Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

tratt.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 499 posts

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#401

Post by tekknik »

scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #334
nunez wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was probably using software, like Canon's Webcam Utility, to stream his camera's HDMI OUT to his computer instead of using a capture card. He likely did this because of his camera not having "clean" HDMI output (i.e. you'd see icons if he were to capture what was on his camera's screen). Software like this is extremely unreliable by comparison and consumes CPU cycles like crazy, both on the camera and on your comp…

I’m starting to suspect something is wrong with our Elgato card because it has been a hit and miss experience for a long time now. We also have a knock off chinese 4k stream box (not the total dirt cheap ones) and that has sometimes been better than the elgato.

No issues with any of of my 4 elgato cards (2x camlink, 2x HD60s)

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#402

Post by estebank »

adhoc_slime wrote: post #24
pmoriarty wrote: post #15

If you're willing to throw $1000 at a "proper camera" of the sort the author recommends, then sure, it would be very disappointing if it didn't outperform the webcam built in to most laptops or phones. But is there a "proper camera" for under $100 that can also offer an improvement over a webcam?

> But is there a "proper camera" for under $100 that can also offer an improvement over a webcam? no just buy an off the shelf web camera if that's all you're willing to budget. but for those of us with these cameras already becuase we enjoy photography, this dual use is quite nice!

Not only that, you can have a decade old DSLRs on ebay for <$200. I already happened to have a D7000 from when it was new. Checking on ebay that same (very serviceable) model seems to cost $150~$250. Of course, that might mean a high shutter count, but for the usecase of a webcam, as long as it can capture an image it will work great.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#403

Post by maxgashkov »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #225
nunez wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was probably using software, like Canon's Webcam Utility, to stream his camera's HDMI OUT to his computer instead of using a capture card. He likely did this because of his camera not having "clean" HDMI output (i.e. you'd see icons if he were to capture what was on his camera's screen). Software like this is extremely unreliable by comparison and consumes CPU cycles like crazy, both on the camera and on your comp…

> He was probably using software, like Canon's Webcam Utility, to stream his camera's HDMI OUT to his computer instead of using a capture card. No, he was using an HDMI capture card and trying to do things with OBS. > Startup takes me, like, 30 seconds: turn key and fill lights on, turn camera on, press hotkey to start OBS, Krisp and Zoom, turn on video. Which is all great and fine if you've got it perfected and you'…

There are HDMI to USB cards that emulate a USB HID camera which is immediately available in zoom w/o need for OBS, the only thing I do is turn on the camera itself which takes maybe 2-3 seconds and is non-blocking for the call (until it's ready it's just a black screen in zoom if the meeting was already started).

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#404

Post by estebank »

aeyes wrote: post #145
HidyBush wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canon's EOS Webcam Utility supports cameras down to the EOS 1100D, which, depending on your level of luck, you can find used under $100. Then all you need is a kit lens which can be found for very very cheap nowadays. Or, if you really think you won't be moving much, just get a super cheap vintage one.

It's under 10fps for most of the cheap models. And unless you don't move at all the focal point of the kit lens is going to make the video almost useless. Autofocus on these cameras can't follow as fast as necessary for live video. I have played with EOS webcam utility in the past and if you are not ready to spend big, DSLR is not the way to go.

I find it interesting that so many people talking about autofocus. My set up has everything on manual focus, and unless I use a 1.8f aperture, there's no need to change things unless I materially change the way I seat.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#405

Post by brocha »

I use a GoPro Hero 9 Black and always get compliments on my image quality. GoPro's software is lacking so I stream straight to my computer and do post-processing there with great results. It's a good little device for those not wanting to spend $1000+ on a "nice" camera

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#406

Post by bob1029 »

__mharrison__ wrote: post #300
nunez wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was probably using software, like Canon's Webcam Utility, to stream his camera's HDMI OUT to his computer instead of using a capture card. He likely did this because of his camera not having "clean" HDMI output (i.e. you'd see icons if he were to capture what was on his camera's screen). Software like this is extremely unreliable by comparison and consumes CPU cycles like crazy, both on the camera and on your comp…

I'm using a Canon M50 just with the webcam software. (I don't think it has clean HDMI out so capture card won't help with this camera.) I've since started recording some of my courses directly from OBS. [0] The framerate probably suffers, but I've never had thermal/overheating issues. 0 - https://store.metasnake.com/view/courses/a1a19c9e-af18-4615-...

This is what I use as well. The software can be a slight pain in the ass, but once you get used to a handful of quirks it's pretty smooth sailing. I've used it for teams calls, web-based barcode scanning testing, etc. Never had it cut out on me due to some arbitrary limitation.

Having a webcam on a proper tripod makes it really easy to control variables in testing of things like barcode scanning and other image recognition tasks as well. Being able to swap lenses and manually control the entire system can make a huge difference for my purposes. I will tape my test samples to a whiteboard (sometimes with varying backgrounds) and place the camera at a fixed location from it.

I don't go much further than the camera and basic software. I don't have patience for backdrops, lights, finicky software chains, etc. I simply do M50=>canon software=>windows webcam device.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#407

Post by girvo »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #137

If you go this route, please make sure your system is robust and ready to go before meetings. We had to ask one employee to go back to his reliable built-in webcam because every other meeting started with 2 minutes of him getting his camera turned on, messing with audio inputs, getting his microphone boom in place, and fighting other quirks. He also had a tendency to drop out of long meetings when his camera overheat…

I just used my iPhone's rear camera as a webcam. Works surprisingly well, and had even less issues than trying to use my mirrorless Fuji cameras. Quality is substantially better than my built-in webcam, but about the same in a compressed stream as the mirrorless really.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#408

Post by Lammy »

zrail wrote: post #215
Hamcha wrote: post #75

Only tangentially related but if you already have a popular Logitech webcam (like the C920) chances are you can find a kit to mount C/CS/D-mount lenses on it, like with this one: https://www.kurokesu.com/shop/C920_REWORK_KIT2 C/CS/D mounts are for CCTV camera so you can find new and used lens for cheap. They will not fix a cheap/bad sensor, but they will definitely get you extra flexibility in what kind of framing/sh…

With these kits do you lose the ability to autofocus?

That sounds like an upgrade to me since my C920 and C922 had very fidgety auto-focus. I could turn it off via the Logitech camera settings application, but it would always reset itself to on when the computer was rebooted.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#410

Post by eropple »

dekhn wrote: post #346
eropple wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehh. After a certain point that's true, but a lens doesn't help much with a garbage sensor, particularly one that has to be compensated for with huge exposure changes. (This is the core of why webcams are disappointing, not the lens.) I use a GH4 or G9 with a USB3HDCAP at my desk because I already have them and the glass, personally, and I know the sensor is not going to be a trailing problem behind the (cheap!) glas…

The sensor is an IMX179 which is a mainstay. I believe the sensor area is smaller, and probably higher noise than a DSLR or mirrorless, but for VC use, it's probably not going to make a difference.

Yeah, I looked--I am not a fan of most of the IMX series, but if it works for you, (unironically) great!
Post reply on HN