<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Casio Exilim EX-F1 in the Wild: Slow-Motion Invades the Mainstream</title>
	<atom:link href="http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/</link>
	<description>Motion graphics, live visuals, VJing, video production, and interactive art</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:55:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Guz</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-132972</link>
		<dc:creator>Guz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:22:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-132972</guid>
		<description>I agree it's not expensive comparing to a 1200 FPS camera (but the professional ones doesn't record in a tiny 336 × 96 resolution)...

Anyhow, it's a GREAT camera, but at least for me, from Samsung's HMX20 $650 to Casio's Exilim $940 it's a huge difference in price (I'm brazilian so that price is pratically the double in my country's currency). I'm still thinking about it, cause the Casio's 600FPS is in a very acceptable resolution...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree it&#8217;s not expensive comparing to a 1200 FPS camera (but the professional ones doesn&#8217;t record in a tiny 336 × 96 resolution)&#8230;</p>
<p>Anyhow, it&#8217;s a GREAT camera, but at least for me, from Samsung&#8217;s HMX20 $650 to Casio&#8217;s Exilim $940 it&#8217;s a huge difference in price (I&#8217;m brazilian so that price is pratically the double in my country&#8217;s currency). I&#8217;m still thinking about it, cause the Casio&#8217;s 600FPS is in a very acceptable resolution&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaymis</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-132961</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaymis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:34:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-132961</guid>
		<description>Expensive? As far as I'm aware, the next-cheapest camera capable of 1200FPS costs around $30,000. So the EX-F1 doesn't seem particularly expensive to me, just depends on what you consider the "category". :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Expensive? As far as I&#8217;m aware, the next-cheapest camera capable of 1200FPS costs around $30,000. So the EX-F1 doesn&#8217;t seem particularly expensive to me, just depends on what you consider the &#8220;category&#8221;. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guz</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-132942</link>
		<dc:creator>Guz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-132942</guid>
		<description>Thank you Jaymis! No wonder Casio is the expensive of it's category. Thanks again for your help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Jaymis! No wonder Casio is the expensive of it&#8217;s category. Thanks again for your help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaymis</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-132882</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaymis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:59:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-132882</guid>
		<description>Hi Guz. It seems that the Casio will let you film for as long as your SD card will allow, which I think is up to 1GB per file. I did some maths a while back, and it seems that this would amount to about 15 minutes of real-time footage. 15 minutes of footage at 1200FPS equals 12 hours when played back at 25FPS. Pretty extensive capabilities, to be sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Guz. It seems that the Casio will let you film for as long as your SD card will allow, which I think is up to 1GB per file. I did some maths a while back, and it seems that this would amount to about 15 minutes of real-time footage. 15 minutes of footage at 1200FPS equals 12 hours when played back at 25FPS. Pretty extensive capabilities, to be sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guz</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-132851</link>
		<dc:creator>Guz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-132851</guid>
		<description>Can anyone tell me for how much time can you film on slow-mo mode? That information seems to be impossible to find on the Casio Exilim EX-F1. Sony cams only lets you film in that mode for 3 sec. Samsung's let you film in that mode for 10 sec. How about Casio's? Someone said that it lets you film for as long as the card holds the space, but that seems impossible to me. Anyone have that information?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can anyone tell me for how much time can you film on slow-mo mode? That information seems to be impossible to find on the Casio Exilim EX-F1. Sony cams only lets you film in that mode for 3 sec. Samsung&#8217;s let you film in that mode for 10 sec. How about Casio&#8217;s? Someone said that it lets you film for as long as the card holds the space, but that seems impossible to me. Anyone have that information?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaymis</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-110022</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaymis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-110022</guid>
		<description>I don't think that the image quality issues will really cause many issues for the slow motion features, or rather, the reasonably low-resolution is a bigger issue :)

I agree that there's going to be plenty of advances coming soon though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think that the image quality issues will really cause many issues for the slow motion features, or rather, the reasonably low-resolution is a bigger issue :)</p>
<p>I agree that there&#8217;s going to be plenty of advances coming soon though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uli</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-109951</link>
		<dc:creator>uli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 19:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-109951</guid>
		<description>read that review on Luminous Landscape aswell and even if they are quite old school with their measures, the image quality (not talking resolution) really isn't that impressive. But the EX-F2 should come this year ... hopefully!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>read that review on Luminous Landscape aswell and even if they are quite old school with their measures, the image quality (not talking resolution) really isn&#8217;t that impressive. But the EX-F2 should come this year &#8230; hopefully!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vjwunderkind</title>
		<link>http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/30/casio-exilim-ex-f1-in-the-wild-slow-motion-invades-the-mainstream/#comment-109533</link>
		<dc:creator>vjwunderkind</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 11:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://createdigitalmotion.com/?p=2368#comment-109533</guid>
		<description>I keep thinking this could really be a blast if tried with InstantHD. I haven't really tried upscaling anything BELOW PAL resolution. But given that PAL blown up to HD looks quite good I dunno why 336x96 blown up to PAL shouldn't look good. Has anyone got one of this babies? Send me a clip and I'll try creating a higher rez film by upscaling it in InstantHD</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I keep thinking this could really be a blast if tried with InstantHD. I haven&#8217;t really tried upscaling anything BELOW PAL resolution. But given that PAL blown up to HD looks quite good I dunno why 336&#215;96 blown up to PAL shouldn&#8217;t look good. Has anyone got one of this babies? Send me a clip and I&#8217;ll try creating a higher rez film by upscaling it in InstantHD</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
