Yeah, you don't really need 1080p in a compact like this. You know it, we know it. Kodak probably knows it too. Still, it's always pretty wild to pick up a little piece like this and know it can shoot to a native resolution that our parents can't even pronounce.
The new Zi8 is certainly bulky for a "pocket" camcorder, but makes up for it by sporting a rechargeable battery, line-in audio jack, HDMI out, 2.5-inch LCD and even keeping the pop-out USB plug around for old times sake. The perks of face recognition for improved exposure and gyroscope-based image stabilization are also pretty snazzy at this $180 pricepoint. We still aren't quite sold on the way this camera (like most of these compacts) processes video -- it seems to do a lot of damage to frame-to-frame motion, something that Apple fought off
pretty well with the iPhone 3GS -- but we're going to take one home and test it out a little before we throw down a verdict.
posted Jul 29th 2009 3:24PM
oh god that spec sticker on the bottom is horrendous
At first glance, I thought it was a secondary screen...which would've been nice.
Yeah, but it's got all the sales-friendly catch phrases and logos.
Plus, it shows how the camera emits radiation.
i had the exact same first thought....no thanks
Just take it off?
That's what she said.
It's a mic in, not a line-in isn't it?
According to Amazon, it does have a line-in.
Oh wait, hold on there, 720p at 60fps? Now that is interesting. There aren't many consumer products that can do 480p at 60fps, let alone 720p.
the Xacti HD1000 from a ways back (~2yrs?) does 720p @ 60fps
Yes, 60fps is what it says on Kodak's site.
Which is pretty awesome. I'm probably going to have to get one of these.
@ coyo t
The point isn't who came up with it first, but how much it cost!
The Zi6 had this feature.
sure the Xacti HD1010 costs more but it does a lot more and it doesn't cost a lot
my point was that there are many inexpensive cameras that shoot at that rate
All I wanna know is this: Will it do 24p, and can I have some bokke? I want to do a real artsy film looking thing but I want it to cost $200 and fit in my pocket. Is this too much to ask? Oh, and I want manual zoom, shutter speed and aperture controls.
And, I'd like it use real, actual film.
@coyo t: No, there aren't many cameras that can do 720p @ 60fps. Other than the Sanyo models, what other ones are there? Not that many.
The Kodak Zx1 does 720p @ 60fps.
HDMI nice. I can record a nice rez crysis video and pretend i'm playing it, yay.
"it seems to do a lot of damage to frame-to-frame motion"
Can you go into more detail about that statement... I had the Zi6 (returned it for low light reasons), but interested in this one
Guys,
I apologize if this is completely unrelated but I need to ask if it is just me, or is everyone else noticing the blue squares over alot of images on the page?
Cheers.
I got the squares too!
When you hover over an image on engadget, the border turns blue, is this what you mean?
If not, can you tell us what browser you are using?
Thanks, good to know I'm not the only one.
Yup, blue squares in Firefox and IE.
Bug or feature Engadget?
Derry: I'm using the latest Firefox 3. For example, instead of the usual green "+" image, the red "-" image, and the silver "!" image by themselves, they are now each framed with a blue border which disappears ONLY if I hover above them.
Blue squares here too.
FF3.5 and Win xp
Blue square positive here as well. FF 3.5 and Win Vista.
And so it begins...
blue Sqrs for me to.
FF 3.0 Ubuntu.
IE 8 and FF 3.5.1 show the borders, while Safari does not. Engadget writers all use Safari and do not test on other browsers, these problems show up often here on Engadget for us non-Safari users.
It's just another thick-headed guy at Engadget making random and useless changes and testing them live. Guess developers have to be in line with the general Engadget "professionalism".
Use Chrome its faster and makes rendering issues go away.
Oh, I use Safari so I hadn't noticed...
FF 3.5 and Windows 7 and I don't see any blue squares...
I can't wait to see some test footage. I'm seriously thinking of getting one of these, and at this price point it is hard to argue against it.
There was some test footage on youtube, but it looks like it's fake: http://todaysepicdeal.com/post/151646516/kodak-zi8-released
You gotta remember that it doesn't come with any storage, so youll have to drop another $40-50 dollars on a decent sized SD card.
Apparently it has 128 MB of internal memory, which, by my calculation, amounts to about two and a half minutes of 720p footage at 30fps.
@Cass
I actually am able to get really cheap SanDisk cards (Practically free actually), so storage cost isn't an issue for me lol.
I probably already have enough laying around my house right now that I won't have to worry about getting anymore for awhile.
I just pre-ordered one on Amazon, upgrading from the ZX1, just sold it to a friend of mine. I am with BB here, could you elaborate on the damage to frame to frame motion for the not so savvy people here?
The center button is reminiscent of Hal 9000 just seconds before his tragic death.
Anyone know the screen resolution?
"The new Zi8 is certainly bulky for a "pocket" camcorder"
Truth be told, I can't see much of a bulkiness there. Unless you (or whoever is holding it) have a giant hand, that is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7PJV2hFbRQ&feature=related legit demo video?
In the past years, Kodak has gone way down hill, especially after the big leap from film to digi cams. The quality is just not there. I won't hold my hopes high on the return review Engadget will hopefully give, as it sounds from the last sentence above.
Just make sure it's the kind of home footage that can be posted on a family-friendly site like Engadget. I'd hate to see the comments suddenly flooded by outsiders who were innocently Googling "engorged"+"pantyhose"+"deer tick".
Yikes... are those logos removable? That's a fistful of ugly there.
I have a Zi6 and I love it. Though it does have issues in low light and in fast motion. However it is a great little recorder that has been seeing a lot of use. I can't stand the software that came with it, but the format of video it produces is easily used in iMovie. I'll definitely pick up a Zi8 when they're released.
Is this better than the Flip Ultra HD?
Flips can't go anywhere near the 1080p resolution without burning themselves out ( which is the reason why they restrict themselves to 720p :) )
[quote]
We still aren't quite sold on the way this camera (like most of these compacts) processes video -- it seems to do a lot of damage to frame-to-frame motion, something that Apple fought off pretty well with the iPhone 3GS --
[/quote]
I am not sure why everything that Apple seems to be doing needs to be the best in this particular area (which Apple has never been a major player in). The dominant marketshare in this segment belongs to the Flip. You will be better off comparing this with the Flip.
By the way, I am not sure what damage you are referring to in the frame-to-frame motion. I have personally experienced none. Of course, if you playback on a CPU and it isn't powerful enough to decode the H264 stream, things look jerky indeed! Have you tried connecting the device to a HDTV directly and viewing the results? Do you still see the same frame-to-frame motion damage?