Bullet Camera Explanation - Specs

skipdup · 05-07-2005, 06:14 AM

I've been trying to research which bullet camera to buy (for a MiniDV) and have seen some great threads on the topic. However, I'm still quite confused and was hoping for some help/further explanation... I want to view the video on a large TV (vs. just for computer/internet).

Can anyone tell me what specs I should be looking at? The specs listed for the different cams are all greek to me...

For example...

It looks like some B-Cams are 1/3"CCD and some are 1/4"CCD. Which is better?

Some list "Effective Pixels" and "Horizontal Resolution", what ratings should I look for?

What is LUX, what's a good number for this application?

Anything else I should be aware of (excluding camcorder specific issues)?

One last thing... Are these mini-lenses even able to come close to the image quality of the lens integrated on the camera? What will I sacrifice by using a bullet cam attached to a miniDV?

Thanks!
Skip

randywebb · 05-07-2005, 09:41 AM

lux is (basicly) how much light there is - it is probably the light level the cam needs to record an image.

thabaer · thabaer's Garage

Do a search for Jack Olsen on this forum, he's great at sharing his tales of fun with the BBS and that includes some good samples of video and the gear he uses to make them. That should give you a real world idea of what his cameras produce. Somewhere among Jack's postings is a good source for the Sony bullet-cams used for his videos, I have three and the quality is quite good for the price.

CCD size isn't a lone indicator of quality, a smaller 1/4" in one camera can easily outperform a 1/3 and vice versa. Lens quality and CCD fab generations vary in levels of performance.

NTSC is the N. American standard resolution spec if you don't go into the new higher def stuff. You'll want to see at least 480 vertical lines of resolution for a full height screen and a similar or greater count across the horizontal.

Lux is a measurement of light level, lower lux numbers mean better imaging with less available light. The Sonys are rated 1lux at a fixed F1.2 aperture. Most bullets have automatic gain that adjusts the output signal brightness depending on the light coming into the camera.

Make sure you can provide the power required by the camera and that it can handle the operating environment you will be in (temp,humid). Composite NTSC output should match with a composite input on your MiniDV.

The plastic lenses in these little toys sure don't match the $1500 glass babies you can put on prosumer 3-CCD DVs or other bigger toys... the world of lenses covers a huge range of light-gathering power and quality

here's a photography site, the links might take you to some places to do some video research (maybe):
http://www.dpreview.com/misc/links.asp

skipdup · 05-07-2005, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by thabaer
Somewhere among Jack's postings is a good source for the Sony bullet-cams used for his videos, I have three and the quality is quite good for the price.

For some reason, I thought the Sony that Jack Olsen uses was only good for low resolution/small file size - for internet/email use. Am I mistaken? Are JACK's SONY's good enough to use for TV playback? For $69 I may just try it out...

Thanks,
Skip

10/2005 EDIT BY JACK OLSEN: I DON'T RECOMMEND THIS CAMERA FOR IN-CAR VIDEO USE. IT IS TOO LIGHT SENSITIVE, AND 'BLEACHES OUT' IN BRIGHT SUNLIGHT.

thabaer · thabaer's Garage

So far I've only used mine w/ small LCD screens as a rear-view backup camera mounted in the cap of my diesel and to watch herr doggie in the back yard. Never hooked one up to a full-size boob-tube.

The file size of Jack's videos is probably not the highest quality that you can get from the MiniVCR he uses, I bought one and it has various degrees of compression. I don't expect to use mine until Pike's Peak so I can't say for sure what the results are like.

But like you say, for $60-70 it's not a painful purchase and who knows what fun you can have with one of them!

Jack Olsen · 05-07-2005, 10:49 PM

The small Sony I use would be acceptable for normal TV use, I think. The files I post are compressed way down, so the image quality takes a nosedive. The only think that bugs me about the cheapn Sony is that -- in the two-camera configuration I'm currently using -- I'm getting an image where the camera's iris is opening too wide, giving the image a washed out look. In the next few weeks, I'm going to try and address this.