GIT2 has a little hardware sensor which they call “gyro”, which servers as an gyroscope. In my opinion video stabilization is quite important, especially if you are not that good with video editing software. Unfortunately, the image sensor that GIT2 has, does not support image rotation, so GIT2 does not have this feature, where as GIT1 has. This is handy when you mount the camera upside down. Image rotation will rotate the video/photo output for 180°. Meaning one has it, and the other does not.
Below are features that are different in both cameras. It’s what makes a huge difference which one to get.Įven though, I explained most of these features in detail in my Git 1 and Git 2 reviews, I will briefly summarize them, since there are people who do not like to read my long reviews. In my humble opinion, this is where you have to focus. Here are features that both cameras have or don’t have. While user-interface, design and plenty other things may fool you into thinking that both GIT 1 and GIT 2 are the same, they are not. Features are options that camera offers to us.
A feature determines what camera can and can’t do.
#GITUP CAMERAS SOFTWARE#
So if in future Gitup releases new software versions, some features from the following table may be different.įeatures are important part of the camera. Firmware (or software) updates add new features and remove bugs.
#GITUP CAMERAS UPDATE#
Why the hell am I telling you this? Because from time to time manufacturer decides to update the firmware. The entire article is based on latest firmware versions available for both cameras at the time of writing the article. Overall, both cameras have same sound quality, though GIT 2 appears to be a bit more sensitive. What I really like about both GIT 1 and 2 is that they support external microphone. Not only that it has far better sharpness and colors, but it also provides more options (for example vivid color) to boost photo performance. Photo quality is something where GIT2 beats GIT1 without any doubt. It is quite obvious how smoother video looks on GIT2.ĭon’t just take my word for it. GIT 2 has video stabilization where as GIT1 doesn’t. It works similarly to image stabilization. This little piece of hardware, combined with camera software stabilizes. People have been going crazy about “gyro stabilization” lately. Take a look at this great side by side comparison by my friend TechTronic9000. At low-light, GIT2 proved to be inferior in quality to GIT1.ĭue to 2 megapixels sensor that GIT1 has, it has better low-light (night) video quality. It appears that newer, GIT2 beats its predecessor at, well everything. Here are few side by side comparison at daylight. In my tests, not only that GIT 2 provided superior video colors in daylight, but it also has more resolutions and frames per second options. If you want to split hairs, GIT 1 weights 63 grams where as GIT 2 weight is 64 grams according to my measurements. When it comes to weight there is a difference. Both cameras are ugly looking, how about weight? So, size, built quality and design are the same. Cameras are light-weight, yet firm and compact. On the other hand, built quality is impressive for the price.
#GITUP CAMERAS PRO#
Both have 1.5″ screen at the back and 4 ugly-looking silver screws attaching a mask at front (Obviously design is not the strongest pro of Gitup cameras, but since this is not I review, I’ll stop crying and complaining about their design). Additionally their dimensions are exactly the same. Both cameras come in black color only and are made out of same materials. Weight, size, built quality and designĪt first glance it is impossible to differentiate GIT 1 from GIT 2. I’ll clarify important things, and help you choose the one that suits you better. Throughout this article, I will do plenty of real-life tests, so do not worry if you do not understand anything from the tables.
0 kommentar(er)
