Bokeh is kinda hard with small sensors and wide angle lenses. You'd have to use software to get a bokeh effect. Or if the camera has a telephoto lens and u max it out and get as close to its minimum distance.
I have just bought elp digital camera like the one in your hand at 1:20. I plug it in my laptop & nothing happen. My laptop recognizes the camera but.... How can I turn it on. The camera doesn't come with the instruction. Do I need a software / application to operate it ? Thank you
At 6:00 you've got the camera way too close to your face. Move it back a bit for an accurate perspective. The problem with optical zoom and getting a well balanced portrait image with no wide angle distortion is the camera has to be farther than the typical depth of most desks. Most people face a wall when at their computer so this is a huge problem. Most situations need about 4-5' from the lens to the face. Most desks are 30" deep max.
@@ChaseDiMarco One could also position it to the side, especially if you have a particularly long desk, then just face the camera when using it. Otherwise optical zoom + portrait lens type perspective is a huge problem when the camera is sitting close. One could also use a mirror setup but that is way too elaborate for most people. With mirrors you could easily get the right perspective. Think reflector telescope like a Cassegrain. Fairly long focal length in an ultra short tube because the light is reflected twice. Makes a huge difference. When you see people delivering the news on major networks you may notice how far away the camera is from them if it pans around to show the studio. Probably 10-15'. They do it because it makes the broadcaster look natural.
Currently looking to get a camera with wide FOV, the annoying thing i find on this video is that you entered a whole lot of the camera info but no exact model name or the ASIN code, would be so much easier to find if i knew the asin code.
At about 2:50 you're talking about what is in focus. Its not the "focal length" really its the depth of field. You probably have it focused on your face which is sharp and the background is sharp as well because the aperture is high or its closed down a lot. Think pinhole camera for aperture. The downside of getting a deep depth of field like you have here is sometimes people don't want their audience/viewers to see every nook and cranny behind them. Also it requires a lot more light if the aperture is closed down. So by opening up the aperture you don't have to blind yourself with strong lights AND you have more privacy in the background. Aperture is such a useful tool in photography. Basically its just aperture (what's in focus) and shutter speed. This is probably 30 fps which is OK if you're not moving around. Otherwise 60 is needed to retain sharpness with moving objects. But again, with 60 fps you're going to need a lot more light! Its always a battle between light and everything else. Hope that makes sense. Its great you reviewed these webcams. We've all seen them and wondered if they were absolute garbage. Now we know they serve a very useful purpose. Hopefully the idea of inexpensive, optical zoom webcams will catch on.
Thanks for the review! I saw this on Amazon for $77 and immediately started looking for reviews. It's a pity it doesn't do a shallow DOF but looks great for the money. Did it come with a little plastic tripod?
I'm trying to decide what webcam to but. There are too many options, and most of them have bad quality image, specially in low light conditions. If I want something good I need a DSLR camera, but they are too expensive and heavy. I've found the ELP cameras and I don't know if they are good. They offer too many different models with different sensors: IMX415, OV2710 , IMX179, IMX291...
Look for an older mirrorless or DSLR with cheap lenses. Canon is good. But some Panasonic models are cheap too. Use a fixed focus 50mm 1.8 for ultra low cost with superb low light capabilities. They're cheap. About $100-150 for the body and $30-$70 for the lens. Add the standard 18-55mm for almost nothing. They're basically worthless as there are so many around. It is almost a macro so its handy for close work if you need that.
Got this for 12$ new with its box unused and I was worried if I spent too much because I didn't know its that small but it seems that its value is around 60$
@@invujerry Of course I know what fisheye means. It means extreme wide angle. In full frame terms that would be way less than 20mm. 28mm was the standard wide angle, 24mm was very wide angle and below 20 got extreme. As to figuring out what kind of mount, I would think they would be in legal quicksand if they had copied a mount of an existing camera but maybe not. I would think the best would be a standard Canon mount as there are so many 18-55mm lenses out there; they're almost worthless. They even focus very close so its almost a macro. One huge problem with webcams and wide angle distortion is most desks are placed against a wall. So there's only about 30" from the user to the wall (the depth of a standard desk). If you've done any photography you know that's way too close for a portrait lens (85mm and up, usually starting at 100mm) to work. With all our technology you'd think they could make a portrait lens that worked at a closer distance!
@@FreshAirRules I’m very familiar with photography, I’m simply using your phrasing on you. Copying a lens mount is not legal quicksand otherwise companies like sigma and ttartisans or 7artisans wouldn’t be able to sell lenses that use canon mounts. They could easily get to a 15mm equivalent lens that wouldn’t have the wide angle look that would be useable within 1M/3 feet.
@@invujerry I misread your fisheye comment and have deleted my response to it as it doesn't make any sense. Regarding the lens mount I just thought it might be different for a company making cameras rather then lenses. So I wonder why some Chinese companies don't make webcams for very common kit lenses like the Canon 18-55? Then they wouldn't have to bother trying to make a lens. You can probably buy them for $20 and they're pretty good optically. And they could also use the Canon 50mm 1.8 which has great low light sensitivity (always a weak area with zooms). Plus if it was a micro 4/3 layout that 50 mm would be like a 85mm, a real portrait lens. Many photographers have these lenses lying in drawer as a backup so they wouldn't need to buy anything. > They could easily get to a 15mm equivalent lens that wouldn’t have the wide angle look that would be usable within 1M/3 feet. But has anyone done that yet? Is it just a case of making the lens smaller as in the diameter of the glass? I can't believe they haven't done this with a webcam. I had an old Sony webcam with optical zoom and I had to place it about 5' feet away as I recall to get a view with no wide angle distortion. It was several years ago. I don't know of any webcam that has managed to capture a portrait lens perspective (no distortion with the face filling almost all the vertical space of the frame) and you'd think they would do this if it was possible. I find this baffling. 99% of the people communicating by webcam have facial distortion because the camera is too close. No one seems to care.
I wanted to buy it for outdoors as a compact camera, because of its compatibility with Android and applications that can control a USB camera, for the price it is a very good option, it would be interesting if I could do some tests. 🤓
You will never get a blurry background with these camera's. The sensor is too small and the lens is too close on the sensor too. You could try a zoom lens and put it in the back of the room and zoom in on your face. But then you would lose the ability to focus it yourself unless you have veeeerry long arms. It also introduces a lot of other problems, you would need more light for instance. But for the money it's worth it. I wonder if it works on octoprint for my 3d printer
To isolate a subject with the background blurry (bokeh) set the aperture for wide open which will give you the most amount of light as well. Photography 101.
You showed us changing the lighting with the webcam this video is not even about but did not do that for the camera that this video is about. This I did not like. Thanks for the indirect comparison I guess. At least I got to see the picture was noticeably better at the very least.
Bokeh is kinda hard with small sensors and wide angle lenses. You'd have to use software to get a bokeh effect. Or if the camera has a telephoto lens and u max it out and get as close to its minimum distance.
Pretty sure that is a standard CS mount lens, often used in security cameras. Many types are available.
I have just bought elp digital camera like the one in your hand at 1:20. I plug it in my laptop & nothing happen. My laptop recognizes the camera but.... How can I turn it on. The camera doesn't come with the instruction. Do I need a software / application to operate it ? Thank you
You can blur the background by decreasing the aperture. The lower the aperture number the shorter the focal length. Basics of film cameras.
At 6:00 you've got the camera way too close to your face. Move it back a bit for an accurate perspective. The problem with optical zoom and getting a well balanced portrait image with no wide angle distortion is the camera has to be farther than the typical depth of most desks. Most people face a wall when at their computer so this is a huge problem. Most situations need about 4-5' from the lens to the face. Most desks are 30" deep max.
So would you use this for some other purpose than as a webcam?
@@ChaseDiMarco Webcam or any video communication. It's a great product and well priced.
@@ChaseDiMarco One could also position it to the side, especially if you have a particularly long desk, then just face the camera when using it. Otherwise optical zoom + portrait lens type perspective is a huge problem when the camera is sitting close. One could also use a mirror setup but that is way too elaborate for most people. With mirrors you could easily get the right perspective. Think reflector telescope like a Cassegrain. Fairly long focal length in an ultra short tube because the light is reflected twice. Makes a huge difference. When you see people delivering the news on major networks you may notice how far away the camera is from them if it pans around to show the studio. Probably 10-15'. They do it because it makes the broadcaster look natural.
The Depth of Field effect is the result of the lens inly, not the non-lens parts of the camera
Currently looking to get a camera with wide FOV, the annoying thing i find on this video is that you entered a whole lot of the camera info but no exact model name or the ASIN code, would be so much easier to find if i knew the asin code.
At about 2:50 you're talking about what is in focus. Its not the "focal length" really its the depth of field. You probably have it focused on your face which is sharp and the background is sharp as well because the aperture is high or its closed down a lot. Think pinhole camera for aperture. The downside of getting a deep depth of field like you have here is sometimes people don't want their audience/viewers to see every nook and cranny behind them. Also it requires a lot more light if the aperture is closed down. So by opening up the aperture you don't have to blind yourself with strong lights AND you have more privacy in the background. Aperture is such a useful tool in photography. Basically its just aperture (what's in focus) and shutter speed. This is probably 30 fps which is OK if you're not moving around. Otherwise 60 is needed to retain sharpness with moving objects. But again, with 60 fps you're going to need a lot more light! Its always a battle between light and everything else. Hope that makes sense.
Its great you reviewed these webcams. We've all seen them and wondered if they were absolute garbage. Now we know they serve a very useful purpose. Hopefully the idea of inexpensive, optical zoom webcams will catch on.
Thanks for the review! I saw this on Amazon for $77 and immediately started looking for reviews. It's a pity it doesn't do a shallow DOF but looks great for the money. Did it come with a little plastic tripod?
No tripod included in mine
Thank you for sharing this valuable information. Keep up the good work.
I'm trying to decide what webcam to but. There are too many options, and most of them have bad quality image, specially in low light conditions. If I want something good I need a DSLR camera, but they are too expensive and heavy.
I've found the ELP cameras and I don't know if they are good. They offer too many different models with different sensors: IMX415, OV2710 , IMX179, IMX291...
choose the sensor that fits you best. I would say the one with 4k 30fps. And use it with the 5mm lens. Then its all good.
Look for an older mirrorless or DSLR with cheap lenses. Canon is good. But some Panasonic models are cheap too. Use a fixed focus 50mm 1.8 for ultra low cost with superb low light capabilities. They're cheap. About $100-150 for the body and $30-$70 for the lens. Add the standard 18-55mm for almost nothing. They're basically worthless as there are so many around. It is almost a macro so its handy for close work if you need that.
Please do a video with an indoor golf swing.
Got this for 12$ new with its box unused and I was worried if I spent too much because I didn't know its that small but it seems that its value is around 60$
If you figure out what mount that lens has, you could easily change it out for a fixed length lens or something that doesn’t have a fish eye effect.
@@FreshAirRules it’s a 2.5-12mm optical zoom. I’m amazed you don’t know what “fish eye” is.
@@invujerry Of course I know what fisheye means. It means extreme wide angle. In full frame terms that would be way less than 20mm. 28mm was the standard wide angle, 24mm was very wide angle and below 20 got extreme.
As to figuring out what kind of mount, I would think they would be in legal quicksand if they had copied a mount of an existing camera but maybe not. I would think the best would be a standard Canon mount as there are so many 18-55mm lenses out there; they're almost worthless. They even focus very close so its almost a macro.
One huge problem with webcams and wide angle distortion is most desks are placed against a wall. So there's only about 30" from the user to the wall (the depth of a standard desk). If you've done any photography you know that's way too close for a portrait lens (85mm and up, usually starting at 100mm) to work. With all our technology you'd think they could make a portrait lens that worked at a closer distance!
@@FreshAirRules I’m very familiar with photography, I’m simply using your phrasing on you. Copying a lens mount is not legal quicksand otherwise companies like sigma and ttartisans or 7artisans wouldn’t be able to sell lenses that use canon mounts. They could easily get to a 15mm equivalent lens that wouldn’t have the wide angle look that would be useable within 1M/3 feet.
@@invujerry I misread your fisheye comment and have deleted my response to it as it doesn't make any sense. Regarding the lens mount I just thought it might be different for a company making cameras rather then lenses. So I wonder why some Chinese companies don't make webcams for very common kit lenses like the Canon 18-55? Then they wouldn't have to bother trying to make a lens. You can probably buy them for $20 and they're pretty good optically. And they could also use the Canon 50mm 1.8 which has great low light sensitivity (always a weak area with zooms). Plus if it was a micro 4/3 layout that 50 mm would be like a 85mm, a real portrait lens. Many photographers have these lenses lying in drawer as a backup so they wouldn't need to buy anything.
> They could easily get to a 15mm equivalent lens that wouldn’t have the wide angle look that would be usable within 1M/3 feet.
But has anyone done that yet? Is it just a case of making the lens smaller as in the diameter of the glass? I can't believe they haven't done this with a webcam. I had an old Sony webcam with optical zoom and I had to place it about 5' feet away as I recall to get a view with no wide angle distortion. It was several years ago. I don't know of any webcam that has managed to capture a portrait lens perspective (no distortion with the face filling almost all the vertical space of the frame) and you'd think they would do this if it was possible. I find this baffling. 99% of the people communicating by webcam have facial distortion because the camera is too close. No one seems to care.
Been considering something like this for the ole "eye-contact" camera in the middle of my screen.
its wide or telescopic
Thank you for the video, it's helpful . Noteworthy indeed is the "fisheye" kinda thing on both sides of the video being taken.. it is kinda warped
I wanted to buy it for outdoors as a compact camera, because of its compatibility with Android and applications that can control a USB camera, for the price it is a very good option, it would be interesting if I could do some tests. 🤓
saludos (Greeting in Spanish ) 👋
I see that the video is two years old, I don't know if you still have the camera, at first I read 2 months 😅
You will never get a blurry background with these camera's. The sensor is too small and the lens is too close on the sensor too.
You could try a zoom lens and put it in the back of the room and zoom in on your face. But then you would lose the ability to focus it yourself unless you have veeeerry long arms. It also introduces a lot of other problems, you would need more light for instance.
But for the money it's worth it. I wonder if it works on octoprint for my 3d printer
They have 5 diff lens , maybe more, only did a quick search , Even high speech 4k/30 for 45$
looks like a microscope camera, (it has a focus point)
4:53 🏄♂️
Good for a VR room
Prices have dropped to $12 range today
The aperture ring controls the depth of field. I can't believe you didn't know this. Its like the number one aspect of photography.
To isolate a subject with the background blurry (bokeh) set the aperture for wide open which will give you the most amount of light as well. Photography 101.
Film Threat!
You showed us changing the lighting with the webcam this video is not even about but did not do that for the camera that this video is about. This I did not like. Thanks for the indirect comparison I guess. At least I got to see the picture was noticeably better at the very least.