Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
I can't find it either but is is similar to the D70 and 300D and has
virtually no shutter lag, the Ds is not "slow" unless perhaps comparing it
to a D1.
"Archie" <Archie@Hatespam.com> wrote in message
news:2gae41litrr5ljrummhtf6cvdguqr81ru4@4ax.com...
> I've searched the web for the shutter lag time in SECONDS for the *ist
> DS, with autofocus on, and can't find this info.
>
> Some places say there is no noticeable lag, some that the *ist is
> "slow"... but nobody has posted an actual delay time in seconds or
> milliseconds.
>
> The D70 and Digital Rebel are also often described as having virtually
> no shutter lag, but in fact when measured it is around 250-490
> milliseconds.
>
> So if you have this info, pls post.
>
> A.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"CyaD" <CyaD@(news)btinternet.com> wrote in message
news28m0c$2f7$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>
> (snip)
>
> some figures are given here:
>
> http://www.steves-digicams.com/200 [...] s_pg7.html >
> (rounded to the nearest 0.1 sec)
>
> It is said to be similar to the D70, and faster than the 300D.
>
> C
Thanks.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:BcR1e.15589$C7.10595@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "CyaD" <CyaD@(news)btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news28m0c$2f7$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>> some figures are given here:
>>
>> http://www.steves-digicams.com/200 [...] s_pg7.html >>
>> (rounded to the nearest 0.1 sec)
>>
>> It is said to be similar to the D70, and faster than the 300D.
>>
>> C
> Thanks.
The shooting performance of the *ist DS is quite robust for an amateur
dSLR; it equaled and in some cases exceeded the responsiveness of the *ist
D. From power-on till the first image was captured measured only one second.
Shutter lag, the delay between depressing the shutter and capturing the
image, was 1/10 second when pre-focused, and 3/10 second including autofocus
time for a high-contrast subject. Shot-to-shot delay averaged about 1/2
second without flash; the internal flash recycle time extended shot-shot
delay to between 1.3 and 4.2 seconds, depending on subject distance.
Continuous Shooting mode captured nine shots in three seconds, with
subsequent shots at a rate of one every 6/10 second as the camera is
processing the contents of the buffer. It required ~7 seconds to write a
buffer full of JPEG images to SD card before being ready to capture the next
burst. This puts the *ist DS ahead of the *ist D and Canon Digital Rebel
both in its burst capture rate and the size/speed of its buffer, trailing
the Nikon D70 by only a slight margin. The above times were observed using a
fast Delkin 1GB SD memory card, 18-35mm FA lens, flash off, daylight
lighting, 3008x2008 JPEG/Fine.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:24:12 +0000 (UTC), "CyaD"
<CyaD@(news)btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>(snip)
>
>some figures are given here:
>
>http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/istds_pg7.html
>
>(rounded to the nearest 0.1 sec)
>
>It is said to be similar to the D70, and faster than the 300D.
>
>C
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:52:00 GMT, Archie <Archie@Hatespam.com> wrote:
>I've searched the web for the shutter lag time in SECONDS for the *ist
>DS, with autofocus on, and can't find this info.
>
>Some places say there is no noticeable lag, some that the *ist is
>"slow"... but nobody has posted an actual delay time in seconds or
>milliseconds.
>
>The D70 and Digital Rebel are also often described as having virtually
>no shutter lag, but in fact when measured it is around 250-490
>milliseconds.
>
>So if you have this info, pls post.
>
>A.
I got 0.1 seconds when prefocused, 0.2 seconds on autofocus under
bright contrasty lighting, and 0.6 seconds under low contrast
lighting. (There is no focus assist lamp.) Shot-to-shot times were
about a second with flash, and 3 seconds with flash, up to about 5
frames.
-------------------------------------
Everything I know, and then some:
http://www.auctionmyths.com
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.