shutter lag

[geoff murray]

I find the shutter lag on my present camera(A20) is very irritating .Any action shots have passed before the shutter fires.My question is, if I upgrade to a more expensive digital camera will this solve the problem,and if it does which of the more expensive cameras should I consider

[jscher2000]

geoff murray wrote:
If I upgrade to a more expensive digital camera will this solve the problem,and if it does which of the more expensive cameras should I consider
How much do you have?

When you say shutter lag, are you including the focusing time? The SLRs are quite fast in both the AF and shutter lag departments. A less expensive camera, such as G-series, that you can focus manually allows you to at least bypass the AF lag. (To do this, you use a smaller aperture to get a good depth of field, manually focus on where you expect the action to be, and then "fire when ready." ) I think the S30/40/45 also have a manual focus option.

[henkbos]

It was one of the main reasons that I went for the D60. No problems since!

[geoff murray]

I found this article which I would be very interested in your opinions..................Digital Cameras What The Sales blurb does not mention.....

Written By an American Reviewer

Today I want to talk about two of the most important things you should look at when choosing a digital camera. OK, pixels and price are probably the most important specs to consider. But two other features, almost always overlooked by product reviewers and shoppers, can make or break your picture-taking experience. I think of them as Digital Photography's Dirty Secrets.

I'm talking about the pause that occurs between the time you press the shutter button and the time the camera actually captures the image, and the time it takes to save a picture onto the memory card. The first matters because it determines whether or not you can take action pictures, the second because it defines the time you have to wait between snaps.

I HAVE SEVERAL digital cameras, which I typically use a few times each week, and a Canon EOS film camera I use maybe once a month. But if it didn't use film, the Canon would be my camera of choice.

Among its main advantages: As quickly as I press the button, the shutter fires. And the EOS has a power winder to advance the film, letting me take pictures in quick succession. That means the picture I see in the viewfinder, especially at a fast shutter speed, is what I'll see when the prints come back.

The digital cameras I've tried out all suffer from excessive shutter lag times. On the low end (which means cameras costing up to £750), you'll find models that wait as long as two seconds between the time you press the button and the time the camera responds to that command.

I ran into this problem last year at the San Francisco Grand Prix bicycle race. I was trying to get a shot of Lance Armstrong and the U.S. Postal Team as they whizzed by. Here comes Lance, he's 10 feet away, I see a nice close-up in the viewfinder, fire the shutter and--no Lance! Between the time I pressed the button and when the camera actually grabbed the image, Lance & Co. had pelted past me.

AFTER SEVERAL TRIES, I was eventually able to calibrate my shooting finger, the camera's lag time, and the speed of the cyclists. I found a spot up the road: When the riders crossed that spot, I pressed the shutter release. Most of the time the cyclists turned up somewhere near the middle of the frame.

I also ran into my second big problem with digital cameras--the time it takes them to store the image on the memory card and prepare for the next shot--that same day. If I'd tried to take two shots of the pack as they whizzed by, I wouldn't have been able to: After I'd waited my two seconds for the shutter to open and capture one image, I'd have to wait even longer for the camera to store it in memory before I could take another.

It was only because digital cameras allow immediate viewing that I was able to notice these problems at all. Had a film camera stuttered like that I would have come home from Wal-Mart with a whole bunch of absolutely useless prints; I would have felt pretty bad about returning them to the store for credit.

And it's not just a problem when you're trying to get some up-close-and-personals of cyclists going by at 30 miles an hour. It's even more frustrating when you're trying to get some candid snaps of people, when the facial expression you want to capture is usually gone before the camera can grab the image. While I learned how to predict when to press the button to get the cyclists on my digital "film," I've never been able to predict in advance when a great smile will appear.

THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE--and you aren't going to like this--is posing pictures. But if I wanted a collection of all posed pics, I'd have bought a disposa-cam rather than a £500 digital model.

None of the reviews I've seen really address these issues--at least not well enough to compare one camera to another. So it's something you'll just have to try for yourself using either a friend's camera or a demo model in a store. Every model is different, so it's important to test the precise model you want.

Testing is easy: Press the button, then see how long it takes the camera to capture an image. Try doing this with people shots, so you can see whether or not the camera captures the expression you wanted. Then see how long it takes the camera to get ready to fire again, even when you aren't using the flash.

Most people, especially those shopping at the low end of the market, will just have to learn to live with these shortcomings and shoot around them. The few cameras I've found that really solve the problem all seem to be £750-and-up "prosumer" models.

THE DIFFERENCE in lag times between the £500 and £1400 Olympus models I've tested, for example, is like night and day. I understand the same holds true of other lines as well. But since your mileage will vary, please test for yourself.

That way you can avoid the problem faced by a friend of mine who bought a popular Canon model, only to discover that the shutter stutter had ruined many of his would-be timeless images. When we discussed the problem, I told him there was a solution--but it would cost some serious money. He was too depressed even to try out one of the high-end options.

Eventually, prices will come down and we won't need to have this discussion. But for now, you can spend a lot of money for a digital camera that requires you to change the way you take photos--or a whole lot of money for one that doesn't. In either case, the results may not be what you expect. So check out those shutter-response and media-write times before you buy.

Almost no shutter lag (Canon Powershot S30)
Name:Stephen Bailey
Posted At:16:04 GMT 09/13/2002

I concur with Mr. White. We specifically purchased the S30 because it had one of the shortest shutter lags. Unfortunately, it isn't as good as a film camera. But, it is good enough to take shots of my son's soccer games.

It also has a setting for taking rapid sequences of photos.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Very Fast Digital Camera - Olympia E-100RS

Name:Alan Heigl Posted At:14:09 GMT 09/13/2002

Other than the 15fps speed, it's worth noting that the E-100RS has a time lag from shutter push to picture of up to a NEGATIVE 1.5 seconds. In other words, it starts taking shots BEFORE the shutter release is pressed!

In "pre-capture" mode, when I press my E-100RS's shutter button half-way down, it makes sure the exposure and focus have been locked in, then starts taking shots. When I press the shutter button all the way, the last (up to) five pre-shots are saved, along with the current shot (or shots, if in sequence mode).

There's no other camera like it. Not currently in production, but refurbs and new ones are available.

[slejhamer]

Geoff,

The article is correct. Also, how about the need for at least a modest amount of post-processing (e.g., sharpening)? Even images from a D30/D60 benefit significantly from "linear" Photoshopping.

On the other hand, the ability to get immediate feedback, and the almost-zero cost of taking digital photos, are unique advantages to digital. I've taken over 3,000 snaps with my G1 in the past year, and retained maybe 10% of them. The cost of film processing alone would have been more than the cost of the camera, but the ability to experiment (and delete the failed experiments with no further processing required) has certainly made me a better photographer than I was a year ago (I hope! :D)

P.S. That 15fps Oly E-100 mentioned in the article offers a whopping 1.5 megapixels. Everything has trade-offs.:(

Cheers,

[geoff murray]

Hi Mitch Happy new year................I agree with all your points.I think digital photography is fantastic but the one irritant is the shutter lag,and what I was trying to establish is at what price level would I need to go to have a digital that could be used for action shots.

[redbutt]

Canon "propaganda" would say about $4500...the EOS 1D. At 4 MP it trucks along at 8fps and has basically no shutter lag. But, I doubt that is the answer you are looking for.

;o)

[geoff murray]

is this possible on a canon................................
Interesting arcticle form Paul and I had the same problem the first weekend I owned my new Fuji FinePix S602. I went horse racing (only the third time I have been) and taking shots of the horses jumping the fences usually resulted in a shot only of the fence and the rear hooves of the horse dissappearing from view on the right hand side of the photo!! Then I went home and read the manual and found how to overcome this small problem, this camera has a continuous shooting mode (no doubt along with a few other cameras costing around £500) which allows you to either shoot up to 40 shots as long as you hold down the shutter button or alternatively you can take 25 shots at 0.2 second intervals and record either the first five or the last five frames. I have found that using these solutions allows you to select on review the ideal shot.

If anyone is thinking of buying or upgrading to a new digital camera I can highly recommend the Fuji S602, if anyone wants to see the results I can e-mail some recently taken photos.

Thanks and Seasons Greetings to all from sunny Cyprus

[electronf]

At the risk of being flamed for lack of knowledge, I think most of the problem is due to the focus time.

FYI I have a PowerShot A20 which I would have thought was towards the lower end of the range.

I spent a whole day at the track recently watching cars go around and around and figured out that if get the focus set before the cars come past (half click, orange light on- pointed at the spot where the cars will be) I can hold the button half down and when the cars appear in the viewfinder press the button. The shot is almost instantaneous and nearly exactly what I would expect. The added bonus of course is that the camera is now focussed where I want it.

[geoff murray]

Thanks very much for that I will give it a try.Don't ever think you will be flamed on this forum,in my "limited" experience everyone is very helpful.

[JohnMN]

I would just like to say that is a very good point raised by electronf and that is 'anticipation'. You must start taking your picture of the horse before it reaches the fence or jump or whatever it is trying to get over. The same applies to the racing cars, you have to select an area on the track were you anticipate the cars will be in the next second or two. Focus on that spot and click before the cars arrives there to compensate for the shutter lag. Unfortunately with different delay times on the differnet cameras, the results can be either spot on or very disapointing.

JohnMN

[DVWarrior]

I don't understand why we have to put up with shutter lag...if you half press your shutter the pic freezes why can't you have the frozen pic...these Japanese chaps are very clever but sometimes they are very illogical.
There is no reason why the frozen pic you choose could not be sent to the CF-SM card...I think it's all about SLRs and if you want shutterless D photography you got to pay big bucks.

[electronf]

No no no... you've got it all wrong... :-{

What I am saying is that you need to allow time for the camera to focus, so do it beforehand. Once you have done this you shouldn't have to anticipate the object entering the viewfinder. Just click when you see it there and you should be pretty much spot on..

The reason for most of the lag is because of the autofocus and you will find that even if you use an SLR with autofocus switched on you will still have exactly the same problem...only you will have payed big bucks for one. Buy an SLR if you need the other features, but not purely because of the 'shutter lag' on a digital.

DVWarrior: Think about it, the picture freezes for a reason...the reason is that it has to focus..however those very clever Japanese chaps have allowed you to get around the autofocus by pre focussing.

Maybe I should have it made a bit clearer (excuse the pun), but you can actually hold the button half in with the focus set for as long as you like... At the car races I do it automatically as soon as I hear the cars coming then hold it for a couple of seconds until they get to me. When I see them in the viewfinder/LCD then I click the button and hey presto...

Of course depending on the speed and your reaction time you may need to click as it enters the viewfinder/LCD. But hey these are digital cameras, experiment as much as you like 'cos it aint gonna cost you anything to delete the bad shots.