 | | Re: LEGO Cam vs. X10's Xcam vs. other webcams —Marco C.
|
| | | (...) hmmm... I'm starting to think that the best (and expensive) way to have good quality wireless image is to mount the roverbot with a DV camcorder (those tiny new Digital Video expensive cams) together with a X10 wireless video-sender. :( oh (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO Cam vs. X10's Xcam vs. other webcams —Ram Meenakshisundaram
|
| | | | | That was not a general statement. The X10's quality is poor for indoor lighting. There are several better wireless digital cameras out there that is far better than the X10, but it costs a lot more. Cant beat the $50 I paid for the X10 via ebay (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO Cam vs. X10's Xcam vs. other webcams —Hao-yang Wang
|
| | | | | (...) This is true, in terms of both lighting and resolution. XCam2 is a cheap, wireless camera. Whether its image quality is good enough for you depends on the nature of your project. In my case, as long as it picks up my barcode tags, I am happy. (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO Cam vs. X10's Xcam vs. other webcams —Marco C.
|
| | | | (...) Yes, I wasn't talking about a perfect digital image input, only mentioned those DV camcorders because of size and image input quality (and auto-focus, optical zoom, steady-cam capability, etc...) ...*and* because I'll more likely spend major (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
