A few notes for those going down this path (I'm doing the same).

1. This doesn't work on OSX yet. Works really well in windows though.

2. There's no microphone. I'm looking for a directional mic setup for the rpi but haven't found anything I'm satisfied with yet.

3. The 6mm lens is total crap. The 16mm lens is decent but the zoom makes it difficult to use as a webcam. I'm still looking for a good rectilinear lens in the 4mm to 8mm range that has minimal distortion and doesn't cost an arm and a leg (after all, the whole point of this is to do it on the cheap). There's no obvious candidate yet.

4. Commonlands has a couple M12 lenses that look promising. I'd prefer a C mount but you have to go with what's available. I'm going to pull the trigger on one of them to test out when I get back from vacation.

5. Arducam has a bunch of lenses, but I find them to be very strange. Maybe it's a language barrier issue, but the videos and the marketing copy are all very odd and don't quite tell you what you want to know. It feels like a Chinese company masquerading as an English company. It's all weird enough that I'm not ready to pull the trigger and purchase one of their lenses.

6. Focusing is a pain in the ass with all these lenses. You will not have the same experience as a typical webcam but once you have the focus dialed in things look great. Just don't move.

7. The HQ camera is very capable but it's limited by the bandwidth limitations of the pi interface. 1080p 30fps is the max you'll get. Don't expect 4k video.

Thank you for posting this list. I was actually looking at the Arducam lenses last night because I'd love to build my own webcam capable of a good image for light content creation, but that I could throw a 90 or 100 degree FoV lens on for calls with groups. I was starting to get a sense of the limitations you listed here and now I'll probably keep looking at some other options like re-purposing a used GoPro with a camlink, spending way more for a DSLR, or really cheaping out on a couple different lower quality cameras. If I can't figure anything out, maybe I'll revisit in 6-12 months.

I think the article's author is right that today's webcams are boring. But I would go a step further and say that the webcam market really needs some of that patented disruption that people keep talking about.

Regarding point 7: Are there other interfaces like the Pi's, but with higher bandwidth, for the Sony sensors?

I've had good luck making use of the Pi-cam in the lab, but would love to be able to configure them with a higher-bandwidth connection to a computer with a burlier processor/GPU.

We just figured out How to solve point 1 about a week ago. It is now working well on macOS. Try it :)

I’m actually really excited about this! I had previously bought everything for this exact project and referenced the blog post on your GitHub for setting up. Unfortunately I got stuck on the Mac issue myself. I’ll definitely be taking a look at your work.

Thanks for putting this together.

That's great! I'll take a look first chance I get.

I don't know why people don't just come up with good single-use-case enclosures for the pi.

for example:

1) hang on the wall with official display

2) sit on the table with official display

3) hang on wall with tiny display

4) hang on wall with epaper display

5) outdoor webcam

6) indoor tilt/shift webcam

7) webcam on top of monitor

8) small server case with space for gpio breakout inside and ports either routed to the back or through grommets

I mean heck, I've ordered a raspberry pi on amazon and I recall it was "#1 selling barebones" so I think there is money in it.

I still wonder why open hardware hasn't taken over the consumer electronics market yet. Hackability/upgradability is a feature I would pay for... ah wait! these things (Pi, 3D printing) are even cheaper than many closed designs.

The problem is that people and companies are still not okay with the idea of paying for R&D of open source, especially when it is not a direct investment - i.e, they pay for FOSS only when it is going to make or save them money elsewhere.

Open source consumer electronics does neither. It is at best a hobby and a very expensive one at that. Take a look at /r/mechanical keyboards or /r/headphones and you will see.

But I am with you. I would love to work on a drop.com equivalent that would focus only on curating and aggregating open source projects focused on consumer electronics.

I think it's hard to get funding for that business model.

Really, the chances of getting funded go way up when you have patents, exclusivity, a monopoly, etc.

Because it's easy to commodotise it. If all the designs are open then the race is to who can manufacture it better but there's a technological limit to that and the return on investment is quite low. What would be a company's market differentiator in this? Quality of construction is easily achievable nowadays, price will be low (as the market is very price-sensitive, who will be buying US$ 100 cases for their Pis?), there is not much incentive to participate in it, even more as the market is quite niche.

Maybe a company doing the packaging and selling of open-source hardware as whole product, much like as Mutable Instruments did with modular synthesizers, could work but then you aren't simply making cases anymore.

Chinese companies don't seem to mind doing this. The answer to thread OPs question is that all the stuff they want is sold by Chinese manufacturers.

For (1), I made https://callanbryant.co.uk/blog/universal-wall-mounted-touch... which works pretty well supporting a Pi3 + (generic) PoE adaptor.

I doubt there would be a viable market for commercial production like that, but I've seen several 3D-print-at-home options for custom cases for Pis and similar.

Lots of individuals make them. They design and 3d print them with their home printers.

I've been looking at the specs of the HQ camera for some time, and I'm not quite sure I understand it. I mean, the sensor is outright TINY for its resolution, at 1.55µm pixel size. I have found some C-mount lenses that claim to provide an optical resolution matching a sensor with 3.5µm pixel size (which would give you an effective resolution of slightly under 3MP with that sensor), but they are at least in the same price range as a a Sony A6000 mirrorless with the kit lens which will have a much higher effective resolution. And that is less hassle as you don't have to deal with two PCBs connected by a ribbon cable...

The sensor definitely isn’t too tiny to be useful, and you can get some nice C-mount lenses for cheap on eBay and Amazon. Incidentally, my favorite lens for my Canon M50 mirrorless is actually a C-mount lens with an adapter that cost me $30. It goes for about $20 new on the bay.

Edit: $50 for the Pi HQ camera, $30 for the lens, $20 for four Pi Zeroes (just in case it’s not as easy to find them for $5 where you are). Still comes out to way less than half the price of a used A6000 with the kit lens.

But as far as I can see, that lens (assuming the default 6mm lens offered with the module) will give you about the same effective resolution as your standard webcam, with maybe slightly better control over depth of field, far worse image distortion near the edges, and no autofocus.

The cheapest 6mm lenses that come even remotely close to using the sensor resolution start at 400€.

What lens? Always a fan of interesting old lenses

The sensor is pretty much the same size and density as a smartphone camera (~1/2.5", 12 MP).

I have a mirrorless laying around, so I only had to buy a cable and a $12 HDMI to USB capture card off of ebay. The image quality is fantastic. My colleagues frequently comment on how clear my video quality is.

If you have a mirrorless that has a clean HDMI out signal, I highly recommend it.

The capture card is actually optional if you're using a Mac, at least for some cameras.

I run my mirrorless via microUSB using two apps, Camera Live[0] and CamTwist[1], both free.

[0]: https://github.com/v002/v002-Camera-Live

[1]: https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/24275/camtwist

Camera Live claims to only support Canon, but I can tell you that Sony ASP-Cs work fine. The details of how exactly to get it working vary by camera, but a search for "$your-camera webcam CamTwist" will turn something up.

Sony has their own software for using your mirrorless camera as a webcam, whether APS-C or Full-Frame. But the quality is inevitably lesser to an HDMI adapter. A version for MacOS is being developped, according to their website

It's called "Imaging Edge Webcam" : https://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/app/webcam/en/

I'm personally using an A7ii with a Tamron 28-75 for Canon EF, and it works much better resolution and quality wise with the HDMI, just because of the limitation to 1024x768 of the USB camera mode, which was really meant for tethering. Coupled with a 4$ phantom battery, it's awesome! I can get a clear image in the very low light conditions of my room at night, too. No need to turn the lights on, even :)

Is that using the tethering feed? I wasn't wild about the quality, ymmv, seemed lower res than my webcam. Here's how to do it using gphoto2 in Linux: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23407365

Yeah, it uses the tethering feed, and I had to tweak some setting in CamTwist to get 1080p.

Starting to think some kind of capture card might be worth the investment though.

I ended up buying the $10 1080p USB capture card recommended in a sibling post, and it's much better than what I got out of the tethering feed.

Yeah, if you have an expensive mirrorless camera in a fixed setup then it's not bad, but it's quite a hassle if have to carry it around and expensive to buy.

IME, a cheap a6000 with the kit lens is very light and easy to carry around, and it's one of those things you keep for a very long time.

Then again, I'm the type of person to lug around an A7ii with a 135 2.8 and a 28-75 2.8 everywhere I go!

I wouldn't call ~450 GBP, 'cheap'...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-ILCE6000LB-Compact-SELP1650-El...

That indeed isn't cheap. They sell on local classifieds for around ~250 CAD here. It's not a production model so buying it from Amazon doesn't make sense.

I've been looking for a DSLR/DSLM on eBay for a while now to hook up to my Elgato Cam Link, and prices there aren't any better. It's like every youtuber has worked out the DLSR + HDMI output = Webcam trick, and it's inflating used camera prices.

That is unfortunate. In my local classifieds I can find them for around 300 USD before any haggling, maybe you will have more fortune there?

But yes, the prices did indeed rise. It's quite how remarkable how well cameras conserve their value compared to other electronics.

There are $12 capture cards? Any recommendations?

For $12 you can get a HDMI-to-USB2 capture card on ebay - it's based on the Macrosilicon 2109.

You can also find $18 fake "USB 3" devices that are the same chip, but a higher price, a different case, and a blue plug.

As it's USB2, you'll find it will only do uncompressed 1080p at 5fps, although it'll do 30fps if you use mjpeg. At either framerate, I noticed several frames of video lag, putting my lips and voice slightly out of sync (although how much is the camera vs the capture card is hard to say).

I'm fairly certain the capture card also introduces some colour distortion compared to the camera's preview screen - perhaps brightening? You'll need a way to convince your camera to autofocus continuously, which might mean running in video-recording mode at all times. And of course you'll need a camera support that's the right height for where you're making calls from. You'll need mains power, or at least enough batteries to run the camera all day. And of course, no taking calls in different rooms for you!

I bought this one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/HDMI-to-USB-2-0-Video-Capture-Card-...

Works great. Haven't had any framerate issues when paired with a Panasonic GH3.

Thanks for the advice! I bought the adapter (or a device that looks just like it) and it does work great. Sony A6300, tested on both Linux and OS X. Plug and play.

1080p -- or whatever the resolution is that it's delivering -- is easily enough for Google/Jitsi meet. Quality is much better than the MacBook Pro internal webcam.

I have this and it works fine. When I bought it it was only $8 though https://www.amazon.com/Capture-Camcorder-Support-Broadcast-S...

No need for a mirrorless camera, most DSLRs can do it, if they support clean HDMI out/external recording.

I was thinking about using a Nikon D7100 with a capture card, since it has "clean output" HDMI (no menus or info ovelayed), but it has a 30 minutes maximum recording time according to https://www.atomos.com/cameras/nikon-d7100. Any ideas how to overcome that?

I've heard 30 minutes of video is the threshold for leaving the EU's 0% "IT Equipment" import tax category and entering the 5-12% "Video camera" tax category. https://www.tested.com/tech/photography/44445-why-digital-ca...

I found this tool that claims to be able to patch your firmware to remove the recording time limit, but I haven't tried it due to being a Sony guy : http://simeonpilgrim.com/nikon-patch/nikon-patch.html

dont't try - its going to burn the sensor, as it will overrun it's thermal capacity. this is why there is the 30 mins limit in the first place; you'll see a marked raise in noise after 10 mins or so any way

The limit is only for tax purposes. One guy at my work uses Sony DSLR as webcam and it works just fine and we are staying with cams/mics on for hours at a time (pair programming)

My D90 purchased in Europe kind of disagrees with you.

Indeed. My A7ii uses a very similar sensor to some Nikon cameras, and the sensor is literally always on, because the camera lacks an optical viewfinder. While the noise for very long exposures is negatively affected by the temperature of the sensor if left on too long without being allowed to cool down, the camera is made for having the sensor on for hours and hours every day without issue, and the Nikon sensors aren't any different.

Whats most likely to break, however, is the shutter mechanism. But even that isn't affected here.

I'm actually really upset that my Lumix LX100 doesn't support live hdmi output, I was hoping to use it as a webcam replacement but apparently Panasonic never implemented this feature, which is a shame because the picture quality would blow any webcam out of the water.

If you're on Linux and don't mind an unreliable hack where your video sometimes freezes, I was able to bodge the mobile app preview stream from my Lumix GX80 to appear as a v4l2 camera [1]

[1] https://www.mjt.me.uk/posts/wifi-streaming-video-lumix-gx80/

I thought the older ones weren't designed for it - they weren't designed to hold the shutter open, or use the sensor for long periods of time.

I assume that has changed.

Not sure that was ever the case. My Nikon from ten years ago had the 'bulb' exposure mode that would stay open until a remote trigger was released.

People have been doing hour long exposures with these cameras for years. Let alone Live View mode!

It's really moreso an excuse to up sell you on a video camera.

I have been working along these same lines, but am still waiting for a Canon lens adapter to arrive so I can have decent glass in front of the sensor (the basic is OK, but I have a few Canon lenses that knock it out of the park).

Meanwhile, I have a slightly tweaked version of uvc-gadget that does not jump to 100% CPU when the camera is off: https://github.com/rcarmo/uvc-gadget

I tried the K&F Concept lens adapter, but the big caveat is the sensor size difference, so effectively you get a huge zoom factor. Using the Kit lens from my Canon, I either need to put the camera module meters away from my face or meeting participants are only going to see my nose. :)

I have a 18-55(?) which is blatantly overkill but might be easier to tune in that regard. Biggest concern I have right now is aperture size, and I certainly don't expect things to be perfect on the first try :)

The crop factor of this camera is about 5.6, so 18 mm behaves like a 105 mm telephoto. For a portrait shot the camera needs to be about 3-4 meters away from you.

7.9mm(1/2.3”) diagonal is not exactly huge, same or smaller than many smartphones.

To be honest, I didn't realize that that sensor just about the size of an iPhone's sensor. I would have guessed the iPhone's camera sensor is smaller. It really blew my mind how compact the whole iPhone camera package is.

Flagship smartphones are cameras first, and phones second.

The iPhone camera module is among most expensive parts in the bill of materials, at about $37.60.

The Apple processor is about $30. NAND and RAM? $40 combined. TrueDepth? $17.

I'm not entirely sure about this situation, but sensor size numbers often don't reflect an actual measurement of the physical size of the sensor. It's all based on old film standards.

Fractional inches notation is based on imaging tubes, not films.

There were of cylindrical fluorescent vacuum tubes that has rectangular imaging area at one end. Inch size notation like 1” or 1/1.2” for CMOS sensors denote size of equivalent imaging tube diameter for its imaging area.

“135 full frame”, “APS-C”, “Super 35mm”, “Medium format” on the other hand refers to film sizes, and thus respective imaging area dimensions.

Maybe jimmies meant compared to webcams?

Last time I hooked up my 5d3 to Teams I saw a nice capture but the other participants saw something that appeared like a 5kib/s 320p feed. When I switched back to the internal webcam the picture was 720p so it wasn’t my connection. Any ideas on this? (macOS, ODS, cam twist, and 5d3 over usb.)

It might have been too high quality, and teams squished it to save bandwidth for every participant?

So why not squish it down to the same level as the internal webcam instead of completely down?

I see there are different lenses available for it (wide angle, telephoto etc.) are these photos using any of those? Or would lenses make it even better?

Also what is the output? Can it do 1080p60? Forgive my naivety if I am asking something obvious

- The wide angle (6mm) is the one I used. It has a good angle of view but with quite a bit of lens distortion.

- I haven't had time to look at the custom lenses, as this is quite confusing to me.

- Output is 1080p30. Here is the link for the specs: https://www.raspberrypi.org/documentation/hardware/camera/

Video quality for the demo video on showmewebcam github page is quite bad. I suspect it is mainly caused by the lens.

Are there any good lenses out there that don't cost a lot?

I could not find any good demo videos from the Rpi HQ camera. There are either macro shots showing the background blur, or some terrible medium range ones.

If a good lens costs an arm and a leg, it is probably still cheaper to buy used entry level mirrorless camera, and it will also have autofocus.

I really wish there were better webcams and I would not have to result some bulky mirrorless/dslr or iphone with droidcam.

See my other comment to the parent, but yeah, the lenses are a challenge. The 6mm is not great. Finding a workable cost effective lens is my biggest hurdle right now.

Have you considered adding a ring light?