I thought the video quality was extremely high, compared with a lot of the other stuff I see on YouTube.
also worth noting that there are a ton of retail outlets in the USA which is an added benefit to their distribution strategy.
Actually the video quality looks terrible. Compare the bits actually shot with the Cube (most of the promo video isn't... you can clearly see when they switch to the shots the Cube itself took at ~0:22-0:26 and ~0:42-0:44, notice how they switch away from the Cube video pretty damn quickly, probably because it is so terrible... doesn't even look actually 1080p as a source, looks like they are interpolating it up from something lower, frame rate looks bad, massive chromatic aberration).
Compare Cube (switch YouTube player to 1080p if it doesn't auto select that, note that most of the promo video is not Cube footage, pay specific attention to ~0:22-0:26 and ~0:42-0:44):
To, say, the Mobius (switch YouTube player to 1080p if it doesn't auto select that):
Mobius costs less than the Cube ($80 vs $99), video quality is miles better even when capturing a much faster-moving scene.
I can see reasons why people might buy the Cube... it is cute, the monkey stand is pretty cool; but in terms of price vs image quality it is a clear loser, IMO.
Here's a still of the video for reference: https://i.imgur.com/wIF1SFt.jpg
There's so much wrong in this picture I'm not sure where to start. And that's a promotional video!
They either need to sell on lifestyle branding (where GoPro is already owning the market) or quality, IMO.
Would a non-technical person understand pro's and con's of the trade-off between 1080p24 and 720p120? I doubt it.
I agree, the Mobius video does look better. But, I think that most of the decision doesn't come down to video quality for a normal person. Its like graphics on video games. There's a very vocal crowd that espouses 1080p / 60 Hz refresh rates, but most normal people are as likely to play Candy Crush as a cinematic Final Fantasy or God of War. Its just not that much of a discriminator for the non-hardcore.
Anecdotally, I bought a Go Pro a while back. What really mattered was: "Can I easily use this for the activity I'm planning (I wanted to be able to set a camera on my shoulder)?", "Can I easily work with / upload the video after I'm done?", and "Is this a product that people online say works?"
The cube looks like a great product, but I was wondering if it will be pro quality. Your post helps.
GoPro actually does produce usable pro-quality HD video. Amazing for such a compact and simple device. Great colour balance, great lens, very little CA, etc., etc.
Cube is clearly not competing with that. It looks like a great fun product, and I reckon I'll buy one... but I won't be able to justify that purchase professionally!
P.S. Have a link to that somewhere?
GoPro is headed in the direction of lifestyle branding. Original content, sponsored professional sports, brand collaboration, etc.
So while Polaroid and Sony are welcoming competition in the space, GoPro's market IMO seems more focused elsewhere.
That's still just a camera company. All those are marketing/promotionals moves, no money makers or markets.
Same for Red Bull I'd say. How much Red Bull makes for selling the drink vs any other endeavour (if it not actually loses money on them).
While "extreme sports" types may not themselves drink Red Bull, the "non-extreme" people who do drink Red Bull are very sensitive to the notion that Red Bull is authentically associated with such sports/attitudes.
That is, they demand their products properly represent feelings, experiences and capabilities that they themselves do not pursue. And you see this in all sorts of markets.
People who will never serious hike demand "authentic" (or authentic-appearing) hiking boots. People who will never push their computers' limits demand high-end parts. People who will only listen to over-compressed audio will demand high-quality stereo components. Etc.
I used to work as a rafting guide, got paid next to nothing, but got to kayak whenever I wanted. My gear was shit, but I was way better than most people who could afford the nice kit.
Just because you bought a $12k carbon fiber Colnago with deep section carbon aero wheels (which are heavier and meant for time trials, not commuting) doesn't mean you'll be Lance Armstrong, nor does it mean you'll beat the guy riding a steel fixie who regularly goes on group rides.
Owning an AMG Mercedes doesn't mean you can keep it in a lane in turns (I usually fined quite the opposite) or keep up with a Miata on mountain roads.
The newest Ducati >liter bike won't make you faster through twisties than the guy on the gsxr 750 who goes to track days and can drag a knee.
In the end though, people are free to spend their money however they want, even if that means looking ridiculous to people who are more passionate about their thing than they are. In middle school, we'd call these people "posers", but now we just call them "rich".
Of course, it clearly costs tens of millions to run a team - but those figures won't include sponsorship/advertising deals either. If you're not in that top ten though...
Most teams that have endured are backed by large companies that can absorb losses, but I have never seen any books from any teams.
They'll get about $80 million back on that from prize money (it's more like $100 million if you win).
Then there's the sponsorship - for a large team about $300 million a year is reasonable.
The rest can often be found from elsewhere. McLaren had large funding from Daimler until recently (when they received a $40 million fine Daimler paid) - Ferrari have a lot of their own money. F1 drives car sales, and the technology from F1 can be pulled back into the road cars - just look at McLaren's new models..
Still, they're great cameras and I think they look beautiful, but you can see lots of shots of skies and pools that are very unnaturally blue on the Sony models.
If you need something submersible, it's not a good option though.
(I work for Garmin, but not on anything related to this.)
I wouldn't get this new cube device because it lacks a rotatable camera body (essential for flexibility in helmet mounting) and the battery lifetime is too short.
But low light performance and interchangeable lenses are almost diametrically opposed to what what they're doing. You need a large sensor and lens to get good low light performance (which makes it bigger) and so would the mechanism on an interchangeable lens. Further the interchangeable lenses are just additional parts to fail when you're bouncing around on your kayak trip.
If you just want portability, you probably want something more like a micro 4/3s camera. I assume they can capture video but would almost certainly be more fit for the job.
But if it's just documentary-style interviews, seems like a cheap approximation of this, the gold standard: http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663105/errol-morriss-secret-wea...
Contour was the original competitor to GoPro. In a lot of ways it was a superior product. The company went defunct for a while but recently has been brought back.
Unfortunately I lost it on the trails as I was too lazy to set up the tether strap and I used a fork mount and must have hit some particularly hard bumps. I now have a Virb, which has arguably superior quality video, and also features a flick switch. However due to the way the Gopro style mount insists on popping it out and away from the helmet, I've moved it to the handlebars as it just got too much for everyday wearing.
I personally find that for helmet mounting the Gopro as well sticks out like an eyesore, and am looking forward to hopefully seeing a Roam 3 from the resurrected company.
FWIW, I'm using the Australian Fly6 on the back of my bike and am loving that there.
When gopro started it was jus the cheapest digital camera that nobody would cry if it was smashed by the skateboard... it wasn't really ground breaking in any other aspect. yeah it had interchangeable lens. but everyone i know that used them had one camera for each lens (since they cost ~1 to 2x the price of a good lens anyway)
nowadays there are tons of cheap digital cameras that fit the bill. most in a more convenient cylindrical body. and sometimes 1/5 the price of a gopro! win-win right? except everyone still goes for the gopro because of brand.
so no, this is not "finally stepping into gopro market". the market already have plenty of alternative and they are mostly doing fine. specially in the dashboard cam niche that gopro doesn't market so heavily.
this is just a product some, what... 20yrs later or something. sd card up to 32gb! wth... what is this? 2010? now they are going to say this is not readily available nationwide and that when it is, there will be a wait list?
I'd say "Polaroid" is mainly just a trademark licensed out by a shell company for random products because its still widely recognized and loved (at least by old people).
on second thought... maybe playing with our emotions like that is a little sinister?
I think this is good. Looks like a genuine competitor to GoPro Hero!
I would say GP's analysis is spot-on, wrt other offerings that were branded as Polaroid lately. You're also right that this looks like a much more well thought out initiative. Here's to hoping it's not just more time spent thinking through the promotional materials.
However, it still behooves you to know who really manufacturers and supports the product. Both so you can avoid the bad and support the good.
You'd think they'd have someone proofread a product announcement.
> It’s wide angle lens provides 124° of coverage so you can get the big shot.
"It is wide angle lens" doesn't work.
I'm not convinced they are correct (note deliberate use of the ungrammatical but popular singular 'they'), because hyper-correctism seems to be increasing as well. The population seems to be splitting into those who can't use correct grammar, and sticklers, with a reduced middle ground of the relaxed.
It'll be OK.
So you don't say "it's" for the same reason you don't say "hi's".
Rules can change over time and you do not need a governing body for rules to exist as rules are just as easily defined by consensus as by imposition.
It is generally known that its and it's have different meanings. People may regularly confuse them and the confusion may eventually eliminate the rule, but that does not mean there is currently no rule.
Or to put it another way, if English has no rules, have understand problem no will sentence you this to.
I usually refer to this handy illustrated guide http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe :D
Sadly, no. "It's been like this for days."
EDIT: To be clear, I'm not greatly bothered either way; I got over my prescriptivism a while ago. I'm just curious whether the trend will continue.
I think the cube is awesome for a fun, inexpensive little camera to stick in places quickly and just start filming without worrying too much - and at that price point you can buy a few and stick them in your car for a road trip, or hand a few out to friends when going down a slope; it's size, shape, colours and accessibility would be targeting even the non-action-sports crowd and there's a huge market of young skate boarders, soccer players etc etc.
I only wish they would market themselves a little better, and also fix up the poor software that tends to be on / accompanies their products.
Waterproof case and suction cup mount
This is absolutely a GoPro competitor whether Polaroid are competing with their own lineup or not.
I do agree that they're going for a more casual angle than GoPro with the marketing and presentation, though.
I think GoPro are in an interesting place - they have an extremely strong brand, but "plugged-in" budget-seeking enthusiasts will seek out wallet friendly clones like the SJ4000 while the casual market is inundated with name-brand options at a lower price point.
Not only does it look kinda fuzzy and janky (like the actual recording frames per second is quite low), but the shot where they show a loop under the bottom of a bike (at ~0:25) has probably the worst chromatic aberrations I've ever seen and I've handled some old lenses with bad chromatic aberration. It is like they made an instagram filter for adding CA to videos and someone went crazy with it and applied it 10 times.
If this quality is the best they've got to put in a promo video, it is no wonder they barely show footage from the cam at all and intermix it with high quality footage (especially as seen in the skateboard section) in a borderline deceptive manner.
I have the #16 and its a neat little toy for my cheap syma quad copter.
Vivitar DVR 787HD 12.1MP Action Full HD Camcorder with Universal Car Kit, Surf Kit and Waterproof Kit.
The Polaroid Cube is more compact which might make it much more useful -- but just so you know there are options under $99, even.
Polaroid may not be the same company they used to be, but at least they're attempting to stay relevant.
Lol..umm...no. I actually don't get the whole GoPro craze, but I do know that Polaroid doesn't stand a chance, even if they have a better product. I'm not investing in either.
Also I wonder if it floats in water... would be great for chucking around the pool.
I went on amazon to buy a new contour roam but it has actually gone UP in price from $120 to 200+ :P
(I have a V1 Roam that I love as well. The form factor is just so much better than a GoPro for a lot of things).
With a remote shutter I'd be in for one just for retro-ness of using a Polaroid.
I'm mostly asking out of curiosity, as 64 GB seems fairly inexpensive on Amazon...
If you could find that bug for me it'd be much appreciated.
Kinda seems like a shame. 32 GB is quite a lot, but for HD video, it seems like it could fill up quickly.
I'd be willing to buy one to play with, and the built in magnet to make it easy to stick on things is a great idea.
I know that's a super fringe use, but I like the idea of something smaller with smooth surfaces even though I own several Gopros.