Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

Digital cameras, "refresh" time??


Chris Wilson

Recommended Posts

Do the more expensive SLR type digital still cameras refresh a lot faster these days? My Sony thing (not an SLR by any means) is a PITA for nature shots, by the time it's ready to take the next photo the subject has moved, gone or something has intervened. Do any work as fast as a motor drive on a normal film SLR? Ta!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the function to take 4 or 5 photos one after the other on my canon (400d) Can take a good 5 photos in a second, pretty useful. I found it went even faster using a descent memory card too.

 

It's rated as 3 frames per second with large image size, but it should be slightly faster with speedier memory. I think 5 is pushing it a bit though.

 

An SLR is definately the way to go though, no lag between pressing the shutter and it taking the photo, unlike most compacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as I think someone else has said, make sure whatever one you buy has a bloody quick card in it, 150x speed cards are common and good :)

 

It's not essential, SLR's are quick enough anyway, unless doing back to back testing with rapid fire I doubt you'd notice.

 

But when a Sandisk "Extreme III" 4GB compact flash card is only around £14 then it's worth getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new canon 450d can manage 3.5 frames a second continuous and there is no noticale shutter lag. Shots are instant. Have a look at some of the photos I took at biggin hill this weekend. Capturing jets on a low flyby just wouldnt be possible with a compact or bridge camera.

 

http://picasaweb.google.com/GrandDaddyRob/

 

Some nice pics there Grand Daddy ;)

 

Some quite noticeable vignetting though, what lens did you use?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigma 150-500 HSM OS DG, Odd that you say theres vignetting as its a full frame lens on an APS-C sized sensor.

 

Yeah not usually an issue with full frame lenses, but this one for example http://picasaweb.google.com/GrandDaddyRob/BigginHillAirFare2008/photo#5209547206343647442 it's quite noticeable. Were they taken right at the full 500mm end? You could always try zoomed out a little from max and can always crop the photos a little. I suspect it's just more noticeable because of the plain bright blue background.

 

Not that it detracts from your photo's at all and a lot of people add vignetting effects in post-processing as it helps to frame the subject anyway :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The focal length varies. If you click on more information to the right of the photo you can see the iso, shutter speed, f stop and focal length etc

 

None of those pics have had any post processing, just resized and dropped the quality for the web.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.