Here is my summary of the Microsoft LifeCam Studio Webcam:
Anticipation, to the use of Skype & Co I will not go, because there is no need to point out that this cam located at Skype & Co can use easily.
I think that with Microsoft products also now take for granted.
The LifeCam leaves a tidy processed solid impression, only the LED on top of the LifeCam is advised me a little too big, who will, however, this cam used in the business certainly appreciate it to know whether the business partners are just present or not and realize what you saying.
Emphasize also the much better picture and autofocus which allows is to keep a piece of paper in front the cam and after about 3-5 seconds. for example, is also very small text clearly visible. Although the auto focus is thus not the fastest, especially at close range. However, the auto focus from 30cm distance responds appropriately and finds its target quickly.
The huge advantage is, as already mentioned, the clearer picture, compared to the HD 3000 almost razor sharp acting, which one but given the lush price (compared to the HD 3000) should also be expected. And yet, here eg Logitech puts the C920 in terms of price something extra, whether it is justified I leave undecided.
But what I find really brazen is that the Microsoft LifeCam Studio has approximately the same frame rate as the HD 3000, who now believes that the approximately 3 times more expensive LifeCam Studio with at least 2-fold better frame rates in the top resolution segments comes up here yet disappointed. Apart from the fact it would seem that comes with a 1080p HD-Cam, as the LifeCam Studio, the 780p HD resolution at 25 FPS liquid. Unfortunately, far from it, here as the LifeCam HD 3000 is just as good or bad as well, with a maximum of 10 FPS is not exactly abundant.
The sound is a bit better than the HD 3000, but nothing that could be described better than outstanding. The recording is as expected clear and undistorted, a separate microphone is therefore no longer necessary, even at mittlgroßen distance to the microphone.
A nice feature is the tripod socket on the bottom of the LifeCam, so who has a huge wide screen, can choose an additional tripod a free position, which for example is likely to be useful in presentations, and therefore probably the addition of "Studio".
A Comparison of HD-3000 and LifeCam Studio features:
Definition
HD-3000: significant noise even in bright light (compared with the LifeCam Studio)
LifeCam Studio: makes it much better
Color fidelity
HD-3000: acts sepia colors, one has an orange skin.
LifeCam Studio: scores with a well-balanced color Blance (without additional software) even in low light
Refresh rates of the resolutions offered:
HD-3000: as fast as the LifeCam Studio
LifeCam Studio: as fast as the HD 3000 up to 1280x720 resolution, the LifeCam Studio has an additional resolution of 1920x1080 at max. 5 fps.
Maximum resolution:
HD-3000: a maximum of 1280x800 at max. 10 frames per sec.
LifeCam Studio: maximum 1920x1080 at max. 5 frames per sec.
Autofocus:
HD-3000: Fixed Focus
LifeCam Studio: Autofocus
Software:
HD-3000: Microsoft LifeCam (at both Cams equal)
LifeCam Studio Microsoft LifeCam (in two equal Cams)
For Microsoft LifeCam Studio software has to be said that this software provides extremely high demands on the PC, and for quite modest results supplies (read: poorly written / is adapted). In Windows 7 (64bit) on an Abit AX78 / Athlon X2 240/8 GB RAM I have to bring the software to deliver trouble me a picture on my laptop SONY Vario Intel Core i3 / 8 GB RAM the software runs so far without problems , What I have, however, found in both systems is that have occasionally misfire the video recordings on the Abit more (if I ever get a picture there), than on the laptop. The software is in my opinion in terms of compatibility strong review and Verbessungsbedürftig.
Resolutions and FPS:
HD-3000
1280 * 800 max. 10 FPS
1280 * 720 max. 10 FPS
960 * 544 max. 15 FPS
800 * 600 max. 15 FPS
800 * 448 max. 20 FPS
640 * 480 max. 30 FPS
640 * 360 max. 30 FPS
424 * 240 max. 30 FPS
416 * 240 max. 30 FPS
352 * 288 max. 30 FPS
320 * 240 max. 30 FPS
176 * 144 max. 30 FPS
160 * 120 max. 30 FPS
LifeCam Studio
1920 * 1080 max. 5 FPS
1280 * 720 max. 10 FPS
960 * 544 max. 20 FPS 800 * 600 max. 20 FPS 800 * 448 max. 20 FPS
640 * 480 max. 30 FPS
640 * 360 max. 30 FPS
432 * 240 max. 30 FPS
424 * 240 max. 30 FPS
352 * 288 max. 30 FPS
320 * 240 max. 30 FPS
176 * 144 max. 30 FPS
160 * 120 max. 30 FPS
Conclusion:
The LifeCam Studio scores especially with its significantly better image and the autofocus, 1080p but is not practically usable because with max. 5fps not fluent display is slower than -noch of erwartet- possible, no matter how powerful the PC behind it may be. In addition, the in-house software Microsoft LifeCam is not to display the 1080p capable, which also stands outside on the packaging. For this purpose, a lt. Microsoft is a "commercial video software" needed, but even with this are, as already mentioned above, only max. 5 frames per second at 1080p possible what I feel as a misnomer personally.
Only someone who is a better image and an auto focus needed to be happy here at 1280x780, especially since the HD 3000 is offering the same FPS values. Who can do without but 780p and * 544 satisfied with 960, can claim another 5 FPS to gain here. My name for the Cam would say loud LifeCam "Business", which is "Studio" in the name of anything but reasonable, considering the current supplied by the LifeCam refresh rates. So all in all, the LifeCam is therefore a real "For" and "cons" that justifies his purchase only by the intended use.
PS: Anyone who knows a WebCam and the 1080p max. 30FPS offers may feel free to leave me a comment.
