Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Am I the only one that's seeing all the pixel dirt on this video? I mean, I know it's compressed for the net but there is a ton of "digital dust" all over this footage.
If it was a dead pixel on the sensor, it'd be in the same place consistently throughout the footage. If it was clipping out whites/darks it'd be in those areas, not across the whole image. I've seen this happen before with P2 footage. Just like a graphics card can overheat and not render properly, the camera gets overheated and can't capture those pixels so they show up as white, red, green, or blue pixels scattered all over the frame.
@JackTheTripper: I don't really believe you, so I guess I'll have to go to hawaii to determine the true cause. I'll stay as long as it takes, months, even years if I have to.
The fact that we're seeing slow-mo HD footage so soon after the event = hot!!!11!
That's pretty incredible. I hope the guys riding this will be able to over-ride their adrenaline rushes and actually remember doing this.
Also: Seeing this post directly after having my brain exploded by our insignificance in the universe still makes me feel like these waves are incredibly huge.
I really want to believe this, but there are a few things that just seem a bit strange.
Why would anyone mount an SLR on a helmet? It would make much more sense to handhold and be able to actually compose the shots. Did he use a cable release?
The other thing that makes me think it might not be true is that the moisture content in the air at altitude could quite easily render the camera useless.
It would be nice if it was a true story, but I'm inclined to think there's a little bit of tall-story in this one.
@RainyDayInterns: Absolutely...looks like a quality product.
Ok, so we've established that helmet is the way to go. If you were going to do this, surely you would use an established method (along the lines of the link you put in) that wouldn't let your SLR fall to it's doom?
At the very least, you would attach a leash to the body as a backup, wouldn't you?
;-)
I think the story was probably more along the lines of...
Friend: WTF happened to your camera?!?!?!
Dude: Eh, well, eh, I was skydiving and dropped it...
Friend: Are you sure you didn't just fall over in the mud and look like a tool but don't want to admit it?
@RainyDayInterns:
When it comes down to it, I would have to say, I don't believe the story, despite how much I would like to.
You're right, I don't really know much about skydiving, and mounting a camera on a helmet seems to be the done thing, at least if you buy the proper equipment to do so.
The point about moisture and altitude was more a comment on a question I posed to a friend that does a lot of skydiving who had suggested that the moisture could potentially damage the camera. The fact that I live in Scotland and it rains pretty much constantly wouldn't help, lol.
As to your comments about my knowledge of skydiving, fair point. Moisture damage to the camera is possible under the right (or wrong) conditions - weather sealing on the camera in question isn't particularly great - but would probably be irrelevant.
The funny thing is how many camera snobs complained about the build quality of this camera when it came out, saying it was built of cheap, brittle plastic. The forums at a certain photography review site that I frequent were filled with those bemoaning the Rebel XT's cheapness, especially when compared to Nikon's comparably priced models (I'd like to see if any of them would survive a fall like this in one piece, much less in working condition.)
Well, in addition to the "plastic" cover, it also has a completely metal frame underneath. And I think the years have proven that the polycarbonate that it's actually made out of is tougher than it looks and feels. I've had my Rebel XT for years and it has taken all sorts of abuse and it still looks basically brand new. There's one area on the bottom of the grip where the finish has rubbed off, but that's it. And I've dropped it a bunch of times and banged it into I don't know how many doorways, walls, cars, etc.
I will say that it is interesting that if that is the actual camera in question in the photo above, that he was actually taking skydiving photos with the kit lens. Not to knock the kit lens after praising the camera itself, but seems like you'd want to at least upgrade to something with IS for skydiving, no? I mean, granted, they'd probably be shooting in bright light, but you can never have too much sharpness for such a special occasion.
@badasscat: I reckon that a plastic shell is superior to metal in some regards. I've seen plenty of metal-bodied items deform on impact and then stay deformed, when a plastic item would deform and then resume its original shape, assuming it didn't break outright.
There is also a chance that the camera will spontaneously turn into a turtle, but both aren't very likely. Just because there is a chance, doesn't mean that it is measurable or even worth paying attention to.
12/17/09
If it was a dead pixel on the sensor, it'd be in the same place consistently throughout the footage. If it was clipping out whites/darks it'd be in those areas, not across the whole image. I've seen this happen before with P2 footage. Just like a graphics card can overheat and not render properly, the camera gets overheated and can't capture those pixels so they show up as white, red, green, or blue pixels scattered all over the frame.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
[www.tsunami-zone.com]
12/17/09
12/17/09
The fact that we're seeing slow-mo HD footage so soon after the event = hot!!!11!
That's pretty incredible. I hope the guys riding this will be able to over-ride their adrenaline rushes and actually remember doing this.
Also: Seeing this post directly after having my brain exploded by our insignificance in the universe still makes me feel like these waves are incredibly huge.
12/16/09
Nice, Canon. Nice.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
Only just recently went back to Nikon :-)
12/16/09
Why would anyone mount an SLR on a helmet? It would make much more sense to handhold and be able to actually compose the shots. Did he use a cable release?
The other thing that makes me think it might not be true is that the moisture content in the air at altitude could quite easily render the camera useless.
It would be nice if it was a true story, but I'm inclined to think there's a little bit of tall-story in this one.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
[www.skydivephotos.co.uk]
12/16/09
Ok, so we've established that helmet is the way to go. If you were going to do this, surely you would use an established method (along the lines of the link you put in) that wouldn't let your SLR fall to it's doom?
At the very least, you would attach a leash to the body as a backup, wouldn't you?
;-)
I think the story was probably more along the lines of...
Friend: WTF happened to your camera?!?!?!
Dude: Eh, well, eh, I was skydiving and dropped it...
Friend: Are you sure you didn't just fall over in the mud and look like a tool but don't want to admit it?
Dude: Well....
12/16/09
We were responding to the fact that you clearly didn't really know what you were talking about when it came to helmet cams and skydiving.
As to your bit about "moisture" and "altitude"...well, that is just ..astounding.
12/16/09
When it comes down to it, I would have to say, I don't believe the story, despite how much I would like to.
You're right, I don't really know much about skydiving, and mounting a camera on a helmet seems to be the done thing, at least if you buy the proper equipment to do so.
The point about moisture and altitude was more a comment on a question I posed to a friend that does a lot of skydiving who had suggested that the moisture could potentially damage the camera. The fact that I live in Scotland and it rains pretty much constantly wouldn't help, lol.
As to your comments about my knowledge of skydiving, fair point. Moisture damage to the camera is possible under the right (or wrong) conditions - weather sealing on the camera in question isn't particularly great - but would probably be irrelevant.
So the camera was most likely fine.
As to hitting the ground at around 100mph...
12/16/09
Well, in addition to the "plastic" cover, it also has a completely metal frame underneath. And I think the years have proven that the polycarbonate that it's actually made out of is tougher than it looks and feels. I've had my Rebel XT for years and it has taken all sorts of abuse and it still looks basically brand new. There's one area on the bottom of the grip where the finish has rubbed off, but that's it. And I've dropped it a bunch of times and banged it into I don't know how many doorways, walls, cars, etc.
I will say that it is interesting that if that is the actual camera in question in the photo above, that he was actually taking skydiving photos with the kit lens. Not to knock the kit lens after praising the camera itself, but seems like you'd want to at least upgrade to something with IS for skydiving, no? I mean, granted, they'd probably be shooting in bright light, but you can never have too much sharpness for such a special occasion.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
"And you said that the nobody would make use of the mega shock resistance!"
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
On the bright side, I hear they're developing a wheat grass cocoa to match so there's that