Logitech's $199 4K Pro Webcam Packs HDR, 5x Zoom, IR Facial Recognition

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Logitech's new 4K Pro Webcam streams 4K, 5x Zoom, HDR, facial recognition for Windows Hello, and more. And it costs $199.

Logitech's $199 4K Pro Webcam Packs HDR, 5x Zoom, IR Facial Recognition : Read more

 

[ohim]

lots of things that you don`t really need from a webcam ...

 

[englandr753]

Agreed but for someone like me that has little kids that live 750 miles away, this is something that I would use and send to them so we have the best picture quality possible. I'd definitely pay this for 2 units for that purpose along with youtube videos. I guess I'm not in the normal consumer class but this is a product for niche purposes anyway.

 

[WFang]

Internet 'up' speed for most consumers can't even support reliable HD / 1080 streaming... Good luck streaming 4k.

I wish symmetric 10/10Mbit was the standard default connection speed of every (residential) subscriber, and that it would just go up from there...

 

[ledhead11]

@WFANG, I totally agree. I've tried Skype with family who had 10mb connections and 1080 was an effort. When they upgraded to 20-40mb it became doable other than Skype's normal issues.

 

[CaedenV]

Finally! A web camera for the PC that almost stacks up to a cell phone camera!
Seriously, we have needed this product years ago. Very happy we are finally getting it now.

 

[Farland_]

no one should pay $200 for a 4k webcam when a $350 full Mobile phone can give you better 4K Camera Plus a full pocket PC ...

Samsung S6 can be found today for $350 and has a super 4k Camera . and you can find a used one for $200 ..

Logitech think that they are still living in the 1990's when they could overprice their products without people noticing ...

this webcam is worth $70 not any cent more .

 

[Farland_]

Agreed but for someone like me that has little kids that live 750 miles away, this is something that I would use and send to them so we have the best picture quality possible. I'd definitely pay this for 2 units for that purpose along with youtube videos. I guess I'm not in the normal consumer class but this is a product for niche purposes anyway.

use your mobile phone , better camera and you wont need a PC as well . and you will end up with better quality 4k video

 

[Farland_]

Finally! A web camera for the PC that almost stacks up to a cell phone camera!
Seriously, we have needed this product years ago. Very happy we are finally getting it now.

use your phone camera as a webcam ... no one needs this 3x overpriced expensive camera ..

 

[alidan]

Now, on the software side, the video will compress like hell making it no better then 720p, actually worse because you increased the file size. The camera will not zoom in or out all the way without crashing, and because they refuse to record lossless audio, will compress even the best microphone to something that costs sub 5$ and you shove down your throat. now lets also have the camera only ever shown off in perfect lighting scenarios so you don't get any ghosting effect due to longer exposures, and if they dare to put out a video advertisement for it, lets post process the hell out of it and make damn sure not use use our own software for capture, have you used that crap?

logitech can make good hardware, but their software is so bad it make the hardware so appealing.

 

[jn77]

Isn't 4k about 6 years ago now? Where are the 8k and 16k web cams? I mean really.... they are test brodcasting 16k in Japan. Always late to the game here.

 

[Farland_]

Isn't 4k about 6 years ago now? Where are the 8k and 16k web cams? I mean really.... they are test brodcasting 16k in Japan. Always late to the game here.

Its not only about the wecams , you will need a super fast CPU to handle 8K and 16K image processing and compression .

and Big no , no one is testeing boradcasting 16K in Japan . There are no 16K Monitors or TVs at all as we speak . Japan are testing 8K ...

 

[bit_user]

I mean really.... they are test brodcasting 16k in Japan.

Source?

I find this extremely unlikely. 4k already needs quite a lot of bandwidth, and most hardware decoders can only do H.265 @ 4k. A few can do 8k (maybe only H.264), but I've never even heard anything about 16k.

You do realize that 16x as many pixels as 4k, right?