Digicam: What features best for filming UFOs?

Perhaps a mundane question, but more people here deal with analyzing UFO photos than elsewhere so I thought I'd try here. I've heard, for example, that the auto-focus on some units is such that it hinders picture quality, therefore you need a unit where you can turn that off--fast. Also, there must be optimum zooming features. There are so many digicams out there that it's difficult to analyze them. I almost think an analog unit would be better because it is so much simpler to operate. What features should I look for? (I don't expect I'll ever shoot a UFO, but why not be prepared just in case?) Do you folks have any preferences?

Well, manual focus is a must as is the ability to gather as much light through the lens as possible. A good zoom is good as well but only if you use a tripod. You have no doubht seen the problems here on ATS when a tripod is not used.
Although I have not researched the digicam market lately I would assume that there is a camera out there that can do the job. Be prepared to pay quite a bit though.
Hope this helps
John.

TRIPOD.

Seriously, one of the most important and overlooked piece of hardware that is essential to good quality, especially when using all of the high tech features of the digital vid camera.

Also you'll find that most corders have a optical zoom rating, and then a DIGITAL zoom rating, usually the dig. zoom is really high 300x etc. Try to find a camera with as high of an optical zoom as possible. Dig. zoom tends to distort the image at high mag.

[edit on 20-5-2007 by greatlakes]

Considering that UFO's might go by so fast that you dont have time to setup a tripod then a good zoom with optical image stabilization would be very good.

What about "Nightshot", i've heard a lot of UFO's are acting in the
Infrared lightspectrum.
Jose Escamilla(Movie-The greatest Story ever Denied) used this feature from VideoCams to catch UFO's.

Look for more Info's here (A New Technology for UFO Hunting.)
Link


[edit on 20-5-2007 by D0MiNAT0R 1OOO]

Originally posted by D0MiNAT0R 1OOO
What about "Nightshot", i've heard a lot of UFO's are acting in the
Infrared lightspectrum.

Very cool find. Thanks! And thanks for the rest of the suggestions as well. There are just so many 'features' on these complex new cameras that it helps to be able to focus (no pun intended) on some of the more important ones. I have a Nikon 5700 and it takes me 15 minutes to re-learn it every time I try to use it!

Originally posted by jon1
Well, manual focus is a must as is the ability to gather as much light through the lens as possible. A good zoom is good as well but only if you use a tripod. You have no doubht seen the problems here on ATS when a tripod is not used.
Although I have not researched the digicam market lately I would assume that there is a camera out there that can do the job. Be prepared to pay quite a bit though.
Hope this helps
John.

There are those cameras, one of them is Cannon A710 high shutter speed is what is essential and you can make IR lens filters for yourself
www.instructables.com...

Also last posts here are examples od Escamilla methods of catching UFO's aswell as Rods ...
ATS L I N K

I picked up a Sony DCR-SR32. It's a tiny little thing with a 30gb hard drive, and an impressive 40x optical zoom. It also boast a pointless 2000x digital zoom (yes, 2000) which fortunately can be switched off! Has nightshot and super nightshot, too (perfect for moths)

Changing functions from auto focus to manual is a bit clumsy because it is all operated through the screen via menus.

Still, it's small enough to carry around ready for the next fly by of the Adamski Scout Ship from Venus or the Greerian 100ft Turd from Uranus (mine works fine in the rain)!

torsion, you slay'. Hundred footer. You point out something I have difficulty with, actually two things; menus and buttons. The menu selector on some is fubsy and the teenie-tiny-eentsy-weentsy buttons and controls. I have a small collection of digital cameras now, none of any great quality and none which is used very often owing to the difficulties of use.

My current fav for documents and just plain having handy is a cheap Nikon L11 which has a screen I can almost see at arms length without my glasses! LOL. The Sony sits because I could never figure out the menu "logic"... that and the cat decded to use it as a playmate and it's case is decidedly banged-up.

I would pay a significant amount of money for a quality system with many of the features others have mentioned with two "wishes" added... a laser range-finder and buttons/knobs and controls designed by the Fisher-Price toy folks.

Oh yeah... And what's with the font size in those printed manuals? Geez, I need a microscope and a big screen TV to read some of those "well-written" consumer manuals. I am glad most are available in PDF.

Cheers,

Vic

[edit on 15-7-2007 by V Kaminski]

Originally posted by V Kaminski
I would pay a significant amount of money for a quality system with many of the features others have mentioned with two "wishes" added... a laser range-finder and buttons/knobs and controls designed by the Fisher-Price toy folks.

I know what you mean. These new-fangled gadgets are difficult to handle when you've got eyes like a mole with macular degeneration and hands like gorilla's feet!

Maybe you could come up with some design for us of the older generation - call it the Kaminski Kam! Nice big piano-key controls like a good old Betamax video player! There was no confusing the play and pause in those days!!

I'm no designer, but at some point folks who are responsible for their design and ergonomics will realize the market segment they are missing by having such impediments to use.

Hmmm. Remember the old Polaroid fold up Land cameras from the '60's? About that size with a 4 or 5 inch screen and the same control selector as on the STS EVA handheld cams... Danny-O had no trouble shootin' the flap repair on STS-117 even with the big/fubsy pressurized MK 5 gloves... Geez I wouldn't have to take my big mitts in winter off to use one with that type of selector.

Even better would be one that accepted voice commands... Hmmm.

Cheers,

Vic

Originally posted by V Kaminski

Even better would be one that accepted voice commands... Hmmm.

As long as it replied as well. I have an idea for a SkeptiCam.

Photographer: "Quick! get a shot of that UFO?"
SkeptiCam: "That's a f'in balloon, you idiot!"
Photographer: "No, that's under intelligent control!"
SkeptiCam: "Don't waste my time wiith this nonsense."

Here's some technical biological info about our, Human, fields of view or realms translated into CCD lens...

There is one which is capable of both fields of view about 1700$. it's Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro. There're others too...

________________________________
Ultraviolet & Infrared Light

The human eye is a remarkable imaging device to be sure, but it can’t see everything. Its sensitivity range is limited to wavelengths that normally start at 400 nanometers (violet) at the short end of the visible spectrum and extend to 700 nanometers (deep red) at the long end. This is also the realm of standard digital and film photography where, with certain exceptions, what you see is what you get. But there are times when ordinary visible-light pictures do not reveal everything a criminal investigator, scientist, or medical researcher needs to see. This is where ultraviolet and infrared imaging comes into play.

Scientists define wavelengths shorter than 400 nanometers as ultraviolet (UV), and wavelengths longer than 700 nanometers as infrared (IR). Technically, neither UV nor IR is "light" because humans can’t see it. However, photographs taken at UV and IR wavelengths can capture and reveal information that is otherwise undetectable by the human eye – literally "colors" we can’t see but that cameras, sensitive to IR and UV wavelengths, are able to record and make visible. It is the visual equivalent of the dog whistle we humans cannot hear.

This uncanny ability to reveal the unseen is why technical professionals in fields ranging from law enforcement, to military surveillance, to medical research, to art history, to biology have long used UV and IR photography to discover crucial observational facts that would ordinarily elude the keenest human eye.
____________________________

I am far from an expert on digicams but i have recently bought the Panasonic FZ8 and for me this does the job quite well.If ever i see a ufo then i will surely upload good enough quality pics here on ats for all to see.
The thing has 12 times optical zoom with optical image stabilizing and especially that last option is important if u need to make shots real quick without having to setup a tripod.
Off course there is much better stuff out there but i would say this is a decent piece of equipment for a decent acceptable price.

Hey Shuyster!

We’ve had this discussion at ATS a few times – and there was some good information to be had. You may want to review some of them. Just enter “UFO filming” or similar into the search field at the top of the page. A couple I remember:

Build Your Own UFO Detecting Binoculars!

Sky Watch Project!

Also – periodically eBay comes up with a used or surplus Cinetheodolite. The sellers often list them as “UFO Filming and Tracking Cameras” or UFO Catchers”, but at several hundred thousand dollars, even Greer couldn’t afford one (yet). I tried getting my ATS pals to pitch in to buy one a few months back (only half-jokingly), but couldn’t get enough participants. Anyway – if you’re independently wealthy, a cinetheodolite is for sale right now on eBay. It has 2 offers and 3 days left, current bid is a cool $175k. Peanuts…

If you win this, can I borrow it once in a while?

Here are some of my ideas and comments on the camcorder subject.

I would get a HDD based camcorder, I believe they have shortest startup time (moment you press REC till it actually records), which in the field of UFO hunting does make a difference.

A 10+ optical zoom (20+ would be even better) with optical image stabilization would be a great asset. If you are willing to hack things around then you might be able to rig a SLR lens to a camcorder through some step-up rings. Better optics and higher magnification power are definitely worth the risk of hacking it to death

Nightmode I wouldn't go without and furthermore I would shoot in it exclusively both in day and night. On top of that I would add a visible spectrum filter to block out all humanly visible frequencies. You will not see anything worth while in there anyway you haven't already seen, and UV and IR are far more interesting especially since UFOs use exotic technologies to hide themselves from human eyes.
Almost any camcorder can be rigged to do UV and NIR (something like 300nm to 800-1200nm which I believe is the upper range for consumer CCDs). There's a NIR filter next to the CCD imager that needs to be removed/replaced with a piece of plain glass (I would use optical quality quartz for highest transparency across the entire spectrum: UV, visible, NIR)

Additional filters, can come handy and if you choose to remove the NIR filter then are a must. I would get a set that allows to shoot UV only, NIR only and Visible only. Good source of filters is www.maxmax.com...

Manual controls, are wishful thinking on most modern camcorders that are made for normal consumers who just want to point and shoot. So finding a camcorder with manual controls and features above will be a challenge.
Perhaps not the latest generation but some older one, though they don't use HDD for recording but miinDV, which after all still have the best recording quality.

Ultimately if you can get your grubby hands on a FLIR (Forward Looking Infra Red) camera you would join the ranks of a few (if any at all) UFO researchers who are truly out there looking for a proof of ETs.
Sadly really good FLIRs are domain of the law enforcement who can fork out $20,000+ for a camera. Ideally if you can get a military FLIR avionics system I'd bow to you for your entrepreneurship.

Lately I have been looking into making my own "system" out of various part. Something like a Tornado Cam Exview Sony KPC-650 Color Spy Camera 520 RS with custom optics system made out of SLR lens and paired with some sort of a recording device. Even an old broken miniDV camcorder could be rigged to record from the video input fed from this camera.

There you have it, some food for thought

Shuyler's skepticam is a hoot.

I'm almost in the market. I'm waiting because I want to go kind of high-end. I want to combine the best optical zoom that still supports image stabilization. We've all see a bajillion shaky videos--do you want to produce yet another?

Optimally I'd like night shot also, but for me that's secondary to the other two criteria mentioned.

Thankz amigo, lots of info here about filters and lenses...
I'm also into building my own camcorder which will do the job, also youTube is full of IR nightVision UFO shots, which just add to my interest about this.
ok, what do you think about this system which I've allready aimed at... heeh

Digital video camcorder SONY DCR-SR72 (1,07 MPixela), 25X optics, HDD 60GB, video in/out (400$)

30mm 1000nm Infrared Filter Hoya or other
www.infraxfilters.com...

And these infrared filter xray 30mm 950nm for Sony HDR TVR HC3
H E R E
There is effect of it on some clothes in this link. It IS really quite possible to peek underneath girls dresses. but it's other question now...

@Amigo what do you think about this combination from above...???

Originally posted by Triad979
Thankz amigo, lots of info here about filters and lenses...
I'm also into building my own camcorder which will do the job, also youTube is full of IR nightVision UFO shots, which just add to my interest about this.
ok, what do you think about this system which I've allready aimed at... heeh

Digital video camcorder SONY DCR-SR72 (1,07 MPixela), 25X optics, HDD 60GB, video in/out (400$)

30mm 1000nm Infrared Filter Hoya or other
www.infraxfilters.com...

And these infrared filter xray 30mm 950nm for Sony HDR TVR HC3
H E R E
There is effect of it on some clothes in this link. It IS really quite possible to peek underneath girls dresses. but it's other question now...

@Amigo what do you think about this combination from above...???

Hi Triad979

I was looking at some of those cheaper Sony HDD camcorders because they have higher optical zoom (due to a smaller CCD imager). You can comparatively see that more expensive models like SR100 and SR300 have lesser optical zoom ability but larger CCD imagers.

Sony DCR-SR72 seems to be an older model, no?

I see they have 62 and 82 now, both of which have 1/6" CCD at 20x optical zoom. Also, I notice that SR42 is still available (at least here) which is slightly cheaper than the two but has 40x optical zoom.
Of course buying into old technology is a double-edged sword. You might get some specs you like but the technology behind it is older and firmware might be buggy.
Sadly they do not package these for us UFO nuts with spectacular features we want

Coincidentally I have a DCR-SR300 at work and that is an absolutely great unit and that Carl Zeiss lens must be contributing to the image quality which is superb.
But, what I do not like is that on one hand we have ease of recording onto a HDD but on the other it's using MPG2 which introduces artifacts. Even at the highest setting I would say that miniDV still might have an edge over MPG2. And you do not want artifacts when hunting UFOs obviously.

I suppose it's just a matter of finding the right balance of pros and cons and settling with what you have available. Cost is always a big and important issue too, so get the best you can with the specs you believe will do the job the best.

Ideally if you can try the Sony DCR-SR72 and also if they have a DCR-SR42 which is if I recall correctly a generation before it. What I have done over here is shoot footage in the store and outside it, and asked them to burn the mpeg files onto a CD so I could take it home and analyze it.
That's how I decided for the SR300 for work, among similarly priced JVC and Panasonic models. In my case I needed a camcorder that would have playable mpeg files out of the box without any conversion or additional software and Sony was it (it saves .MPG).

As far as the filters go, I really prefer manufacturers who post their transmittance curves so you can actually see which part of the spectrum is covered and how much light passes/gets blocked.
For example look at the MaxMax site IR filters, clearly you can see the ranges offered and which regions individual filters are best at.

Dont invest on a smaller ccd camera just for the higher zoom. The bigger ccd cameras have one crucial advantage which is that they produce less ccd noise when the sensitivity is boosted. Considering how much ufo sightings are done in low light conditions that might be a good thing to consider.