Related Sections: Camcorders Portable Gadgets Video
Side-by-side video: Flip Ultra vs. iPod Nano
Last week was full of rants and raves about the iPod Nano's on-board camcorder, but now we found a comparison of its video side-by-side with its targeted competitor, the standard-definition version of the Flip camcorder.
The verdict of the New TeeVee shooters who created this excellent real-time side-by-side comparison? The Flip wins, offering better video in both bright and low light, more detail, and better sound, even in a crowd. And we think the Flip's color looks better, too. Keep in mind, though, the cheapest Flip camcorder, the standard-definition Flip Ultra SD, has no music player on board like the iPod Nano's.
So take your pick, the cheapest iPod Nano for $150, or the lowest-end Flip Ultra camcorder, a bulkier unit that shoots better video for the same retail price (but you can find them for $127).
NewTeeVee, via CrunchGear
By Mihos at 4:34 PM ON 09/14/09
This video needed more Liz
By murc at 6:34 PM ON 09/14/09
hahaha.....and yes, I agree.
By TL at 9:49 PM ON 09/14/09
Excellent
By Scorpius at 3:16 AM ON 09/15/09
Keep in mind, though, the cheapest Flip camcorder, the standard-definition Flip Ultra SD, has no music player on board like the iPod Nano's.
So the choice is a single-function camcorder that does its one job very well vs. a multi-function, more expensive unit that does a mediocre job on one function and a good job on another? At ~$150 it's no contest, I'll carry a small flip and a small MP3 player than one mediocre multi-functional MP3 player.
By asher at 10:36 AM ON 09/15/09
That's interesting, the Flip was vastly superior except when handling direct back-lighting from the skylights and the lighting fixtures.
In this one way the ipod was notably superior.
By Commander at 4:56 AM ON 09/16/09
@asher wow are u blind? ipod got glares the flip didnt
By waterman at 9:27 AM ON 09/16/09
@ Commander and @ Asher
I think Asher might have meant the one quick view of the skylight inside the building. If you pause the video when the camera is looking up at the skylight, the exposure on the Nano video is actually better - but I think that is still open to debate.
As much as I wanted the Nano to be superior it is not (and a am a major Apple supporter - Mac user for 20 years and own bunch of aapl stock
By Cereal? at 4:58 AM ON 09/17/09
I like how you are comparing a camcorder to a mp3 player w/ video. Let me get this straight... the sole purpose of the flip IS to shoot video. So yea, I'd hope it would do a better job than something that has the main purpose of playing quality music and video as a 2ndary feature.
Seriously, you guys are retarded.
By NOt Crazy at 3:08 PM ON 09/17/09
Seriously, the ipod is better cause I can see WAY more of teh shot. I can see the WHOLE building in the nano. that means with the nano i have the option to get closer and achieve the same shot as the Flip. The flip looks over saturated big time. The nano gets glares because it captures so much more area. The flip is a LOT more shaky also. O guarantee the whits in the flip are not broadcast safe, lol. Look how HOT!! Plus with the Nano you get twice the functionality in a smaller package. watch movies from itunes? music? is there even a choice?
By PeopleAreStupid at 11:53 AM ON 09/29/09
@NOt Crazy, you are a moron, you can just stand farther back with the flip to get a wider shot. The quality of the Nano is absolute garbage in comparison.
on your cellphone!
Text DVICE to 72434
editor@dvice.com
PeopleAreStupid:
@NOt Crazy, you are a moron, you can just stand farther back with the flip to get a wider shot. The quality of the ...More »