Poor quality @ 1080 120fps (pixelated)

Discussion in 'SJ7 Star' started by Skud, Dec 9, 2017.

?

Any one experiencing Video Quality issue for SjCAM 7

  1. YES

    89.3%
  2. NO

    7.1%
  3. Sometimes

    3.6%
  1. Sulev Svilponis

    Sulev Svilponis Elite

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2017
    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Seems like poor lighting, plus too much noise reduction, plus too much sharpening.
     
  2. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    I've tried all sorts of settings. These samples are taken under default/auto settings.
    on version 1.18 was the same
    I agree that there is not much light, so I added a searchlight. But, even with him we see terrible "ulcers". I need a camera that can shoot without sunlight.
     
  3. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    Please, do somebody sample slow motion shooting on your camera at 720p@240 fps, so I can see how it looks from you. And try in artificial lighting, or muffled, i.e. not in the sun.
     
  4. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    dusk. iso 800 or 1600, rest settings default. I increased the part with the branches. Do you see "ulcers"?
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1_.jpg
      1_.jpg
      File size:
      64.5 KB
      Views:
      0
    • 1__.jpg
      1__.jpg
      File size:
      577.6 KB
      Views:
      0
  5. RBEmerson

    RBEmerson Humbled by events

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SE PA USA
    Open a support ticket and include both pictures. I think the camera has a problem with the lens. The detail looks very much like poor focusing and not an electronic processing error.

    I haven't done a lot of low light shooting but even in my dark office, the results weren't as bad as you're getting.
     
  6. Sulev Svilponis

    Sulev Svilponis Elite

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2017
    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    This is a still image. It looks like there is a thin fog layer on the lens (from condensation, because of the temperature differences), and also there is rather agressive sharpening (visible image processing artefacts, caused by the sharpening). If your camera was not on a stable tripod or on any other sturdy support, then instead of the fog, the blur might be caused by the slow shutter speed (10 sec is too slow for taking photos hand-held).

    This is definitely NOT poor focusing! The camera has fixed lens and can't just focus badly only in lousy lighting conditions. The lens is always focused with the same accuracy as it is. If you ever suspect bad focus of a fixed focus lens, then test it in the best possible lighting conditions available (to rule out any other causes for unsharp images, like slow shutter speed etc). At this short focal length (ultra wide) poor focusing should blur far out-of-focus subjects, but will not create this kind of shifted look bokeh. If it was a tele lens, then this kind of bokeh might appear.

    Try to reduce the Sharpness setting. Take care of fogged lens. Use sturdy tripod.

    BTW, The ISO is 400, and exposure bias is +2.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2017
  7. sans

    sans New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2017
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DUBAI-UAE
    This shoot at home with lots of ( daylight ) fluorescent on

     
  8. RBEmerson

    RBEmerson Humbled by events

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SE PA USA
    Looking at Sans' video, there's the same problem Bul`dozer is reporting. Either there are two broken cameras, or there's one "broken" firmware. When in doubt, start with the easy explanation: broken firmware.

    Try test videos with V1.15. I think a number of problems showed up in V 1.17 beta and propagated forward to V1.20.

    I suggest both of you submit support tickets and a couple of frame grabs and describe what's wrong with them. If you can include a small video clip, even better.
     
  9. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    I'll lower the firmware version. I'll write about the result.
     
  10. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    to Sans: thank you for video
     
  11. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    Thank you! You're right about optics and most importantly about sharpness. Sharpness was "normal", I made "soft." The picture became softer.

    to RBEmerson:
    I am looking for V1.15. The result is the same.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    I was wrong. I experimented more. And the quality of V1.15 is much higher (if not by an order of magnitude) than V1.20!
     

    Attached Files:

  13. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    And so after long experiments on the settings in different firmware I achieved an acceptable result and I understood from what this porridge is brewed. The main motive is that the viewing angle is wide and we turn off the lighting improvement. The result is identical by v1.15 and v1.20
     
  14. RBEmerson

    RBEmerson Humbled by events

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SE PA USA
    Just to be sure I fully understand what you mean, you reset all lighting changes to their default values and the video was clear. This is true for V1.15 and V1.20.

    Do I have that right?
     
  15. Sulev Svilponis

    Sulev Svilponis Elite

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2017
    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    For high speed video recording any artificial lighting is usually (if not specially designed for this purpose) insufficiant. Especially in case of cameras with so tiny sensor as the SJ7. Those cameras could show their potential on full daylight only (or maybe under special studio level lighting).
    If I was hoping to record decent high frame rate video, then I'd test the camera under bright sunlight first. And if I manage to obtain desired quality there, only then I'd start experimenting with artificial lighting. If you could not get decent result under the direct sun, then there is no hope for getting this at poor lighting conditions.
    Illuminance level for full daylight is ca 10,000 lux. Illuminance level in well-lit office or home is usually no more than 500 lux (this is 20 times less, difference is more than 4 stops).
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2017
    Jason likes this.
  16. buldozer

    buldozer New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Russia, Karelia, Petrozavodsk
    Yes exactly. When I make a wide angle and turn off the lighting improvement, then I get a sharp flicker from the lamp, but the picture quality is much better.

    to Sulev Svilponis: Thanks to you, my knowledge of cameras and light has expanded. I recently discovered Iso, exposure and diaphragm.
     
  17. RBEmerson

    RBEmerson Humbled by events

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SE PA USA
    If I have it right, the first picture is with V1.15 and the second is with V1.20?
     
  18. RBEmerson

    RBEmerson Humbled by events

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SE PA USA
    Most of the exposure tweaks, ISO. etc. are for still photos. Video is a dynamic setting; locking down settings works against trying to get the desired imagery. "Less is more".
     
    Troy likes this.
  19. sans

    sans New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2017
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DUBAI-UAE
    using SD card Class 10 ultra Speed 100 MB/S** , is this fine ?

    for me 1.15 is again worst than 1.20 intern of light exposure ,

    1080P 60 ver 1.20



    1080 60 ver 1.15



    sjcam 7 1080P 120 fps ver 1.20




    SJCAM 7 720P 120 ver 1.15

     
  20. RBEmerson

    RBEmerson Humbled by events

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SE PA USA
    If you can read the file from the SD and it's not chopped up (missing frames or huge image or color errors), then you're "good to go".

    For the rest of the post, with images, I'm out of ideas.
     

Share This Page