«

By reading the press and searching into this forum history I got a fact:
SLR systems are faster: meaning they have shorter shutter lag.

So far I have had a few camera the latest being a coolpix SQ, the
shutter lag is so long that I am considering investing into an SLR
camera Nikon 70 or Canon 350 for example. (I am talking about the lag
with pre-focus)

What I don't understand is why SLR are faster? in fact they need to move
the mirror/prism so they should be even slower.

Is it just the price or is there a technical reason because of which you
cannot have a faster sensor when you also use it to visualize the image
in real time. Is there a time to reconfigure the sensor from the
vizualisation mode to the shooting mode?

I don't want an SLR, I would preffer a bridge (smaller, 10x zoom is fine
with me I don't need to change lenses, most of the time I prefer the
screen rather than the viewfinder - By the way my SQ have no viewfinder).

If some vendor could build a bridge with a good latency I would buy it
immediatly even at the price of a SLR.

Do I have a chance to see a bridge with good latency any time soon?

By the way do you know a good site or magazine with a comparison of
shutter lag.

Thanks for your advise.
Antoine

Antoine Garric wrote:
> By reading the press and searching into this forum history I got a
> fact: SLR systems are faster: meaning they have shorter shutter lag.
>
> So far I have had a few camera the latest being a coolpix SQ, the
> shutter lag is so long that I am considering investing into an SLR
> camera Nikon 70 or Canon 350 for example. (I am talking about the lag
> with pre-focus)
>
> What I don't understand is why SLR are faster? in fact they need to
> move the mirror/prism so they should be even slower.
>

They are just using newer faster technology. It is starting to filter
down to the P&S cameras.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia's Muire duit

Antoine Garric wrote:
> By reading the press and searching into this forum history I got a
fact:
> SLR systems are faster: meaning they have shorter shutter lag.
>
> So far I have had a few camera the latest being a coolpix SQ, the
> shutter lag is so long that I am considering investing into an SLR
> camera Nikon 70 or Canon 350 for example. (I am talking about the lag

> with pre-focus)
>
> What I don't understand is why SLR are faster? in fact they need to
move
> the mirror/prism so they should be even slower.
>
> Is it just the price or is there a technical reason because of which
you
> cannot have a faster sensor when you also use it to visualize the
image
> in real time. Is there a time to reconfigure the sensor from the
> vizualisation mode to the shooting mode?
>
> I don't want an SLR, I would preffer a bridge (smaller, 10x zoom is
fine
> with me I don't need to change lenses, most of the time I prefer the
> screen rather than the viewfinder - By the way my SQ have no
viewfinder).
>
> If some vendor could build a bridge with a good latency I would buy
it
> immediatly even at the price of a SLR.
>
> Do I have a chance to see a bridge with good latency any time soon?
>
> By the way do you know a good site or magazine with a comparison of
> shutter lag.
>
> Thanks for your advise.
> Antoine


www.dpreview.com

a écrit :

>
>
> www.dpreview.com
>

Thanks for your swift answer. I looked at this site and did not find
mention of latency/lag for example I browsed the 2o page review of the
Canon 350D and didn't find it. Any specific page to look at?

Thanks,
Antoine

Antoine Garric wrote:
> By reading the press and searching into this forum history I got a
fact:
> SLR systems are faster: meaning they have shorter shutter lag.
>
> So far I have had a few camera the latest being a coolpix SQ, the
> shutter lag is so long that I am considering investing into an SLR
> camera Nikon 70 or Canon 350 for example. (I am talking about the lag

> with pre-focus)
>
> What I don't understand is why SLR are faster? in fact they need to
move
> the mirror/prism so they should be even slower.
>
> Is it just the price or is there a technical reason because of which
you
> cannot have a faster sensor when you also use it to visualize the
image
> in real time. Is there a time to reconfigure the sensor from the
> vizualisation mode to the shooting mode?
>
> I don't want an SLR, I would preffer a bridge (smaller, 10x zoom is
fine
> with me I don't need to change lenses, most of the time I prefer the
> screen rather than the viewfinder - By the way my SQ have no
viewfinder).
>
> If some vendor could build a bridge with a good latency I would buy
it
> immediatly even at the price of a SLR.
>
> Do I have a chance to see a bridge with good latency any time soon?
>
> By the way do you know a good site or magazine with a comparison of
> shutter lag.
>
> Thanks for your advise.
> Antoine

An SLR, digital or film, auto-focuses with small sensors that get a bit
of the image from a beam splitter, these small sensors can be very
fast. A P&S uses the image coming from the imaging chip, which takes
much longer to read out, this limits haw fast the auto-focus can be on
a P&S.

If you pre-focus a good P&S there will be very little shutter lag, less
then an SLR.

Scott

Antoine Garric <> writes:
> Is it just the price or is there a technical reason because of which
> you cannot have a faster sensor when you also use it to visualize the
> image in real time. Is there a time to reconfigure the sensor from the
> vizualisation mode to the shooting mode?

The reason is that consumer point-and-shoot digicams usually use the
same CCD to both autofocus and actually capture the image. That makes
the AF rather slow. Cheap 35mm point-and-shoot cameras don't do that.
They use an infrared sensor for autofocus and use film to capture the
image, so they're faster than point-and-shoot digicams. Film SLR's
and DSLR's have AF sensors as part of the viewfinder system, so again,
they are fast.

The Ricoh Caplio R1 and some of its successors are built like 35mm
cameras so they don't have the shutter lag of typical p/s digicams.
I don't know why all digicams aren't made like that, except to save
a few cheap electronic components.

Paul Rubin wrote:
[]
> The Ricoh Caplio R1 and some of its successors are built like 35mm
> cameras so they don't have the shutter lag of typical p/s digicams.
> I don't know why all digicams aren't made like that, except to save
> a few cheap electronic components.

The Nikon 8400 has both a focus sensor and can use CCD focus if needs be.
This combination makes it fast in use.

David

"David J Taylor" <david-> writes:
> The Nikon 8400 has both a focus sensor and can use CCD focus if needs be.
> This combination makes it fast in use.

Oh great, they're couthing up then. Is that an IR sensor? Nikons
used to be awful at low light focusing.

Paul Rubin wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> <david-> writes:
>> The Nikon 8400 has both a focus sensor and can use CCD focus if
>> needs be. This combination makes it fast in use.
>
> Oh great, they're couthing up then. Is that an IR sensor? Nikons
> used to be awful at low light focusing.

I believe it's an IR sensor, although the specifications in the manual say
"AF sensor" and even DP Review just says "external sensor". Behind the
glass plate on the camera there look to be two further lenses:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Niko...lroundview.jpg

above the gold "8.0 megapixels ED" logo.

David

Antoine Garric <> writes:

>What I don't understand is why SLR are faster? in fact they need to move
>the mirror/prism so they should be even slower.

>Is it just the price or is there a technical reason because of which you
>cannot have a faster sensor when you also use it to visualize the image
>in real time. Is there a time to reconfigure the sensor from the
>vizualisation mode to the shooting mode?

There are two factors at work: autofocus and LCD preview.

DSLRs use phase-measuring autofocus systems that have extra optics and
CCDs that are optimized for focus only. This makes them fast at
focusing. From a single measurement, the camera knows which direction
and approximately how far to move the focus motor, even before the motor
starts moving.

Most P&S digicams use a simple contrast-measuring autofocus system that
requires them to repeatedly read images from the sensor while
(relatively) slowly moving the lens through a range of focus positions.
This is cheap (no extra hardware), but slow. A few P&S cameras have
external autofocus systems like P&S film cameras, so they can be faster.

In addition, it takes a bit of time to reconfigure the camera from "live
preview" to "picture taking" mode. The shutter is open during preview,
so it has to close. Then the CCD is cleared (by reading it out
rapidly). Only then can the shutter open and close for the actual
exposure. In comparison, in a DSLR the sensor is normally in the dark
and can be kept cleared. When you want to shoot, the mirror flipping up
is the only delay.

Some P&S digicams can be made to operate noticeably faster by (a)
switching to manual focus so there's no autofocus delay and (b) turning
off the LCD preview, which allows the shutter to remain closed.

Dave