Hacker News Reader

This might be for different uses, but I'd rather Apple bring their iPhone front camera to the MacBooks. It's crazy that MacBook cameras still top out at 720p.

That still misses the point. People want the look of a larger sensor that the tiny ones in a phone's camera. Shallow depth of field, different lenses, filters, etc that a fixed lens fixed aperture lens on a small sensor does not allow.

I'd cite portrait mode as counter-example. The optics are irrelevant if the software can emulate the look. And thus far, from what I understand, portrait mode systems have not had to use the depth sensors/lidar that's available!!! I would be very wary of assuming the larger format optics are necessary or helpful!

The look can be done. There are some advantages retained by the larger sensor but it's a category that will shrink.

This post is obviously wrong, in that you cannot hack the same quality out of a smaller cheaper lighter sensor. There's a lot that will remain out of reach. Yet still, there's a lot that can be done to bring the appeal of one to the other.

I think the post is half right. Right now the macbook webcams get zero help from any computational photography unless your video call software has something like that (e.g. Zoom's background blur). Apple could do a lot more with both the physically design as well as with drivers, which they aren't doing today.

I don't think they can, is the thing. My iPhone is at least three times as thick as the screen of my MacBook, and I'd be surprised if they aren't using at least some of that depth on the front camera.

What I would like to see is official support for using the back iPhone cameras as a webcam, but I don't expect to: it looks like Apple wants to remove the last port on the phones, no matter how dumb an idea that might be, and then they'd have to deprecate this feature, which would draw attention to the loss of functionality such a silly move would entail.

I really hope I'm wrong about this implication of the new MacSafe, the idea of owning a phone with no wired connection just makes me nervous. But it would be in character for the company.

The port is definitely going, but maybe they'll put a magnet in the MBP lid so you can snap your iPhone onto the lid with the camera facing you over the top?

Not really their style though.

Not official, and no personal experience with it, but it sounds like this is what you want:

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/epoccam-webcam-for-mac-and-pc/...

> Just download drivers to your PC/Mac and you're ready to go! Connection is fully automatic, no need for manual setup. You can connect wirelessly over WiFi network or with with a USB-cable.

I use this. It kinda sucks, and the battery goes way too quickly.

I agree it kinda sucks. I found it (and alternatives) to be flaky, and had an audio delay when I had them running. Plus the setup experience each time you want to use it (put iPhone in tripod, position in correctly [because you moved the tripod], plug it in, launch app, check focus etc..) is enough of a pain that a dedicated webcam is just way better even if the picture quality is lower.

If you have an old, jailbroken iPhone and an HDMI adaptor, and an Elgato Camlink, you can screen mirror the iPhone as a webcam using my app, CleanCam.

I hope it'll put some old phones back into good use.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24302918

I assume they could add a camera bump to laptops, similar to modern smartphones.

There was the Canon EOS solution they published the beta for earlier this year. I have an old Rebel T5 that I decided to try out, even though official support bottomed out at the T6.

No capture card required, just the EOS Webcam utility and a USB connection. It runs very slowly, though. The latency is bad and so is the frame rate, though the picture itself is great. I've heard that reported for many supported cameras and varying computer specs as well so I'm not sure how long that will continue...

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/se...

> This Software is for use in the U.S. and will not be supported outside that area

> Subscription to a third party service required.

What on earth reason could they have for this being US only. Absolutely ludicrous.

I used the beta utility without problems in Europe without any subscription. Plug and play!

I'm guessing that statement is there only for liability reasons.

Canon Canada just tells me to go to Canon USA and to use that software!

https://canon.ca/en/Features/EOS-Webcam-Utility

No subscription required for me. It installs the driver, restart your machine, then the camera is ready to use.

> What on earth reason could they have for this being US only

GDPR, for one.

eos-movrec project worked perfectly on my old T3i on Linux, and I guess it still does.

On Mac OS, I run Camera Live (which works off the EOS sdk), and then CamTwist. I use these with a Canon EOS M6 Mark II.

I have solid 720p video 30fps video, no problems.

You don't need a capture card unless you want better than 720p30fps. (Then again, I have no idea about the linux/windows situations)

Do you have an instruction set? I tried following most others I could find and they all tended to fail at some stage.

Mostly https://docs.crowdcast.io/en/articles/1935406-how-to-use-you...

But use Camera Live v11. (Newer versions hit some problems with Catalina)

And tweak CamTwist settings to do 720p 30fps. Browsers won't acknowledge CamTwist new/changed virtual cameras until you restart them.

Totally agreed. My old NEX-5 doesn't work with this new Sony software, and I was thinking about getting a new interchangeable lens camera mostly for webcam use. I think the right prime lens with a huge aperture could go a long way to making me look more presentable in video calls. In this environment it's an investment in your appearance, similar to buying nice clothes, a gym membership, etc.

Unfortunately there's very little information out there about things that are relevant for this application like resolution of HDMI out, ability to disable onscreen displays, latency, autofocus performance during HDMI streaming, overheating during continuous use, speed/convenience of power-on sequence, etc.

Does anyone here have a setup with an interchangeable lens camera as webcam that they really like and recommend?

I do use a D800 with a 50/F1.4 lens for video conf calls.

A lot of the current generation DSLRs do provide XGA, 1024x768 sized preview images when tethered, as, surprise surprise, that is the resolution of their viewfinder/screen. Older cameras, like the D800, only do 640x480, though IMO that is still a vastly superior image for video conferencing.

I've put together what I've found out so far at https://github.com/dognotdog/ptpwebcam/blob/master/CAMERAS.m...

Sony ILSM cameras seem to all do 1024x, DSLRs mostly do 640x480 unless they're from the last 2 or so generation of cameras. I have most complete information for Nikon, as they actually publish specs for the cameras PTP interfaces, unlike Canon or Sony, which have to be reverse engineered.

I've got the A7 which is not supported by this. You can get one used for 200usd. I put on the Sony 35 or 50 F1.8. I've also got a 40usd LED panel for lighting and both camera and lights are on fixtures connected to my desk via camps, 20usd from Amazon.

Perhaps unsurprisingly the used camera market seems to have exploded. The current used price seems to be $600+.

> it's kind of wild to me how there's such a product vacuum for this stuff.

markets tend not to move, until provoked.

canon seems to be the company that broke the standstill here, from what i can see[1]. companies like Hero, Sony, & others responded. i might be wrong here. but this is definitely

agreed that the logitech webcams situation has gone on for too long. most phones have way better cameras. in fact, many Linux users & mac users have been using phones for webcams for a while now[2][3]. With great onboard hardware encoding & solid wifi, these can be even more appealing solutions to what other dedicated devices like photography cameras & webcams provide. Everyone else is, simply, less willing & able to be flexible.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/29/21241305/canon-cameras-ds...

[2] https://github.com/bluezio/ipwebcam-gst

[3] https://github.com/paolorotolo/droidcam

I was experimenting today with using my iphone as a webcam. It seems to work best with camo, and the image was way better than the builtin webcam of my imac or any regular external webcam. But I found it surprising how niche this still is. There seem to be no standard mounts for sale for easily clipping an iphone on the top of a laptop or imac, and the software situation is unsatisfying.

I've used Camo since beta and it is very solid. Image quality is great and it just works. Agree with you about a way to mount the phone, however.

I thought the same and went looking recently, Black Magic gear looks well suited.

Camera:

- https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/au/products/blackmagicpocke...

- https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/au/products/blackmagicmicro...

Capture card:

- https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/au/products/atemmini

- https://www.elgato.com/en/gaming/cam-link-4k

- Generic eBay capture card

Except that is a $1000+ setup.

Mirrorless without auto focus for webcam? Sony's RX100Mx should be fine.

Are you using this?

When I looked the black magic camera seemed to require a human running it to get things to work well.

There were no clear winners, but these were the options I looked at as best:

- LUMIX GH5, high quality but old, bad autofocus

- LUMIX G100, new and cheaper, bad autofocus

- Sony ZV1, new and great autofocus, no interchangeable lens

I ended up unable to decide between them.

I read about that too and they take canon lenses.

Then I realized... yikes! they cost more than many canon bodies!

The phones which everyone has in their pockets is only limited by software to not act as a proper webcam(UVC/As an HID Webcam) instead of hacks like using IPCam protocols like RTSP etc which also need additional software on both ends.

I was really hoping Apple would make it possible to use an iPhone as a webcam on macOS as a first-class built in feature (reverse AirPlay?) by now.