Praktica DVC 5.2 FHD 1080p Test (Downscaled to 720p)

Testing the Praktica DVC 5.2 FHD in differently well lit environments with and without night shot; all without tripod or other stabilizers. I downscaled the video to 720p while encoding, but the result isn't worse in 1080p. The first 1 1/2 minutes are low-light scenes. The Camera performs way better in better light conditions which you can see starting at the middle of the video.

I need to find out how to get into the service menu - a new firmware would be nice, too.

N.B.: The Camera is the same as Toshiba Camileo H20 or Yashica ADV-530 HD. It only lacks the electronic image stabilizers which those cams offer at VGA- and CIF-resolution (which is absolutely useless according to some online tests anyhow).

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Praktica
• DVC
• 5.2
• FHD

[DeKoepi]

In the meantime I bought an Aiptek AHD H5 Extreme which does real 1920x1080 resolution and not the pseudo-1080p (1440x1080p anamorph). It is a step forward, but in the scaled-down youtube clips you won't notice the difference.

I love to record my clips in HD. There's plenty of details in the image, compared to lower resolutions - for example, I can really see my niece in HD clips with details in the face where PAL resolution cameras just show "hm, there is a moving object".

[dummerbube]

The darkness vidoes still look really light...

[maggnommy]

1080p is 1920x1080

[lecochonbleu]

People buy and film with H.D. cameras just because of the highest resolutions. There's little point in getting a H.D. home film camera and filming in V.G.A. or C.I.F. resolutions. Once you've taken films in the highest resolutions and got used to watching them on T.V. for example, I doubt you'd ever want to take lower resolution films. Most of the cameras weren't made for that anyway, you'd be better to get a really good stills cam. with V.G.A. video - some are very good, they're geared to it.