Olympus C 8080 autofocus and shutter lag performance

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bill A, Jul 8, 2004.

  1. Bill A

    Bill A Guest

    Can anyone comment on the speed of the Olympus for action photography.
    I need to know if it is fast enough to capture say a fast mvoing
    mountain bike coming towards the camera. What is the autofocus speed
    like ? Is there much shutter lag. I've read most reviews regardgin
    these 2 figures, they put that combination in the .5 - .6 second range
    which is certainly a lot quicker than my c740 !!
    In a nutshell, what is it like in a point and shoot situation ?
     
    Bill A, Jul 8, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In article <>,
    (Bill A) wrote:

    > Can anyone comment on the speed of the Olympus for action photography.
    > I need to know if it is fast enough to capture say a fast mvoing
    > mountain bike coming towards the camera. What is the autofocus speed
    > like ? Is there much shutter lag. I've read most reviews regardgin
    > these 2 figures, they put that combination in the .5 - .6 second range
    > which is certainly a lot quicker than my c740 !!
    > In a nutshell, what is it like in a point and shoot situation ?


    ..5 seconds probably assumes bright lighting and no motion. A moving
    mountain bike will probably cause autofocus to take much longer or fail.
    Put your C740 on a tripod and I bet it can focus in .5 seconds too.

    Consider a DSLR and a lens with an ultrasonic motor. SLR cameras use a
    focusing mechanism that instantly determines the focus error and makes a
    correction in a single jump. You can manually turn the focus dial to
    where you expect your target to appear. When it's time to shoot, the
    focus locks with only a small jump. Total lag time is about .1 to .2
    seconds. It won't be confused by moving objects either.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Jul 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. << Can anyone comment on the speed of the Olympus for action photography. >>

    Bill-

    A friend at work briefly let me try the 8080. It was definitely faster than my
    C-3040Z, but still not as fast as I would like. (Other than the slight delay,
    it is an outstanding camera.)

    Now, consider a DSLR (your choice). Guess what - it takes time to focus. It
    may be faster than most non-SLRs, but you can imagine a situation where it
    isn't fast enough. The ultimate problem is not the fact it is digital. It is
    the fact that autofocus is not instantaneous, at least not for the current
    state-of-the-art. (Maybe a pinhole camera?)

    What to do? Before autofocus arrived, you had to either manually pre-focus or
    set the distance scale to the estimated distance. If your camera has a manual
    focus option, you can try either. The trouble is that autofocus cameras do not
    usually provide support for manual focus. There usually is no split-image or
    microprism, and there may not even be a ground glass area in the viewfinder.

    I think the bottom line is that whatever camera you have, you have to learn its
    shortcomings and deal with them. In the case of my C-3040Z, I learned to
    prefocus, so the actual exposure was nearly instantaneous. Now, with a newer
    Canon Digital Rebel, I still find myself pre-focusing, but primarily because I
    don't always agree with the spot the camera chooses to focus on.

    Fred
     
    Fred McKenzie, Jul 10, 2004
    #3
  4. Kevin McMurtrie <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > In article <>,
    > (Bill A) wrote:
    >
    > > Can anyone comment on the speed of the Olympus for action photography.
    > > I need to know if it is fast enough to capture say a fast mvoing
    > > mountain bike coming towards the camera. What is the autofocus speed
    > > like ? Is there much shutter lag. I've read most reviews regardgin
    > > these 2 figures, they put that combination in the .5 - .6 second range
    > > which is certainly a lot quicker than my c740 !!
    > > In a nutshell, what is it like in a point and shoot situation ?

    >
    > .5 seconds probably assumes bright lighting and no motion. A moving
    > mountain bike will probably cause autofocus to take much longer or fail.
    > Put your C740 on a tripod and I bet it can focus in .5 seconds too.
    >
    > Consider a DSLR and a lens with an ultrasonic motor. SLR cameras use a
    > focusing mechanism that instantly determines the focus error and makes a
    > correction in a single jump. You can manually turn the focus dial to
    > where you expect your target to appear. When it's time to shoot, the
    > focus locks with only a small jump. Total lag time is about .1 to .2
    > seconds. It won't be confused by moving objects either.


    That's pretty optimistic. DSLR motion prediction modes don't take
    into account acceleration. How many times is something moving at a
    perfectly constant rate in a perfectly singular direction while you
    focus? Maybe a train would work ok. But natural action shots?
    Hardly.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jul 11, 2004
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    (Fred McKenzie) wrote:

    > << Can anyone comment on the speed of the Olympus for action photography. >>
    >
    > Bill-
    >
    > A friend at work briefly let me try the 8080. It was definitely faster than
    > my
    > C-3040Z, but still not as fast as I would like. (Other than the slight
    > delay,
    > it is an outstanding camera.)
    >
    > Now, consider a DSLR (your choice). Guess what - it takes time to focus. It
    > may be faster than most non-SLRs, but you can imagine a situation where it
    > isn't fast enough. The ultimate problem is not the fact it is digital. It
    > is
    > the fact that autofocus is not instantaneous, at least not for the current
    > state-of-the-art. (Maybe a pinhole camera?)
    >
    > What to do? Before autofocus arrived, you had to either manually pre-focus
    > or
    > set the distance scale to the estimated distance. If your camera has a
    > manual
    > focus option, you can try either. The trouble is that autofocus cameras do
    > not
    > usually provide support for manual focus. There usually is no split-image or
    > microprism, and there may not even be a ground glass area in the viewfinder.
    >
    > I think the bottom line is that whatever camera you have, you have to learn
    > its
    > shortcomings and deal with them. In the case of my C-3040Z, I learned to
    > prefocus, so the actual exposure was nearly instantaneous. Now, with a newer
    > Canon Digital Rebel, I still find myself pre-focusing, but primarily because
    > I
    > don't always agree with the spot the camera chooses to focus on.
    >
    > Fred



    The Digital Rebel lets you focus manually and automatically at the same
    time if you have the USM lenses. It's handy if you want to focus
    through a fence or some vegetation. Crank the focus ring to the next
    field of focus and then the AF will lock on to it. It's also about the
    only way you can make multiple AF zones work. It helps focusing in
    darkness too.

    The USM lenses are a lot faster than the kit lens. The kit lens
    sometimes gets twitchy because the gears are so slack.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Jul 11, 2004
    #5
  6. Bill A

    Bill A Guest

    Kevin McMurtrie <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > In article <>,
    > (Fred McKenzie) wrote:
    >
    >>

    >
    > The Digital Rebel lets you focus manually and automatically at the same
    > time if you have the USM lenses. It's handy if you want to focus
    > through a fence or some vegetation. Crank the focus ring to the next
    > field of focus and then the AF will lock on to it. It's also about the
    > only way you can make multiple AF zones work. It helps focusing in
    > darkness too.
    >
    > The USM lenses are a lot faster than the kit lens. The kit lens
    > sometimes gets twitchy because the gears are so slack.



    Sounds like the Digital Rebel might be the way to go (as opposed to
    the C8080 and Sony F828)
    How much of a difference does a usm zoom lens make to camera
    repsonsiveness as compared to putting on a cheap lens such as a Tamrom
    28-300mm ??
    Primarily I want to be able to capture windsurfers (usually a fair way
    away from the camera, Im guesstimating about 100-200 metres) at the
    optimum moment e.g. when they are jumping etc. (Also mountain bikes
    as mentioned a my earlier post, and jumping border collies :) !!)
    I have considered a film camera - say the Canon EOS 33 with an
    accompanying lens; that boasts 4 fps. Whichever camera I use, it
    would proably be in the telephoto postion most of the time, which I
    believe further slows responsiveness down.
     
    Bill A, Jul 11, 2004
    #6
  7. << How much of a difference does a usm zoom lens make to camera
    repsonsiveness as compared to putting on a cheap lens such as a Tamrom
    28-300mm ?? >>

    Bill-

    I have one lens that is Ultrasonic, but wasn't aware its focus could be
    "nudged". I didn't notice that it was any faster in focusing either. I think
    the main reason to choose the Ultrasonic lens is to get higher quality.

    If you go for either film or digital Rebel, I recommend you NOT get such a
    wide-range zoom as the Tamron. Use a wide-to-near telephoto lens such as the
    digital Rebel's kit lens for "normal" photography, and get a better telephoto
    zoom for your action shots.

    You may be hard pressed to find a sharper Canon lens than the Olympus lens
    supplied with the C-8080, but you can find them with wider apertures. That
    equates to faster shutter speeds and less motion blur, which is critical at
    longer focal lengths.

    As far as choosing between a film and a digital Rebel, consider whether you
    want the image to be in digital format or not. The film camera probably will
    permit a large number of rapid exposures, while the digital Rebel has a limited
    buffer. When the buffer fills, you have to wait before taking another photo.
    (I think the more expensive models also have larger buffers.)

    On the other hand, converting film to digital entails an additional imaging
    process that can degrade the resulting photograph. Then, what happens if you
    want a print several years from now? I recently dug out some ten-year-old
    negatives, but found they had degraded to the point where new prints were
    almost unusable. They had somehow reacted with the glassine sleeves, messing
    up the surface of the emulsion. As much as I hate to abandon my wonderful film
    camera collection, I doubt I'll take many more film photographs!

    Fred
     
    Fred McKenzie, Jul 11, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim Spencer

    Olympus C-50 Shutter Lag

    Jim Spencer, Nov 9, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    363
    Jim Spencer
    Nov 9, 2003
  2. Mark Stephen

    Canon s400 and shutter lag ?

    Mark Stephen, Dec 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    375
  3. Ronald H. Nicholson Jr.

    fastest consumer autofocus+shutter delay?

    Ronald H. Nicholson Jr., May 4, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,934
  4. Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)

    Need a low shutter lag point and shoot digital

    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Nov 14, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    832
    T.N.T.
    Dec 14, 2004
  5. Bryn James

    Simple way of estimating shutter and focus lag

    Bryn James, Dec 7, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    531
    Olin K. McDaniel
    Dec 16, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page