[jhb] Re: Another OT
- From: "bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
- To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 04:33:06 +0100
I've noticed a variation between the manual figures and what the camera
says. The manual says buffer capacity is 100 for all JPG settings except
JPEG Fine and Large but if you run through the S/M/L and JPEG Fine/Normal
and Basic options you find the camera reports much lower values. The highest
I could get my buffer up to was with JPEG Basic and Small - capacity was 71
- but actual number of shots available was off the scale at over 1000 on a
1Mb card. I think JPEG Basic and Medium gave 868 pictures but I would never
step down to that quality.
I was pleased with this one today -
http://homepages.mcb.net/bones/WebPix/Gull3.jpg. I was by the upper harbour
in Castletown just playing with the camera and this gull dived over the
water and then pulled up sharply. It was going like a train as it passed
about 15ft away from me and I didn't think the AF would keep up with it even
though set on Continuous - but it did. Pity it was just a bloody gull. <g>
bones
-----Original Message-----
From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 14 July 2007 20:30
To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb] Re: Another OT
It's easy to overlook write speed. I saw a prog a couple of weeks ago,
where three non digital pros were given digitals to try. One was
shooting interiors, in RAW. He had to keep apologising for the delays
between shots, whilst it wrote to card.
Read an article where a girl from SLR Mag accompanied a sports pro to a
premier league game. They laughed when they saw her shooting RAW. The
sports pros said it was too slow and for press purposes JPEG was plenty
good enough.
I was chuffed to find the pro success rate is very low, at something
like one in eight, if memory serves.
Gerry Winskill
bones wrote:
>Looks like two separate issues are being discussed here. Shot count is
>standard with any camera but the buffer indication on the trigger seems
>to be a facility related to the D50 and D80. Buffer overflow is 100 on
>all the camera but this is specific to image quality. On the D80 all
>JPG formats can go up to 100 but it's the RAW settings that start
>dropping the count down.
>
>bones
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of franklyn fisher
>Sent: 14 July 2007 19:22
>To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [jhb] Re: Another OT
>
>
>No Frank. It relates to the speed of writing to and the speed of
>clearing from the INTERNAL buffer to the memory card.
>
>Mike
>
>The 520 count goes down with each shot taken, this is the max number
>for the
>
>card and setting, obviously switching to a higher pixel count, the
>less the
>
>number of shots.
>
>Despite being a 6mp camera, I usually only print postcard size, and can
>print A3 without degradation. So a 10mp camera (with regard to the
>extra
>cost) would be wasted. Would loved to have got the D40X. But with only the
>one lens in the box, and ���£200.00 dearer, I opted
> for this one. (D40 with 18-55 and 55-200 lens)
>
>For continous shot mode, I can get up to 100, before buffer overflow, a
>bit OTT anyway, I would have to hold the button down for at least 30
>seconds. Quicker to keep pushing. Response is a lot faster than my old
>5mp Konica compact.
>
>Frank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
