Digital camera with large sensor or camcorder with small sensor?

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
Jezebel Masterson Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: 60 fps frame rate pros and cons

Francis Carver wrote:

For the life of me, I cannot figure out why some people claim that 60p = 60 fps is now the new "high frame rate standard." Why is it? Are 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, etc. frame rates so much worse in comparison to it, or why then?

60 isn't the new thang, it just happens to be what most of our newer cameras shoot at. If mine was capable of 1080/120p, trust me I would be talking about that. Higher is better, that is all we are saying. It just so happens that current technology can do 60p and for very affordable prices. There is no reason then, that we should be shooting at 24fps. Try not to freeze frame this topic, the numbers you are hearing will keep changing. In 5 years it may be 520fps you are arguing about. The bottom line is, we can easily shoot far over 24fps, so why not do it?

BTW, for decades in all PAL television countries everything was shot at 25 fps, which is of course only 1 fps faster of a frame rate than 24 fps is. But you would not really call 25p a "cinematic look" frame rate, would you now?

I think the interlaced issue prevents it from looking that way. AFAIK, tele doesn't play 25p, it is 480/25i, or higher rez 25i, here in the states it is 480/30i. I have high def channels, even 3D, but they have traditionally been interlaced. I think that's why none of it looks cinematic.

Regarding displaying "rapid motion" -- if you really want to stress out your camera, I am sure you can shoot with it rapid motion at 60p that will look pretty bad. Is that why you have switched to 60p = 60 fps shooting -- you tried them all, and nothing below that particular frame rate will satisfy your personal needs for "smoothness?"

For me, it was the highest I could get for my budget. If my panasonic would shoot at 120fps without any IQ degredation, I would do it. External HDD are cheap, 120fps may appear exactly the same as 60, or it could be even smoother. Either way, it allows me to employ slow mo to an even greater affect, and the only downside is larger files. And your point of shooting 60p motion that could look bad, yes, if motion was fast enough even that could show "chop", all the more reason to push even further. Ever see a bullet in a 5000fps slow mo? Played back at 60fps it is butter smooth, same concept for normal video just not as extreme.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow