Forum menu
Also when taking shots of people - often their expression changes quickly or they close their eyes, or something. A burst of a few frames gives you a better chance of the optimum shot.
sorry Graham, I misread your post
No probs. I frequently confuse myself by talking about wanting more DoF, when I actually less of it. 😕
brain/finger delay is at least 100mS
Hmm.. but if you are shoot 6 frames-per-second, then you're getting 166ms between frames. Longer if you include exposure time*.
So if you would miss the action at 100ms delay then surely catching it when shooting at 166ms intervals is going to be pretty hit and miss?
(* I have no idea how exposure time features in the 6 fames-per-second thing. Is that a theoretical maximum assuming zero exposure time?)
(* I have no idea how exposure time features in the 6 fames-per-second thing. Is that a theoretical maximum assuming zero exposure time?)
yes, except any speed above flash sync limit is effectively zero.
[img] 
[/img]
yes, except any speed above flash sync limit is effectively zero.
Why so?
Love frame two BTW, he looks like he's almost smiling as it his own impending calamity 😀
So if you would miss the action at 100ms delay then surely catching it when shooting at 166ms intervals is going to be pretty hit and miss?
I think the point is that if you were to line up and take a single shot you'd need to predict it perfectly, but at 5 or 6 fps you have a better chance of getting a usable image very similar to the one you wanted, if not the exact one you wanted. Things like SFBs squence above, if he had lined up for a single shot he might have got one shot as the rider reached the edge, anticipating no problems. But with a burst you get to see the unexpected and to record it in fairly good rate.
Why so?
Because the frame rate is fixed at X fps by the sensor interface and memory, so so long as the shutter speed (and flash recharge if needed) is fast enough to fit between those points in time and does not last >166ms - a slight overhead, your frame rate is unaffected. If you're running 0.5 sec exposures then your frame rate drops to 2fps naturally.
I'm a Nikon user, so can only speak for their range. I have both a D200 and a D40. For more serious photography, the D200 is superb and has pretty much any controls that you could need. The D40 is lacking a few of the controls that the D200 has, but is about half the weight and half the size and so that is the camera I more often pick up to take a quick few snaps. If you're taking it out biking, the size and weight benefits of the D40 over the D200 could also be beneficial.
If you're just starting out with a DSLR, then I would get a second hand D40 (not the D40x, as this has higher resolution but less pixel sensitivity) for a couple of hundred quid with a lens and start playing with it. Once you find how many "pro" features you are missing then make a decision to go up the range at that point.
Buying new, a D90 will do pretty much anything you could want, without being in the semi-pro price, size and weight brackets. Next up the range for me would be the D300 and if I wanted/needed full-frame then the D700 would be on the cards.
yes, except any speed above flash sync limit is effectively zero.Why so?
The flash max sync speed is the lowest speed at which the rear shutter curtain doesn't start moving until the front curtain is fully open, so I think incorrectly I thought there would be no additional delay for faster speeds, but now I've changed my mind 🙂
Because the frame rate is fixed at X fps by the sensor interface and memory, so so long as the shutter speed (and flash recharge if needed) is fast enough to fit between those points in time and does not last >166ms
no, it's a mechanical thing, how fast the camera can:
lift mirror
stop down lens
open front curtain
close rear curtain
open lens aperture
drop mirror
retract both curtains
with my D300 it can go faster with an extra battery pack as more current is available for the motors. The sensors support video at 24fps
SFB - yup, there's a mechanical limitation too but...
The sensors support video at 24fps
At VASTLY reduced resolution. Even at HD resolutions you're looking at a TINY fraction of the data processing required per frame.
But regardless, my point was that it isnt the shutter opening duration that's particularly limiting until proper long exposures are needed, and then you'd not use a burst anyway.
At VASTLY reduced resolution. Even at HD resolutions you're looking at a TINY fraction of the data processing required per frame
Yummy!
Mmmmm indeedy! Though clearly not an SLR!
I used to work with a camera that would capture normal vid at 30fps but, given the right software tweaks, run at 900fps. Unfortunately it was windowed to a 200x16 pixel area in 256 bit greyscale 🙂
Though clearly not an SLR!
No, but it can take Nikon lenses and shoot 12 megapixel RAW images at 120 fps!
T'is probably the future.
Love that sequence of shots 😀
Does anyone know of any good books, websites etc that's a good starting point in learning how to use a DSLR effectively?