| 1 |
<meino.cramer <at> gmx.de> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> the Logitech c920 HD Pro webcam is able to deliver 1920xq080x30fps |
| 5 |
> (H.264). |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Some interesting notes and comments at the bottom of this page: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
http://www.ideasonboard.org/uvc/ |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Also, in the past, I have found the best comments on various camera |
| 13 |
hardware in the relevant kernel driver. Sometimes that is a unique |
| 14 |
driver, other times it is a unified kernel driver for a similar group |
| 15 |
of video cameras. Sometimes you can go way back to where the kernel |
| 16 |
driver for a given video camera first appeared (got supported) in the linux |
| 17 |
kernel for detailed information on the limitations of a given piece |
| 18 |
of hardware. Often, the poorer performance on Linux, was intentionally |
| 19 |
due to the actions of the manufacturer, particular on max frame rate, |
| 20 |
bit minipulations and other key parameter settings of the cameras. Once |
| 21 |
folks learned the protocols (decoded them) on windows, they would make |
| 22 |
those adjustments with windows software and reverse engineer the |
| 23 |
driver software so as to be able to support various linux drivers. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Logitech is very reasonable (at least compared to other vendors) but even |
| 26 |
there newer hardware rarely works with the best of a given feature set, |
| 27 |
until the product has been out for a while. If not, Logitech should |
| 28 |
have a published interface specification so and to make reverse engineering |
| 29 |
not necessary? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Dunno know the specifics on the model your listing, as I've been out |
| 32 |
of that 'game' for a while now, but all those tigers still have the same |
| 33 |
stripes.... |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Good hunting! |
| 36 |
hth, |
| 37 |
James |
Archives