Vide quality not pictures

I've read about the recent sonys being not so hot vid clip wise

Q) Is it all down to fps ?

read of one having 15fps and that being the reason

looking for some decent vid quality really - but
not that mega expensive nokia - n93 i think

thanks

---

› See More: Vide quality not pictures

vid wrote:
> I've read about the recent sonys being not so hot vid clip wise
>
> Q) Is it all down to fps ?
>
> read of one having 15fps and that being the reason
>
> looking for some decent vid quality really - but
> not that mega expensive nokia - n93 i think
>
> thanks
>
24 fps is the minimum needed to fool the eye in to thinking it's seeing
a moving picture rather than a number of stills one after the other.
Also full capture rather than slow scan which just captures the changes
from one frame to the next.
If you need good quality video get one of the new small camera's, at the
moment I haven't seen a phone that can take anything like good footage
(mind you, I'm hyper critical, I was in the broadcast biz for 18 years,
what I think of as crap I've heard people say they like !!! we're
looking at different things).

vid wrote:
> I've read about the recent sonys being not so hot vid clip wise
>
> Q) Is it all down to fps ?
>
> read of one having 15fps and that being the reason
>
> looking for some decent vid quality really - but
> not that mega expensive nokia - n93 i think
>
> thanks
>
24 fps is the minimum needed to fool the eye in to thinking it's seeing
a moving picture rather than a number of stills one after the other.
Also full capture rather than slow scan which just captures the changes
from one frame to the next.
If you need good quality video get one of the new small camera's, at the
moment I haven't seen a phone that can take anything like good footage
(mind you, I'm hyper critical, I was in the broadcast biz for 18 years,
what I think of as crap I've heard people say they like !!! we're
looking at different things).