Higher 320x240 FPS? - page 2 - Feature Requests - CHDK Forum

Higher 320x240 FPS?

  • 19 Replies
  • 9864 Views
*

Offline a710is

  • ****
  • 250
  • A710 IS
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #10 on: 18 / January / 2008, 12:10:15 »
Advertisements

does the a710 have the ICX629 sensor? it says it can capture full frames at 3.33 fps so what about higher framerate for continuous shooting? is that possible?
« Last Edit: 18 / January / 2008, 12:18:39 by a710is »

*

Offline kwf

  • **
  • 72
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #11 on: 18 / January / 2008, 12:41:25 »

does the a710 have the ICX629 sensor? it says it can capture full frames at 3.33 fps so what about higher framerate for continuous shooting? is that possible?

My guess would be that the digic-III cannot encode the JPEGs fast enough. But digic-III in DSLR is capable of encoding the JPEG pictures faster than that, probably the digic-III aren't the same in every camera (clock frequency, memory bandwith etc.).

Somehow i doubt that the limitation of the powershots and ixus cameras is only artificial, because even the high price P&S cameras don't reach the maximum frame rate of the sensor (which would be possible with 65Mpix/s like the 40D manages), but maybe a moderate fps increase wouldn't be impossible:

A570IS: 1.7 fps @ 7.1M = 12 MP/s
A720IS: 1.3 fps @ 8.0M = 10.4 MP/s
S5 IS: 1.5fps @ 8M = 12 MP/s
SX100: 1.3fps @ 8M = 10.4 MP/s
A650IS: 1.2 fps @ 12.1M = 14.5 MP/s
G9: 1.5fps @ 12.1M = 18.15 MP/s



*

Offline vit40

  • ****
  • 276
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #12 on: 18 / January / 2008, 14:14:19 »
Well, obviously, there are some differences between cameras with Digic II. Starting with different voltage - lower models on 2 AA batteries, higher on 4 batteries, SLR-s on Li-ion etc ... I don't believe that it's possible to raise frame rate in photo or video mode

When using CHDK+RAW, frame rate in photo mode is limited to less than 1 fps anyway (in case of my A620), because writing speed to SD card is 8-9 MB/s and size of raw + medium size jpeg is about 10 MB

But I'm still hoping that it's possible to change sound format in video mode to 16 bit 22 kHz or something like that, now when I can use optical zoom and manual focus with Ewavr's latest builds

*

Offline kwf

  • **
  • 72
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #13 on: 29 / January / 2008, 07:51:47 »
Btw. for those who are interested, i found a datasheet of an older sony sensor, explaining readout modes in detail:
www.eureca.de/pdf/optoelectronic/sony/ICX282AQ.PDF

So it might even be possible to achieve higher frame rates for the center proportion of the frame reading in an AF-mode (if this readout mode is still supplied). But i guess this would need some serious hacking which is probably not worth the effort.


*

Offline a710is

  • ****
  • 250
  • A710 IS
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #14 on: 29 / January / 2008, 08:37:06 »
sorry if i'm missing out on some detail but I just thought of something: if the sensors are capturing full lines that get resized maybe it's possible to get a wide screen format. instead of 640x480, 1280x480 would be nice for example which would then have its vertical resolution doubled in camera or on the PC
or uninterpolated 640x466 or 1280x 466 for example in the case of the A710 sensor
or maybe get the 1280x466(480) video and then double its vertical resolution in camera or in software thus obtaining pretty high quality 1280x932 video. and of course another option would be to resize from 1280x466 to 1280x720 which would basically get close to 720p HD video although a bit flattened. also 466x1.5 = 699 and 480x1.5=720 ( x1.5 =inserting a line between every 2 lines that would be their average).

so I'm saying that if we at least could have more horisontal resolution, it would be nice to use it.
« Last Edit: 29 / January / 2008, 08:57:24 by a710is »

*

Offline kwf

  • **
  • 72
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #15 on: 29 / January / 2008, 11:12:45 »
sorry if i'm missing out on some detail but I just thought of something: if the sensors are capturing full lines that get resized maybe it's possible to get a wide screen format. instead of 640x480, 1280x480 would be nice for example which would then have its vertical resolution doubled in camera or on the PC
or uninterpolated 640x466 or 1280x 466 for example in the case of the A710 sensor
or maybe get the 1280x466(480) video and then double its vertical resolution in camera or in software thus obtaining pretty high quality 1280x932 video. and of course another option would be to resize from 1280x466 to 1280x720 which would basically get close to 720p HD video although a bit flattened. also 466x1.5 = 699 and 480x1.5=720 ( x1.5 =inserting a line between every 2 lines that would be their average).

so I'm saying that if we at least could have more horisontal resolution, it would be nice to use it.
Yes, it might be possible.  I think that is about that, what Canon does with their TX1, which can record 720p, but many people claim its just uprezed VGA, not too impressive...

*

Offline grg

  • *
  • 10
  • A640
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #16 on: 15 / February / 2008, 14:06:14 »
Does anyone know what sensor is used in a A640?
My searches could only find a forum post that claimed its the same as in the G7 (?), but no name/specs. The G7 can do 1024 x 768 @ 15fps, would there be any chance to achieve this resolution on a A640 with CHDK?

To be honest i don't really understand the difference between photo and movie mode, I'd appreciate it if someone could enlighten me 'how comes one makes click and the other doesn't', or give me a link to read up on this. ::)

Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #17 on: 07 / March / 2008, 07:24:56 »
I want HD quality video for s3 please ehheheh :D

Please let me know it is possible ????


*

Offline a710is

  • ****
  • 250
  • A710 IS
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #18 on: 10 / April / 2008, 05:30:05 »
so now that the TX1 firmware has been dumped zSHARE - tx1_100g.zip what do developers think, is there hope of having HD video (1280x720) on our other cams?

Incidentally, the TX1 has the same sensor as the A710 and the A570, which can read 466 lines @ 30 fps, so the differences are mainly in resizing software I would assume.
« Last Edit: 10 / April / 2008, 05:46:34 by a710is »

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
Re: Higher 320x240 FPS?
« Reply #19 on: 10 / April / 2008, 08:46:39 »
and in data throughput.

 

Related Topics