet a lot of people are willing to spend a bit extra to have the best looking image in the meeting. Everybody my wife videoconferences with immediately notices here camera is way better than theirs And also, not everyone wants to sit in front of a bright light
  - KineticLensman 6y ago
    > Why doesn't Canon or Nikon have a go, or Sony? Nikon offer a free webcam utility [0] that allows recent DSLRs (and mirrorless) to be used as a webcam when plugged into a PC. I tried it with my D850. The advantage is, predictably, awesome optics. The downsides were a) finding a place on my desk for the camera and some sort of mount b) the camera battery gets eaten really quickly. Interestingly, the webcam utility isn't available for the smallest Nikon cameras - the Coolpix range - so I guess there won't be a dedicated Nikon webcam. [0] https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/548/Webcam_Utility.html https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/548/Webca...
- Der_Einzige 6y ago
  More like 500, around 1000 if you need a high quality lens

by tda 6y ago

i_am_proteus 6y ago

A DSLR with a lens costs thousands of dollars. A cheap continuous light with a cheap softbox costs about $150, and gets the job done.

tda 6y ago
Of course, the point was more that regardless of price the following holds in poor light: webcam < phone < point and shoot cam < dslr. Why are there no webcams with actual optical zoom lenses and decent sensor sizes? Why doesn't Canon or Nikon have a go, or Sony? The market (at least now) is a lot bigger than that for camera's. Even in the longer run, I bet a lot of people are willing to spend a bit extra to have the best looking image in the meeting. Everybody my wife videoconferences with immediately notices here camera is way better than theirs And also, not everyone wants to sit in front of a bright light
- KineticLensman 6y ago
  > Why doesn't Canon or Nikon have a go, or Sony? Nikon offer a free webcam utility [0] that allows recent DSLRs (and mirrorless) to be used as a webcam when plugged into a PC. I tried it with my D850. The advantage is, predictably, awesome optics. The downsides were a) finding a place on my desk for the camera and some sort of mount b) the camera battery gets eaten really quickly. Interestingly, the webcam utility isn't available for the smallest Nikon cameras - the Coolpix range - so I guess there won't be a dedicated Nikon webcam. [0] https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/548/Webcam_Utility.html https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/548/Webca...
Der_Einzige 6y ago
More like 500, around 1000 if you need a high quality lens