Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Digital camera's shutter lag: Why are SLR faster?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 7:43:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

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
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 7:43:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

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
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 7:43:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

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
Related resources
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 7:43:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

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
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 7:43:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Antoine Garric <agarric@yahoo.com> 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.
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 7:43:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

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
You might check the specs on the Kodak DX7590. It, and similar cameras,
have shutter lag figures only slightly slower than DSLRs.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 8:55:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

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
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 8:55:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> 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.
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 9:46:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> 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/NikonCP8400/Images/allr...

above the gold "8.0 megapixels ED" logo.

David
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 9:54:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

sewell.tim@gmail.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
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 11:01:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Scott W" <biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113322103.046289.240400@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> 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.

I've heard it said that dSLR can be more likely to get auto WB wrong than
P&S because it sets WB on the basis of small sensor and quickly, so less
info on which to select best WB.
Anonymous
April 12, 2005 11:21:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Antoine Garric <agarric@yahoo.com> 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
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 2:33:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Very good explaination! I have been asking this question to so many
people recently and no one could give me any reasonable answer.

Do you have a refernece to a book or site explaining this?

Thanks agains,
Antoine



Dave Martindale a écrit :
> Antoine Garric <agarric@yahoo.com> 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
>
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 4:11:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> 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.


Aha! Fair is fair; the Ricoh R series got mentioned at last! :o )

--
Lin Chung.
[The Water Margins of Liang Shan Po were at the time of the Sung dynasty.
Replace that with "ntlworld" for emails.]
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 4:11:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Lin Chung wrote:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>
>
> Aha! Fair is fair; the Ricoh R series got mentioned at last! :o )
>
One problem I see with it is that so far it seems to be vaporware. At
least in the US.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 6:48:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Antoine Garric" <agarric@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:425C3094.4060304@yahoo.com...
>
> Very good explaination! I have been asking this question to so many
> people recently and no one could give me any reasonable answer.
>
> Do you have a refernece to a book or site explaining this?

It doesn't get any more essential than Dave's reaction. Try to Google
on the Groups, it may turn up more references to similar (less
condensed) info.

Bart
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 9:11:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> 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

And don't forget to either disable the flash or set it to multi-shot mode.
Some digital cameras will delay being ready until the flash is charged up,
even when it's not required.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"Dave Martindale" <davem@cs.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:D 3h731$drl$2@mughi.cs.ubc.ca...
> Antoine Garric <agarric@yahoo.com> 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
>
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 4:26:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> 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

Usualy on page 4 on reviews for P&S cameras there is a detailed analysis of
all timing and delays. Also new models of P&S cameras are much faster now
(for example, my Fuji F810 feels really snappy in action).
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 12:40:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>>
>> Aha! Fair is fair; the Ricoh R series got mentioned at last! :o )
>>
> One problem I see with it is that so far it seems to be vaporware. At
> least in the US.
>
>

For some reason Ricoh don't seem to deal in the US
don't know why, they make good cameras (digital and film)

Tony M
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 4:30:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <p4GdnWraqbejzsHfRVn-uw@comcast.com>, noemail@email.com says...

> I've heard it said that dSLR can be more likely to get auto WB wrong than
> P&S because it sets WB on the basis of small sensor and quickly, so less
> info on which to select best WB.

I would rarely use auto white balance anyway, since the "balance"
is affected by the dominant colors in the photograph. As far as
I'm concerned, auto white balance is a P&S feature that doesn't
belong on a serious camera.

Much better to set your white balance for the type of light you're
shooting in, and go with it. Film photographers got by just fine
for years with nothing but daylight and tungsten film, and it worked
just fine. It's nice to have additional white balance choices for
flourescent and for open shade, but "auto" is not a useful choice.

Diane
!