LifeView CompactFlash Camera....1.3 Megapixels!

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.mobileplanet.com/private/pocketpcthoughts/product.asp?dept%5Fid=3718&pf%5Fid=MP760002&listing=1' target='_blank'>http://www.mobileplanet.com/private...60002&listing=1</a><br /><br /></div>I was cruising through Mobile Planet and saw that they had a listing for a product I hadn't heard of before - a 1.3 Megapixel camera from LifeView. It's priced at $139.99, and we can only hope that it's better than the Pretec 1.3 MP camera. I'll look into getting one for review, but you can pre-order the camera today (it's available at the end of the month).<br /><br /><img src="http://www.mobileplanet.com/assets/product_images/MP760002.gif" />

[dermite]

Manufacturer's website shows that there is a 1.3 MP model with a flash, in addition to the one on Mobile Planet without one. Any information on this?

[cpoole]

I did a search on this product and came across the following site. It mentions many cams for the Pocket PC including some SD cams.

http://www.ipaqabilities.com/info/ipaqdirectory/multimedia.shtml

[R K]

Let's hope the image quality of this FlyCAM is better than the 0.3MP version. The 0.3MP FlyCAM has bad image quality in indoor lighting.
Here's a little review of the FlyCAM, but please don't jump in all at once.
I don't have much bandwidth to spare. :)

http://www.angelfire.com/electronic2/pocket_pc/video.htm


UPDATE: Link fixed

[daveshih]

Dude, I thought you guys already knew this, otherwise I'd have posted this review already.... http://www.pdaordie.com/peakdetail.asp?PeakID=142
The review is in Chinese, but I'll try to sum up here:
1. Overall, picture quality is much better than .3M cf cam.
2. Plug&Play, meaning software will automatically be launched (once installed, of course) once you plug it into the CF slot.
3. 180-degree Swivel cam plus a view-finder!
4. Manual focus
5. Fullscreen capability during shooting.
6. 240x320 all the way to 1280x1024, with 5 preset quality settings (Lowest to Super).
7. Video cam mode also works great.
8. They are working on getting this integrated with not only PDA, but also mobile devices to enable mobile video-conferencing.

Hope this helps,

David

[Tom W.M.]

The description Jason linked to is incorrect. 640x480 is not a 1.3 MP camera. I get 307,200 pixels. :wink:
Hope I helped,
Tom

[Foo Fighter]

Looks nice, but I never trust protruding attachments or dongles. Too easy to break. :?

Cool though. 8)

[Jason Dunn]

The description Jason linked to is incorrect. 640x480 is not a 1.3 MP camera. I get 307,200 pixels. :wink:
Hope I helped,
Tom

I'm not sure what you mean - I linked to the item on MobilePlanet, and that's definitely the 1.3 MP version.... :?:

[R K]

You might also want to hold off on preordering.
It seems that CompactFlash Cameras are notorious for getting the release date pushed back.
The images in the pdaordie review look pretty good, but I'd like to see some indoor shots since a lot of CF Cameras are week in this area.

[R K]

The description Jason linked to is incorrect. 640x480 is not a 1.3 MP camera. I get 307,200 pixels. :wink:
Hope I helped,
Tom

I'm not sure what you mean - I linked to the item on MobilePlanet, and that's definitely the 1.3 MP version.... :?:

The Specifications for the camera has an error and says that it's a 1.3MP camera capable of taking pictures at 640x480.

[dermite]

I called the company. They say the 1.3 MP version with flash should be done in about a month. The reason the CF cameras do poorly indoors is that they're too slow for indoor light levels, so use long exposure times that produce blurred images. Plus the color balance is often poor. A flash should fix this. None of the other CF cameras that I'm aware of have one.

[Gerard]

Somebody with this company is not getting things at all right, and it is getting about as clear as mud just who. I contacted these on Monday about the specs of this camera as listed on their website (the manufacturer's, not the reseller), and the first answer I got went something like this (sorry, I didn't save the email exchange, as it seemed it was done and useless):
(my inquiry) I am interested in testing your new FlyCam 1.3MP model CF camera with my iPAQ 3835 and Casio EG-800 for purposes of a review. I have several questions..... (details of what I would expect from a CF camera, considering my dismal experience so far with the Pretec).
(company response) Dear sir, you seem to be mistaken... The camera is NOT a 1.3MP camera, but a 0.3MP camera. Units are available for advance ordering on our website. Thank you for your interest.
(my answer) But the dimensions of the highest quality images stated on your specification list show about a 1.3MP total resolution, please clarify this.
(company response - also received by Jenneth Orantia who was also asking questions like mine) Sorry, we see that the data posted on the website is mistaken, and have corrected this. The CF camera is a 0.3MP model. Sorry for any confusion.

So, what's the deal with these people exactly? They seem so far to have marketed at leaast 3 different CF camera with differing specifications, and yet all turn out to be 300,000pixel resolution and with generally similar features otherwise, but bundled with a confusing array of 'IA' software bundles. Some of the specs look great, like videos in AVI format, and (perhaps) conversion in-device to animated GIF of these AVI files. I am beginning to smell a rodent, one where the PR department is treading water trying to market a known-dog. I've read so far two fairly comprehensive independent reviews which come out saying this camera is not so great, and one forum poster on Brighthand comes to the camera's defense with an almost religious zeal while never really saying much about why it's so great ('really great considering it's just a CF camera' and 'if you want a fantastic camera buy a standalone camera' are not exactly raves, but the rest of his comments are overtly, if vaguely positive).
Has anyone with a reputation for quality reviewing done a full scale product test and review? I'd really like to see it. And I don't mean one of those 'hey everybody, I just got one of these things and they are GREAT!' sort of reviews....

[R K]

Hey Gerard,
I don't have the camera with me any more but I'm still open to questions you might have. Basically, I think I covered everything that a potential buyer needs to know but if there's info that's lacking, I would like feedback on what I missed.

[Gerard]

Okay. How about these then:

You can also adjust the focus by twisting the lens to one direction or another.

So, how close can you take a clearly focused picture? With the Casio (which I sold today after 30 months of very regular use for stills and lots of videos at 30fps), I could get to 4.5 inches with the ring to the close focus end of the rotation. For anything over about 3 feet, 'infinity' seemed to be a good setting, with focus being fussy between three feet and 4.5 inches.
With the Pretec, closest focus is about 9 inches. Similarly, anything over roughly 4 feet needs the ring turned to infinity. Since the displayed image is so pixelated, noisy, jerky, and generally blurred, it is necessary to zoom digitally, focus, then un-zoom before all pictures in that middle range.
(By the way, just after the above quote you said "One thing unique about this camera is the integrated viewfinder..." - the Pretec in front of me has one of those also, but with a faulty hardware shutter button this is useless, as I must see the onscreen shutter icon to tap it, and the image needs to be captured exactly when the image stabilizes or it'll be blurred horribly. There are no PPC hardware buttons mappable to use for a shutter.)

The "Pixel Format" option let's you choose between a YUV or RGB format.

What does this mean in your testing, as in, how did one versus the other affect the image quality, saturation, whatever, or did it have no apparent effect? Sorry for this, but I'm just unclear on why this control is there.
How long a video is possible given a set amount of available memory in the save-while-you-shoot mode, and at what sort of compression? Did you get, for example, 5 minutes per megabyte? 1 minute per MB? 30 seconds per MB? How long a video could you manage to capture reliably with for example 20MB of free memory? What about saving-on-the-fly to an SD card; is this possible? It would seem you hint at this with the comment:

Using a storage card for saving your videos will probably help avoid a lot of these problems."

But is this available? It would seem that one could shoot a 90 minute one-shot feature length movie if a large enough SD card were available and an external power supply as well. Is that a reasonable assumption based upon your testing?
And I realise that your site bandwidth limitations are a factor, but would it not be possible to take at least one outdoor shot, and maybe one very short video as a sample download? It'd really help with decision making. If this camera is about as good as my old Casio, and can shoot video in AVI rather than a silly proprietary format like CMF or MMF, then I'd possibly buy one. It's not an easy decision to make with so very little in the way of the end-product, the still image and the video, are available for viewing.
Sorry RK if this seems like I'm pushing too hard. I just have a lot of experience with the CF camera now, and know that there are just a few key facts missing from every single review of every camera so far... well, one exception is the excellent review done some time ago for pocketnow on the HP camera, but that dang thing still costs $250 here! And even then, not a lot of clarity on the video front. Short, or preferably longer videos of family outings and ordinary around-the-house and garden videos are important to me. I collect them, and they provide a sort of family album. But I'd like them in a format playable in 20 or 50 years, not some soon to disappear nonsensical format which cannot be converted, like the Casio one.

[R K]

As mentioned, I know longer have the camera with me, so I'll try to answer the questions as much as I can from memory, but I do realize that a certain amount of accuracy will be lost in the answers.

Okay. How about these then:
You can also adjust the focus by twisting the lens to one direction or another.
So, how close can you take a clearly focused picture?

I'd say about 6" - 7".

The "Pixel Format" option let's you choose between a YUV or RGB format.
What does this mean in your testing, as in, how did one versus the other affect the image quality, saturation, whatever, or did it have no apparent effect? Sorry for this, but I'm just unclear on why this control is there.

I'm not very clear as to why this control is there as well. I'm not too familiar with the technical aspecs of YUV vs RGB but I think YUV is the mode that most cameras use. Setting the FlyCAM to RGB mode produced more noisy lines in the pictures.

How long a video is possible given a set amount of available memory in the save-while-you-shoot mode, and at what sort of compression? Did you get, for example, 5 minutes per megabyte? 1 minute per MB? 30 seconds per MB? How long a video could you manage to capture reliably with for example 20MB of free memory?

I think the compression was about 3.5MB for 25 seconds of video, so with 21MB of storage space, you should be able to shoot 2.5 minutes of footage. 42MB of storage would get you a decent five minutes of footage.
I didn't do very much testing in "Save and record simultaneously" mode though. As I mentioned in the review, it only seems to be able to record at about 10fps max at this setting, so I skipped thorough testing of this option concluding that it wasn't worth it.

What about saving-on-the-fly to an SD card; is this possible? It would seem you hint at this with the comment:
Using a storage card for saving your videos will probably help avoid a lot of these problems."
But is this available? It would seem that one could shoot a 90 minute one-shot feature length movie if a large enough SD card were available and an external power supply as well. Is that a reasonable assumption based upon your testing?

Saving to the storage card is available after recording, but you can not use "Save and record simultaneously" option with a storage card therefore, you would not be able to record very lengthy videos with it.

And I realise that your site bandwidth limitations are a factor, but would it not be possible to take at least one outdoor shot, and maybe one very short video as a sample download?

I'm sorry but I didn't save many pictures after I sold the camera so I can not provide you with these samples. It's winter here anyway so I don't think i would have been able to get some good scenary to shoot.

The shot of the actual FlyCAM in the review was taken in front of a large sliding-door window at daylight so it should be a pretty accurate representation of what shots look like outdoors as well.
As you can see, it's not very good at capturing skin colors.
I'd like to see how the 1.3MP FlyCAM does at capturing skin tones.

If this camera is about as good as my old Casio, and can shoot video in AVI rather than a silly proprietary format like CMF or MMF, then I'd possibly buy one. It's not an easy decision to make with so very little in the way of the end-product, the still image and the video, are available for viewing.

I still stand behind the conclusion I made in the review. It's not the best CF Camera around, but it still holds some ground in comparison to the competition. That's why I'm very interested in this new 1.3MP FlyCAM. If the 1.3MP FlyCAM has a couple improvements over the 0.3MP FlyCAM (and it looks like it does from the sample pictures), then it will be a real treat.

[buffasnow]

Mobile Planet frequently has misstatatements in its product description. I have purchased items described as "genuine leather" or "leather" that have actually been genuine simulated leather. I also purchased a device that had a capacity lower than was described on the website. My suggestion is double check any description with the manufacturer, or another reliable source, before you make your purchase. :roll:

[Gerard]

Thank you very much RK! Those answers are just fine. Exactitude is not so very important, just ballbark figures are all I want for comparison.
From the combination of the flaring colours (especially skin tones apparently) and the massive size of the video files, I'll pass. Seems this camera is not for me. Especially with the failure to properly use an SD card for live saving of video. MMF files are a lot smaller, is inconvenient what with PC conversion to MPG being necessary, and with a 45 second video taking only 1.9MB of memory the Pretec is far better. That's at the smaller resolution. The larger one is useless, being at best about 4fps. I'd say a reliable 10fps would be tolerable, if it were clear and the file size not so large as those AVI files from the FlyCam. My Casio CF camera got about 30 seconds per MB at it's larger resolution, or 2MB/minute, though the longest decent video I ever got with it was about 53 seconds, in the smaller size, and 33 seconds in the larger.
Oh well, moving along.... maybe the 1.3MP FlyCam will be better, if it exists.

[R K]

I have one modification to make about the video compression comment.
The 3.5MB for 25 seconds is also taking into consideration that I was using the 22KHz Mono setting (43KB/s) for audio.
43KB/s equals about 1.1MB for 25 seconds, so almost a third of that 3.5MB was being taken up by audio.
I suppose you can get smaller videos by using lower sound settings. 8KHz would probably achieve a lot more video per MB.

[Gerard]

Sure, that's useful to know. Oddly, with the Casio CF camera, choosing to disable audio capture during recording resulted in identical file sizes to those captured with sound as a component. With the Pretec, this is an option as well, but one I've not yet tested. Frankly I usually want sound in there, with a few exceptions for capture of work-in-progress with restorations of instruments.
The mic-in modification of my iPAQ allows for a much clearer audio element in the videos with the Pretec. It'd be nice if this could be adapted in terms of audio bitrate, but there's no such option.