GoPro Hero 4: 4k Video, New Processor and Release Date – Air Herald.
There are rumors that the Hero 4 will also have some sort of 3D capability, perhaps paired with another Hero 4 as was done with earlier Hero cameras.
A comparison of inexpensive, consumer level 3D cameras in terms of the specifications that matter for 3D photography and video. There are other cameras besides these but these are affordable and available from many vendors. Another day I will look in to specifications of higher end cameras, such as the Sony TD10/TD20 3D video cameras.
Update: Since posting this item it appears that most of these cameras are in the process of being discontinued and you can find some great half price deals right now. It is likely that new 3D cameras will be introduced in a few weeks at the 2013 Consumer Electronics Show.
| Fujifilm W3 | Lumix 3D1 | Toshiba Camileo Z100 | |
| Stereobase | 6.5 cm | 3.0 cm | 3.0 cm |
| Focal length | 35-105mm 35mm equivalent | 25-100mm 35mm equivalent | Fixed lens, 4x digital zoom in 3D, 35mm equivalent unknown |
| Stills | 2x 10.0 MP Sensor3D Resolution 7.2 MP in 16:9 ratio 8.9 MP in 3:2 ratio 10.0 MP in 4:3 ratio Stills recorded in full size side by side MPO format |
2x 12 MP Sensor3D Resolution 6 MP @ 16:9 8 MP @ 4:3 Stills recorded as full size |
2x 5 MP sensor3D Resolution 4 MP @ 16:9 (2D 5M 2592 x 1944, and an “interpolated” 16 MP 4608×3456) Stills recorded in full side-by-side JPEG |
| Video | Video 1280×720/24p MP4 encoding3D HD Resolution two separate video streams recorded as 1280×720/24p for left 1280×720/24p for rightEncoding AVCHD or MJPEG 3D-AVI format |
Video 1,920×1,080/30F in either AVCHD or MP4. Sensor is progressive but video is encoded as 1080i – end result is basically the same as 30p. 1280×720/30p 1280×720/60pEncoding AVCHD or MP43D Resolution 960 x 1080 for left 960 x 1080 for right |
Video 1920×1080/30p 720/60p MP4 encoding,3D file format is one half side-by-side formatmeaning 960×1080 for each halfFeatures external mic input plug |
| LCD | Glasses free 3D | 2D only | Glasses free 3D |
| Image stabilization | No, CCD imager | Yes, CMOS imager | No, CMOS |
| Battery | user replaceable | user replaceable | user replaceable |
| Sony Bloggie 3D | ||
| Stereobase | 2.0 cm | |
| Focal length | 16:9 stills and video: 47mm (35mm camera equivalent) 4:3 41mm (35mm equivalent) |
|
| Stills | 2x 5.15 MP sensor (3.1 MP @ 16:9) (5 MP S 4:3)3D 2 MP (1920x1080x)Encoded as full size MPO side by side images |
|
| Video | 1080 720/60p 720/30p 3D: 1080/30p onlyEncoding MP4Encoded in half size side-by-side 3D format for 960 x 1080 resolution per side |
|
| LCD | Glasses free 3D | |
| Image stabilization | Yes, CMOS imager | |
| Battery | internal, not replaceable |
An interesting observation – some of these cameras have 1920×1080 image sensors but actually cut the image in half when encoded into video. The reality is they are not 1920×1080 but 960 x 1080 x 2.
In addition, the frame rate offers additional temporal resolution.
Let’s compare the image quality in terms of actual resolution, as well as resolution in time by calculating a “mega pixels per minute” rate:
Interestingly, depending on many factors, your highest image quality might come from 720 x 60 fps because it delivers more potential information to your eyes over time.
Shooting 3D with my two Kodak Playsport Zx3 cameras, I think the 720/60p dual camera view looks on par with the 1080p/30p view. But that is also because after editing and 3D processing, the output of a 1080p video often ends up as a 960x1080p side by side video (as needed, for example, to upload to Youtube).
Figuring out which is best can get complicated!
When shooting 3D video using two cameras, we turn off all in camera stabilization features. This makes hand held video look shaky, unfortunately, as all the little hand movements remain in the original clips. Consequently, we have to shoot most 3D on a tripod.
I just did a test, though, using my Canon Vixia HF M301 video cameras. I use two of them to shoot stereoscopic 3D. The HF M301 has three stabilization options: off, standard and dynamic. For my tests, I shot a scene using standard stabilization and another scene using dynamic. Then I paired the left and right tracks in Magix Movie Edit, output to a WMV 3D anaglyph file and watched the test video.
For general hand held shots without rapid camera movements, the in camera stabilization tracked well between both cameras. However, rapid camera movements caused different stabilization effects in each camera and the 3D goes bonkers as one goes left and the other goes right!
Bottom line: for simple handheld shots without a lot of movement, the in camera stabilization works okay and eliminates the handheld jerkiness.
Ideally, it would be nice if we could stabilize the 3D images after editing but there is not an easy way to do that.
Most video editing software today has image stabilization capabilities. Image stabilization analyzes the video for jerky movements and then corrects by shifting the video around to minimize the jerky movements. Since this tends to leave black bars at the top, bottom or sides, the video is also enlarged slightly to fill in the black bars left by shifting the video.
When it comes to 3D video, there does not seem to be a great solution. Sony Movie Edit Platinum 11 disables the stabilization feature on paired 3D clips. Magix Movie Edit Pro MX Plus can stabilize individual clips before pairing – but there is not a good way to match the stabilization between the left and right tracks. You can stabilize one, copy the effects track and paste it to the 2nd track, but this has not produced the expected result of matching stabilization.
I suppose we could created our 3D track, output to a video file, import that file as a single clip that may as well be 2D as far as the editor is concerned, and then apply stabilization. Not sure I want to go through two more transcodes though!
