Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Steve, Nov 7, 2008.

  1. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:57:24 -0600, Hank Thomas
    <> wrote:

    >>speed can also influence the cycle time, adding another delay. All
    >>this means that "Live View" is actually delayed view. Often this
    >>delay is longer than 100 milliseconds, and that means when you
    >>press the shutter the subject is in a slightly different position
    >>than what you see on the LCD screen. This is another factor in fast
    >>action photography and why those who do such photography usually choose
    >>an optical viewfinder. But it is not the main factor. The main factor
    >>is predictive autofocus.

    >
    >LOL!! He doesn't even know how to use live-view nor how it works. The only "lag"
    >is the EVF/LCD refresh rate, which is 60 to 120 fps or faster. The live-view is


    Thank you for revealing once again that when it comes to the real
    facts about cameras, you have no idea what you're talking about.

    You can see the effects of live view lag on high pixel count cameras
    easily, and it's much greater than the LCD refresh rate. Just point
    the camera at something and then move sharply and you'll see the
    movement on the LCD image is delayed from when you actually moved the
    camera.

    This delay is so low as to be not noticable with my old 4MP P&S. But
    I just tried it in Best Buy with a whole slew of 10MP P&S and even the
    live view on two DSLRs and the delay is noticable to some degree or
    another.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Nov 7, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <>, Steve says...
    >>
    >> You can see the effects of live view lag on high pixel count cameras
    >> easily, and it's much greater than the LCD refresh rate.

    >
    > It's not. I have two live view cameras (Olympus 8080 and Sony R1)
    > which have no noticeable delay in live view.
    >
    >> Just point
    >> the camera at something and then move sharply and you'll see the
    >> movement on the LCD image is delayed from when you actually moved the
    >> camera.

    >
    > Only a few cameras have a feature which simulates the shutter lag, but
    > you can turn that off.


    This isn't an emulation, Alfred, this is a delay between the sensing and
    the display of the image. I've seen this in may compact cameras, and it's
    most noticeable at low ambient light levels when the image from the sensor
    has to have an exposure of a significant fraction of a second. It seems
    that some compact cameras integrate the image either on the sensor or
    between sensor and display to produce an acceptable display in these
    low-light conditions. The lag is then very noticeable.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 7, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Steve

    franko Guest

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:37:41 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <-this-part.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:

    >Alfred Molon wrote:
    >> In article <>, Steve says...
    >>>
    >>> You can see the effects of live view lag on high pixel count cameras
    >>> easily, and it's much greater than the LCD refresh rate.

    >>
    >> It's not. I have two live view cameras (Olympus 8080 and Sony R1)
    >> which have no noticeable delay in live view.
    >>
    >>> Just point
    >>> the camera at something and then move sharply and you'll see the
    >>> movement on the LCD image is delayed from when you actually moved the
    >>> camera.

    >>
    >> Only a few cameras have a feature which simulates the shutter lag, but
    >> you can turn that off.

    >
    >This isn't an emulation, Alfred, this is a delay between the sensing and
    >the display of the image. I've seen this in may compact cameras, and it's
    >most noticeable at low ambient light levels when the image from the sensor
    >has to have an exposure of a significant fraction of a second. It seems
    >that some compact cameras integrate the image either on the sensor or
    >between sensor and display to produce an acceptable display in these
    >low-light conditions. The lag is then very noticeable.
    >
    >David


    You missed some important information (reposted below). Without this information
    in your mind you keep appearing to be nothing but another of the many
    virtual-photographer (or sub-amateur) trolls around here.


    >> Live View drag

    >
    >This is such a huge misnomer. There really is no such thing as "live view drag"
    >in any camera with an EVF/LCD system these days. A true live-view delay will
    >never be more than about 1/60th of a second, and in many cameras much faster
    >than that as a minimum, far shorter than any human perception. This is the
    >refresh rate of the EVF/LCD display.
    >
    >What you are experiencing as "live view drag" is the live-view recreating the
    >shutter-speed in real time. This is how an EVF/LCD viewfinder is able to
    >accurately represent those soft moving-water effects at slow shutter speeds and
    >stop-motion flapping bird wing images at high shutter speeds. The reason this
    >"live-view drag" has become a mantra of those with less experience is that they
    >test their P&S camera in the store. Never once realizing that the slower shutter
    >speed used indoors is what causes this perceived "live view drag".
    >
    >For the experienced/advanced photographer that has come to understand the vast
    >benefits they wouldn't buy any camera without this feature. Having what you call
    >this "live view drag" is even more important to someone like me than being able
    >to use a bright DOF preview (as also exists on all P&S cameras). I want to
    >instantly see what happens to the final capture of my moving subjects as I
    >change shutter speeds. I enjoy having that instantaneous film-to-print preview
    >in real-time as I frame my shots.
    >
    >D-SLR owners who have never had this great feature all their lives won't
    >recognize it for what it is, nor will they understand how to make use of it.
    >They at first, wrongly and ignorantly, consider this some kind of drawback
    >instead of the great asset that it is. Until they finally learn on their own.
    >This is why "live view" is becoming more commonplace in D-SLRs, to slowly
    >introduce them to the vast benefits that P&S cameras have had for a decade.
    >
    >The mindless D-SLR owner/buyer/promoter will eventually figure it out, one day.
    >But then, come to think of it, the D-SLR owner lost use of something as simple
    >as having a bright DOF preview (as used to exist in better SLRs of the past, and
    >still exists on all P&S cameras). They don't consider that any great loss nor
    >even realize why its important. Some will just never figure it out.
     
    franko, Nov 7, 2008
    #3
  4. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <9hZQk.84156$>, David J
    > Taylor says...
    >> Alfred Molon wrote:
    >>> In article <>, Steve
    >>> says...
    >>>>
    >>>> You can see the effects of live view lag on high pixel count
    >>>> cameras easily, and it's much greater than the LCD refresh rate.
    >>>
    >>> It's not. I have two live view cameras (Olympus 8080 and Sony R1)
    >>> which have no noticeable delay in live view.
    >>>
    >>>> Just point
    >>>> the camera at something and then move sharply and you'll see the
    >>>> movement on the LCD image is delayed from when you actually moved
    >>>> the camera.
    >>>
    >>> Only a few cameras have a feature which simulates the shutter lag,
    >>> but you can turn that off.

    >>
    >> This isn't an emulation, Alfred, this is a delay between the sensing
    >> and the display of the image. I've seen this in may compact
    >> cameras, and it's most noticeable at low ambient light levels when
    >> the image from the sensor has to have an exposure of a significant
    >> fraction of a second. It seems that some compact cameras integrate
    >> the image either on the sensor or between sensor and display to
    >> produce an acceptable display in these low-light conditions. The
    >> lag is then very noticeable.

    >
    > As I wrote, you can turn this emulation off, if you choose to do so.


    Not on the cameras I was testing - there is no such emulation.

    How much lag do you see in low-light, with the shutter speed set to, for
    example, 1/1000s?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 7, 2008
    #4
  5. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <pm2Rk.84289$>, David J
    > Taylor says...
    >
    >> How much lag do you see in low-light, with the shutter speed set to,
    >> for example, 1/1000s?

    >
    > In that case you see no shutter lag (well, I can speak for the Olympus
    > 8080 and Sony R1).


    Perhaps you're lucky. I've just tried all the compact cameras in the
    house, and they /all/ show blurring when they are rotated in a dark
    environment - as if you were panning. Most of them, with the exception of
    the Nikon 8400, also show a very perceptible lag between what's happening
    in from of the lens, and what is shown in the LCD. Just wave your hand in
    front of the camera to see this happening. In some of the cameras, the
    lag was even perceptible with the scene in broad sunlight.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 8, 2008
    #5
  6. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <pceRk.84476$>, David J
    > Taylor says...
    >
    >> Perhaps you're lucky. I've just tried all the compact cameras in the
    >> house, and they /all/ show blurring when they are rotated in a dark
    >> environment - as if you were panning.

    >
    > Have you tried setting them to a short exposure time, for instance
    > 1/100s? It would seem that the motion blur emulation was activated
    > with your cameras.


    I tried that by setting the flash to "on", and it made no difference on
    most cameras. With the Panasonic FZ20, setting the exposure to 1/1000s
    resulted in the display being invisible in dark conditions, with the Nikon
    8400 the lag and blurring were unchanged at 1/3000s exposure. In the very
    low light, the sensor needs a longer exposure to create a sufficiently
    acceptable image for display.

    Of more concern, to be honest, was the visible delay between the subject
    movement and the movement portrayed on the LCD display. This was
    noticeable even in bright lighting conditions on some of the cameras.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 8, 2008
    #6
    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. Eric Stevens

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    Eric Stevens, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    274
  2. Don Stauffer

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    Don Stauffer, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    410
    dj_nme
    Nov 9, 2008
  3. Jürgen Exner

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    Jürgen Exner, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    28
    Views:
    855
  4. SMS

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    SMS, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    310
    Me Here
    Nov 7, 2008
  5. RichA

    Why DSLR mirrors must eventually go

    RichA, Apr 21, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    46
    Views:
    1,331
    John A.
    Jul 31, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page