The video is blurry because I edited the footage using software and had to output it using a lower quality to be able to upload it to YouTube. 210 and 420fps videos are clear, 1000fps is not so good.
in slo-motion terms, the ex-f1 is better, you get a slightly higher FPS (goes up to 1200fps as opposed to the FH20's 1000fps).
Because of it's slightly higher power, it's able to record these videos with a higher resolution (better quality), but the difference is hardly noticable.
I have no idea about single-shot quality, but my FH20 is 100x better than I was expecting.
I think the main difference is cost, the FH20 cost me £350 at the time, while the EX-F1 was selling between £600-£700.
The video is blurry because I edited the footage using software and had to output it using a lower quality to be able to upload it to YouTube. 210 and 420fps videos are clear, 1000fps is not so good.
sparkyhillen 1 year ago
y is it so blurry is it just how it uploaded because im going to buy it and i dont want crappy resolution
Sox2525 1 year ago
One difference also is that the EX-F1 has a 6 mpix sensor while the EX-FH20 has a 9.1 mpix sensor.
jubuttib 2 years ago
uhm wheres the difference between ex fh20 and ex f1.. whats better?
BerSerKer2k8 2 years ago
in slo-motion terms, the ex-f1 is better, you get a slightly higher FPS (goes up to 1200fps as opposed to the FH20's 1000fps).
Because of it's slightly higher power, it's able to record these videos with a higher resolution (better quality), but the difference is hardly noticable.
I have no idea about single-shot quality, but my FH20 is 100x better than I was expecting.
I think the main difference is cost, the FH20 cost me £350 at the time, while the EX-F1 was selling between £600-£700.
wayofthehunter 2 years ago