3 ms·

The blurbs are a little bit incoherent > DSLR technology on a webcam > A Mirrorless Miracle > 7.8mm [diagonal] sensor 7.8 mm diagonal is basically the ballp

The blurbs are a little bit incoherent > DSLR technology on a webcam > A Mirrorless Miracle > 7.8mm [diagonal] sensor 7.8 mm diagonal is basically the ballpark of a phone camera sensor (which it almost certainly is). It's not all that obvious why you'd spent 300 $ on this instead of using a smartphone as a webcam. 300 $ also gets somewhat close to being able to buy a used low-end mirrorless camera plus lens and adapter (if necessary), which is more flexible and you get a camera for free. Might be for the "can't be bothered, but have money" market, as an all-in-one-solution to get something OK without meddling?

bayindirh 5y ago
The only thing it has a top notch Sony sensor and a glass lens assembly, with f/1.8 equivalent aperture. It'll have no bokeh or low light sensitivity of an FF or APS-C camera. Also, Sony A7 (first generation) comparison is rigged. Get an A7-III, A7C for $2000, and install latest webcam drivers. Its colors and fidelity will blow Opal out of water, even without trying (both have 6K sensors, too). The only alleged improvement of Opal is microphone array however, Apple is already good at this. When Zoom & Google's noise cancellation technology is added on top, everything is more than satisfactory, for most scenarios. On this front, I'm not sure that stereo mics of a true mirrorless system would be that behind in focusing sound (if webcam driver can stream the location of the prominent face to the driver, a more advanced sound filtering can be done with a pair of mics, too). If you're too inclined, you can just throw in a Yeti in a mix and, sound issue will be solved for once and for all. All in all, it's a good webcam, but they're picking wrong competitors. A modern mirrorless is too powerful for them, and MacBook's pinhole webcam is too good for its size. They need better marketing and targeting IMHO.
- carlob 5y ago
  What do you mean f/1.8 equivalent? I thought focal lengths were different for different sensor sizes, not apertures.
  - bayindirh 5y ago
    the F number is calculated by f/D where f is the focal length and D is the diameter of entrance pupil. For a F/1.0, 50mm lens, you need a 50mm front element. In Opal's terms, this means their f/D ratio is 1.8. However, it doesn't mean it can capture equal number of photons with a full frame system with a f/1.8 lens, since their sensors' surface area is not equivalent. Another difference will be in DoF. Since the sensor is smaller, there'll be a big crop factor, it'll multiply everything. Hence the resulting DoF will not be anything like a full frame system. In other words, almost everything will be in focus. To add a cherry on top, they're not telling the T number of their lens, which defines how much light actually passes through it. F number and T number can be vastly different, intentionally or unintentionally, due to design parameters and features of a lens.
    - numpad0 5y ago
      Focal distance is 4.81mm. 4.81mm/1.8 = 2.67mm. Don’t worry, there’s no such thing as “equivalent F-stop” and you also don’t have to have front lens element as wide as the aperture.
  - AirborneUnicorn 5y ago
    As I understand it, a larger sensor size will require longer focal lengths to match an "equivalent" view angle as a smaller sensor. As focal length increases, perceived depth of field becomes more shallow. Which is to say, a lens at f/4 on a 4x5 camera will will be much more shallow than an equivalent angle lens on a smaller film/sensor size.
- jonas21 5y ago
  > All in all, it's a good webcam, but they're picking wrong competitors. A modern mirrorless is too powerful for them, and MacBook's pinhole webcam is too good for its size. They need better marketing and targeting IMHO. I disagree. Their target market is the person who says, "I'm tired of looking lousy in my Zoom meetings, but I know nothing about cameras. What can I do to fix this?" Then they see the Macbook Webcam video and think, "that's how I look now", and they see the Opal and A7 videos and think, "that's how I'd like to look." Then they see the prices, where the Opal is in the "accessory" price range, and the A7 costs more than their laptop. And they're sold on the Opal.
  - bayindirh 5y ago
    > Then they see the prices, where the Opal is in the "accessory" price range, and the A7 costs more than their laptop. And they're sold on the Opal. The thing is, you can't buy a new A7 (MK-I) today, and if you can buy one, it'd be around the same price of a brand new Opal. Or you can buy an Logitech Brio Ultra, and use that one. If you buy an even modestly priced Fuji APS-C camera, it'll blow Opal out of water. I'm not telling that Opal is bad hardware. It's modestly good hardware, ruined by bad marketing and wrong claims.
- chrismorgan 5y ago
  > Get an A7-III, A7C for $2000, and install latest webcam drivers. Its colors and fidelity will blow Opal out of water, even without trying (both have 6K sensors, too). Colour, maybe, but fidelity absolutely not: over the USB connection, all Sony’s cameras deal in no larger than 1024×576 (citation: personal experience with an α6100, and https://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/app/webcam/en/instruction/ https://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/app/webcam/en/instructi... agrees this applies to all). You need to go HDMI to get 1080p or 4K, and then hopefully you’re on a desktop with a PCI-E capture card or something, because USB HDMI capture cards are a minefield with no perfect options (they all have problems with latency, compression, or colour, typically more than one of the three).
floren 5y ago
I wonder precisely what DSLR technology is in it... if the answer is "a high-quality sensor", well, that's the D, what about the SLR? :)
- bigiain 5y ago
  No off set optical viewfinder, to that’s the Single Lens bit covered… (I’m guessing here, the article is 404ing for me…)
  - floren 5y ago
    There's no "viewfinder" at all, though, just the video from the sensor, right? What makes an SLR an SLR is the combination of mirrors and prisms that makes the light from the lens go to either the viewfinder or the film/sensor. If you don't have that, I'd argue it's just a "mirrorless", aka "a plain old digital camera".
    - bigiain 5y ago
      I agree with you, mostly. But if we're going to nitpick about the acronym, it's only the "R" bit that refers to the mirror/prism, the "SL" bit is separate to that. A "plain old digital camera" is an example of a Digital Single Lens camera. It just doesn't do the "Reflex" trick of sending the image to the viewfinder(/autofocus/lightsensor) with a mirror/prism. (I'm out of my camera historical terminology depth here, but I'm assuming there "SL" bit made it onto the common use SLR acronym to differentiate from cameras where the viewfinder had it's own lens, and didn't use the same "single" lens that the optical path to the film used.)
- daveslash 5y ago
  I'd argue that they're misusing the term "DSLR" altogether. A more appropriate term would be "Mirrorless" (which they also use on the page).
mcbuilder 5y ago
I agree that it is probably for those who want "DLSR", or "iPhone 11" if you prefer, quality, but don't want to spend the hassle beyond plugging it in and having it just work.

bayindirh 5y ago

The only thing it has a top notch Sony sensor and a glass lens assembly, with f/1.8 equivalent aperture. It'll have no bokeh or low light sensitivity of an FF or APS-C camera. Also, Sony A7 (first generation) comparison is rigged. Get an A7-III, A7C for $2000, and install latest webcam drivers. Its colors and fidelity will blow Opal out of water, even without trying (both have 6K sensors, too). The only alleged improvement of Opal is microphone array however, Apple is already good at this. When Zoom & Google's noise cancellation technology is added on top, everything is more than satisfactory, for most scenarios. On this front, I'm not sure that stereo mics of a true mirrorless system would be that behind in focusing sound (if webcam driver can stream the location of the prominent face to the driver, a more advanced sound filtering can be done with a pair of mics, too). If you're too inclined, you can just throw in a Yeti in a mix and, sound issue will be solved for once and for all. All in all, it's a good webcam, but they're picking wrong competitors. A modern mirrorless is too powerful for them, and MacBook's pinhole webcam is too good for its size. They need better marketing and targeting IMHO.

carlob 5y ago
What do you mean f/1.8 equivalent? I thought focal lengths were different for different sensor sizes, not apertures.
- bayindirh 5y ago
  the F number is calculated by f/D where f is the focal length and D is the diameter of entrance pupil. For a F/1.0, 50mm lens, you need a 50mm front element. In Opal's terms, this means their f/D ratio is 1.8. However, it doesn't mean it can capture equal number of photons with a full frame system with a f/1.8 lens, since their sensors' surface area is not equivalent. Another difference will be in DoF. Since the sensor is smaller, there'll be a big crop factor, it'll multiply everything. Hence the resulting DoF will not be anything like a full frame system. In other words, almost everything will be in focus. To add a cherry on top, they're not telling the T number of their lens, which defines how much light actually passes through it. F number and T number can be vastly different, intentionally or unintentionally, due to design parameters and features of a lens.
  - numpad0 5y ago
    Focal distance is 4.81mm. 4.81mm/1.8 = 2.67mm. Don’t worry, there’s no such thing as “equivalent F-stop” and you also don’t have to have front lens element as wide as the aperture.
- AirborneUnicorn 5y ago
  As I understand it, a larger sensor size will require longer focal lengths to match an "equivalent" view angle as a smaller sensor. As focal length increases, perceived depth of field becomes more shallow. Which is to say, a lens at f/4 on a 4x5 camera will will be much more shallow than an equivalent angle lens on a smaller film/sensor size.
jonas21 5y ago
> All in all, it's a good webcam, but they're picking wrong competitors. A modern mirrorless is too powerful for them, and MacBook's pinhole webcam is too good for its size. They need better marketing and targeting IMHO. I disagree. Their target market is the person who says, "I'm tired of looking lousy in my Zoom meetings, but I know nothing about cameras. What can I do to fix this?" Then they see the Macbook Webcam video and think, "that's how I look now", and they see the Opal and A7 videos and think, "that's how I'd like to look." Then they see the prices, where the Opal is in the "accessory" price range, and the A7 costs more than their laptop. And they're sold on the Opal.
- bayindirh 5y ago
  > Then they see the prices, where the Opal is in the "accessory" price range, and the A7 costs more than their laptop. And they're sold on the Opal. The thing is, you can't buy a new A7 (MK-I) today, and if you can buy one, it'd be around the same price of a brand new Opal. Or you can buy an Logitech Brio Ultra, and use that one. If you buy an even modestly priced Fuji APS-C camera, it'll blow Opal out of water. I'm not telling that Opal is bad hardware. It's modestly good hardware, ruined by bad marketing and wrong claims.
chrismorgan 5y ago
> Get an A7-III, A7C for $2000, and install latest webcam drivers. Its colors and fidelity will blow Opal out of water, even without trying (both have 6K sensors, too). Colour, maybe, but fidelity absolutely not: over the USB connection, all Sony’s cameras deal in no larger than 1024×576 (citation: personal experience with an α6100, and https://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/app/webcam/en/instruction/ https://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/app/webcam/en/instructi... agrees this applies to all). You need to go HDMI to get 1080p or 4K, and then hopefully you’re on a desktop with a PCI-E capture card or something, because USB HDMI capture cards are a minefield with no perfect options (they all have problems with latency, compression, or colour, typically more than one of the three).

floren 5y ago

I wonder precisely what DSLR technology is in it... if the answer is "a high-quality sensor", well, that's the D, what about the SLR? :)

bigiain 5y ago
No off set optical viewfinder, to that’s the Single Lens bit covered… (I’m guessing here, the article is 404ing for me…)
- floren 5y ago
  There's no "viewfinder" at all, though, just the video from the sensor, right? What makes an SLR an SLR is the combination of mirrors and prisms that makes the light from the lens go to either the viewfinder or the film/sensor. If you don't have that, I'd argue it's just a "mirrorless", aka "a plain old digital camera".
  - bigiain 5y ago
    I agree with you, mostly. But if we're going to nitpick about the acronym, it's only the "R" bit that refers to the mirror/prism, the "SL" bit is separate to that. A "plain old digital camera" is an example of a Digital Single Lens camera. It just doesn't do the "Reflex" trick of sending the image to the viewfinder(/autofocus/lightsensor) with a mirror/prism. (I'm out of my camera historical terminology depth here, but I'm assuming there "SL" bit made it onto the common use SLR acronym to differentiate from cameras where the viewfinder had it's own lens, and didn't use the same "single" lens that the optical path to the film used.)
daveslash 5y ago
I'd argue that they're misusing the term "DSLR" altogether. A more appropriate term would be "Mirrorless" (which they also use on the page).

mcbuilder 5y ago

I agree that it is probably for those who want "DLSR", or "iPhone 11" if you prefer, quality, but don't want to spend the hassle beyond plugging it in and having it just work.