| Author | Message | ||
     Henrik |
Detailed reviews and testing here as well: http://www.imaging-resource.com Henrik | ||
| Bomber |
thanks for the tips, all -- I am in the position of needing to replace my Cannon S200 (which was more capable than I) -- it did all I could have expected, with one exception the lag between tripping the "shutter" and making the "exposure" made it darned near impossible to shoot anything in motion with any accuracy -- so, if you'll help a middleaged film-head out, what is the relevant specification I should be looking at describing this, and are there any tankbag/pocketable cameras that have good numbers in this regard? thanks | ||
| Tripper |
Bomb, the lag was the reason I avoided digital, I finally bought a Minolts Dimage Z1 because it acted almost like my SLR, and the price of $400 was in my reach. Been very happy. Fits in the tankbag, but not under a tight leather jacket.  | ||
| Henrik |
Bomber; you're referring to shutter lag. DP Review usually has numbers on that. Most pocket-able digital cameras have this. You'd most likely have to go digital SLR to (almost) get rid of it. Look here for some average times and further definitions. This is from the Canon A95 review - gets high marks for a camera for less than $300. Henrik | ||
| Dino |
Henrik - Thanks for all the good info on cameras and sites. I've been to dpreview but not imaging-resource...but I will now! Tripper - I bought an Olympus C4000Z a year or two ago that the wife immediately stole from me. It's got a long shutter lag. I guess that's due to the auto-focus sequence? If you prefocus by holding the shutter halfway it should reduce lag...though that's obviously not useful in many circumstances. My wife hangs of the back of my bike and takes tons of picture during rides. It's not uncommon to hear muffled curses coming from back there when a highway sign or a large roadside bush shows up just as the shutter finally trips. Guess I could get her one with shorter lag...but it's so entertaining! Can't speak for the other sites that Henrik mentioned (yet) but www.dcresource.com gives their take on the speed of camera operation in their reviews(time to ready after turned on, shutter lag, time to zoom across full range of focal lengths, lag between photos, etc.) One of the things that caught my eye in the review of the Sony DSC-W1 (along with great image quality) was the speed of operation. Bomber - Shutter lag is what you're referring to. Guess you and I better check out the Dimage Z1! Thanks for the tip, Trip...I hope other will post concerning their cameras with special attention to suitability for motorcycle travel (with sample photos!) Granted, the photos won't tell us much due to downsizing for the web...I'd just like to see people's favorite photos! | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
Yup used up all my good karma for the next several years it seems now. Well thatr and I picked up the Kiev for $50. Had to chase down a light leak when I got it and am now getting used to shooting with it. I still need to get a way to scan the negatives, the platten for the flatbed doesn't like the larger size and will often claim it didn't find a negative. Suppossedly I can order one from Epson. The owner of the shop that develops my medium format film for me made his own for that size so I will see if he will let me make a duplicate of his or buy the original from him. In context for the thread subject...  | ||
| Dino |
BTW, it seems like, in going thru camera reviews, I did at least one camera that could be set on continuous mode in which focus and exposure are constantly updated and shutter lag is minimized...at a cost in battery life. Sorry, don't remember what it was, sigh. | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
One thing to keep in mind with regards to digital SLR's and non-digital lenses. Using a non-digital lense (there are adaptor rings to allow the older Olympus lenses to be used between the Olympus DSLR just as there is for the EOS line to use the older Canon lenses) is that the digital camera only gets 1/2 the effective use of the lens. For instance I have tried a 28mm wideangle lens on the Canon only to loose the wide angle and most of the depth of field. Seems from what I have read a general rule of thumb is you loose the top 2 f/stops and the bottom f/stop. | ||
| Dino |
From review of Sony DSC-W1 on the imaging-resource site Henrik mentioned. Great site, BTW. "Shutter Lag and Cycle Time: Very (!) fast, particularly for a subcompact model. The DSC-W1 is a very fast little camera, with really excellent shutter response (0.30-0.60 seconds) and cycle times (a blazing 1.24 seconds/frame), as well as very quick startup and shutdown times." | ||
| Dino |
"Well that and I picked up the Kiev for $50." Yep, I think you've used yours up...hope I'm next in line. Thanks for the photo post! | ||
| Reepicheep |
For "cheap but capable" look at old Nikon Coolpix 950 models. Excellent optics, highly flexible, "enough" resolution (1200x1600). Runs on AA batteries as well, so NiMh rechargables are cheap and effective. Not perfect, but better then you would expect. Its pushing being 5 years obsolete already, but I find myself still using it day in and day out. Everytime I find a camera that could replace it, it is like $500 and up, which I have a hard time justifying as being "that much" better. Looks like they are going for the low $100 range on eBay, and doubt you could find a new $100 camera that is anywhere near as good. You won't be able to go bigger then an 8x10 print without artifacts showing up, but on the other hand, you can slap a 128mb CF card for another $30 in there and store 250 pictures at a time. | ||
| Bomber |
thanks, all, for the data -- I'm being fragged into the later part of the 20th century here, and your assistance cuts down considerable on the pain! | ||
| Dino |
Bomber - Glad to be of assistance. I'm inclined to agree with your assessment. Most any of the compact cameras from the major makers do way more than most people will ever ask of them. You just have to be careful of unforeseen drawbacks like shutter lag that can make a big difference in usability. Different photographers will have different concerns as to available features that will point to one model or another. Even the little point and shoot Olympus I used for the images above coulda done a much better job if I'd known how to use it properly. Keep me informed as to the progress of your search...here or by e-mail. Dino | ||
| Ebear |
Hey , Dino,Thanks for the mention...Yes , I have been lurking arond this thread and watching all the great info everyone has thrown up to assist Bomber.All these points of interest are valid ,however some of the most irritating ones are being taken care of finally by these manufacturers.The top one most people bring up to me are as you'all have discussed are Lag Time.As Dino pointed out people think lag is a function of the particular camera.To a degree it is because of the time it takes to write the pic to the memory card.This is only a third of it.The only way to correctly test "write to speed" is at a manual focus setting.If you have the time, you need to compose your picture,hold button down halfway untill focus is set and then press the rest of the way till your sounder beeps or the 'active' light has lit,showing you that the CCD buffer is writing to the memory card.Some people are fooled into thinking their camera is slow because they press the button without awaiting the autofocus to do its job.This will cause the camera to slowly seek the focus zone and servo drive the lens to correct focus thusly drive you crazy not knowing why the damn thing hasn't shot the picture yet!This time will vary also by 'Shutter Speed' ,Quality setting',and 'Memory card access speed' on cameras with small or no buffer.The way this has been improved on better cameras is to increase the buffer size(built in memory between the CCD and the memory card).My Canon D10 has enough buffer that I can take 9 pictures in about 2 seconds and the buffer will write it to card in about the time it takes most cameras to write 1 picture!Access speed of the memory card is then far less important.Focus speed is a function of this issue and dependent on the complexity of the shot,quality of the lens and the cameras active focus zone.On true SLR Digitals you are driving a motor to drive the lens barrel and this can be slow.The Canon Ultrasonic lenses are super fast and quiet and can run their entire focus length in tenths of a second.The D10 I use has a 6.3 megapixel rating.The new D20 has a 8 mp rating ,however as someone mentioned this isn,t necessarily better!As was mentioned the 6.3 is working better and I believe because with that many pixels on a CCD of the same physical size you start getting more noise and no better usable resolution.I believe the Pro 1 is also this way.I use an S1 Is Canon as my motorcycle camera.Just a tad too big for most pockets but carried on my side it is more accesible and is always with me.This Canon can shoot about 4-5 shots in a row before downloading and has an incredible 10X optical zoom equal to about 37-370mm. | ||
| Bomber |
my experience is limited to one digicam (Cannon), but the lens-created zooming was fine, while the digital zooming had the imaging falling apart in no time -- I'm thinkin I need a little bit better kit next time around | ||
| Ebear |
Bomber...Digital zooming is'nt really zoom.The camera is cropping and enlarging the pixels to make it appear as if it is actually seeing closer.This is why the images appear stretched or grainy.The true zoom can only be done optically. Most lenses are only 3X.To create a lense that can zoom 10x or so requires some room and element size so the image will fall on the CCD in a clear and bright manner without a lot of edge degradation.The CCD in most digital cameras is 1/3 or 1/4 of an inch square and so any issues from lens quality really stand out.The CCD(imager)on the Canon SLR line(Rebel,D10,D20,,D60 etc)isn't big enough to accept the entire image being cast on it by the removable lense.This is why when you read the Specs for these and other Dig SLR's they say they have a 1.6 conversion factor.This means that a 28mm lens from a 35mm film camera will appear as a 43mm field of view through your Digital SLR.Since the edges of the image are cut off and dont fall on the imager inside the camera you need a wider angle lens to achieve the field of view of the original lens.A Canon D1 , which is their Professional Digital camera has a physically larger imager and so there is no loss,I.E. the image falls on an imager that is the same size that 35mm film has(24mm X 36mm).Thusly for only about $7000 you get a 1 to 1 image.These cameras are about 11 megapixels and I lust for one!But other than that issue these cameras are incredible!I have complete control of every function possible with a film camera and can see the difference real time!!The special effects you can create are so easy and fun it gets you all excited again about capturing images.!!The Canon SI IS I use also has Image Stabilization.(thus the IS!)For anything over about 3-5X zoom this can be really handy.It uses 2 gyroscopes mounted in the camera(in the lens on the SLR)that actually move an element in the lens to correct the movement of the image.One of the gyros can be turned off for panning. | ||
| Bomber |
Bear -- ya got my head spinning -- I'd figured out the zoom stuff, but was no where near all the data you've dumped (as often happens, when I reveal my ignorance on this board, I find I'm drinking form a firehose with all the great incoming data!) I'm beginning to miss my IIId Leica! ;-} | ||
| Ebear |
      | ||
| Dino |
Geez, just when I'm getting my digital photo equipment lust under some semblance of control, Ebear goes and posts pic like that! Cruel...very cruel. Next he'll prolly post pics of sexy, red Aprilias. | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
There is only one thing in that collection of pics that insites lust within my eyes...and lets just say its long and white and screaming to be fondled...goes to get a wetnap | ||
| Dino |
You're not the only one jealous of that lens, Wycked. Ebear's S1-IS is also a bit green.  | ||
| Ebear |
Guh-DIE , MATE...Guh-DIE...!  | ||
| Usroute66 |
Dino and Bomber...I really like my little Nikon Coolpix 2100. This is the same camera Jerry (aka Ferris) used on his cross country trip. I just love mine, and for the money ($150 or less) it is a great starter camera. I would suggest getting a 256K card and a good battery recharger...I use the Monster Power Digital Charger. Good Luck! | ||
| Dino |
Hey Ebear...just so you don't think that you're the only one here with some high-zoot, state of the art photo equipment...check these babies out!  | ||
| Ebear |
Very,VERY Cool Dino!!!!!But NOW you've started something!!!.....(just wait till I get home!)  | ||
| Dino |
Ebear...shot across your bow...   Now don't make me get out the BIG guns!  | ||
| Ebear |
No Fair!!!I cant do ANYTHING from work!!! So what..???Are you retired?like Ferris?? | ||
| Jerry_haughton |
hey, i resemble that remark!!! | ||
| Dino |
Nope, just happened to have that image on my laptop 'cause I'd been sharing old camera stories with Bomber, who used to have a Leica IIId, and sold it! His one-time IIId caused me to unearth and shoot this:  | ||
| Dino |
What are you doin' here, Ferris. Shouldn't you be working! I'm telling d. |
