Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What camera ($1000 range) can do the best burst (5+ shots/..

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 1:46:31 PM

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

I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).

The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
shots.

Can someone point me in the right direction?

Thanks, Chris
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 2:09:01 PM

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

Either buy a 20D (8 MP, 5 fps) or a used 1D (4 MP, 8.5 fps)
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 4:02:34 PM

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

On 3 Aug 2005 09:46:31 -0700, "eastcoast" <cbright99@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
>is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
>as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).
>
>The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
>burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
>shots.
>
>Can someone point me in the right direction?

The right direction is over a 1000 dollars. The closest to that price
is the Canon 20D but correct solution is the Canon 1DMkII.

Here is a place to start looking at specs.

http://www.dpreview.com/


******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 4:00:39 AM

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

eastcoast wrote:
> I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
> is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
> as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).
>
> The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
> burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
> shots.
>
> Can someone point me in the right direction?
>
> Thanks, Chris

The Minolta Diamge 7, 7i and 7hi (not DSLR cameras, just good prosumer
cams) can all do a burst (in UHS mode)of 7 shots per second at 2mp
resolution, and the Nikon D2H can do a burst of 8 fps (in CH mode) or 1
to 7 fps (in CL mode).
Also, the Canon EOS 1D can do 8fps in continuous high speed mode.
It realy depends mainly on how much money you want to throw at the
problem.
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 6:31:51 AM

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

"eastcoast" <cbright99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123087591.647762.258270@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
> is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
> as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).
>
> The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
> burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
> shots.
>
> Can someone point me in the right direction?
>
> Thanks, Chris
>

An Olympus E300 for $946 with the two-lens kit, battery, charger and 256MB
SD card will get you what you want.

If you upgrade the SD card to a SanDisk Xtreme III 1GB for $100, you can do
continuous shooting until the card is full, using SQ mode, which is an 8
megapixel image.

In addition to that, you get a 14-45mm lens and a 40-150mm lens and the Four
Thirds system, which is built from the ground up as a digital camera/lens
system for optimal performance.

At the moment, the E300 is the absolute best camera deal in the world. I
have one and it is an excellent camera with excellent lenses. I've been
shooting film since recorded history began, and I have to say that the E300
is significantly superior to film. It's got less grain at high ISO than film
at lower ISO, it's got more effective resolution and much more dynamic
range. You can pull nice detail out of the shadows, for instance, whereas
with film, scanned on 48-bit scanners, there is nothing but grain and a
ragged representation of the most blatant details of that shadow area, not
good.

If you shoot higher image sizes, like RAW or TIFF, you get 4 shots before
the buffer has to empty to the card. In SQ JPEG mode, you can keep shooting
without stopping. And you can lower the resolution and keep shooting, but
why bother with a 5MP image when you can shoot 8MP images? :-)


--
Take care,

Mark & Mary Ann Weiss

VIDEO PRODUCTION . FILM SCANNING . DVD MASTERING . AUDIO RESTORATION
Hear my Kurzweil Creations at: http://www.dv-clips.com/theater.htm
Business sites at:
www.dv-clips.com
www.mwcomms.com
www.adventuresinanimemusic.com
-
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 6:31:52 AM

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

"Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:r6fIe.560$RZ2.493@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "eastcoast" <cbright99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123087591.647762.258270@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
>> is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
>> as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).
>>
>> The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
>> burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
>> shots.
>>
>> Can someone point me in the right direction?
>>
>> Thanks, Chris
>>
>
> An Olympus E300 for $946 with the two-lens kit, battery, charger and 256MB
> SD card will get you what you want.
>
> If you upgrade the SD card to a SanDisk Xtreme III 1GB for $100, you can
> do
> continuous shooting until the card is full, using SQ mode, which is an 8
> megapixel image.
>
> In addition to that, you get a 14-45mm lens and a 40-150mm lens and the
> Four
> Thirds system, which is built from the ground up as a digital camera/lens
> system for optimal performance.
>
> At the moment, the E300 is the absolute best camera deal in the world. I
> have one and it is an excellent camera with excellent lenses. I've been
> shooting film since recorded history began, and I have to say that the
> E300
> is significantly superior to film. It's got less grain at high ISO than
> film
> at lower ISO, it's got more effective resolution and much more dynamic
> range. You can pull nice detail out of the shadows, for instance, whereas
> with film, scanned on 48-bit scanners, there is nothing but grain and a
> ragged representation of the most blatant details of that shadow area, not
> good.
>
> If you shoot higher image sizes, like RAW or TIFF, you get 4 shots before
> the buffer has to empty to the card. In SQ JPEG mode, you can keep
> shooting
> without stopping. And you can lower the resolution and keep shooting, but
> why bother with a 5MP image when you can shoot 8MP images? :-)
>
>

Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked for
5fps.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 11:18:10 AM

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

>
> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked for
> 5fps.

Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk II,
for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)


--
Take care,

Mark & Mary Ann Weiss

VIDEO PRODUCTION • FILM SCANNING • DVD MASTERING • AUDIO RESTORATION
Hear my Kurzweil Creations at: http://www.dv-clips.com/theater.htm
Business sites at:
www.dv-clips.com
www.mwcomms.com
www.adventuresinanimemusic.com
-
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 11:45:06 AM

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

"Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:SijIe.2876$ns.1578@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
>> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked for
>> 5fps.
>
> Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk II,
> for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)
>
>
> --
> Take care,
>
> Mark & Mary Ann Weiss
>

Sorry, but the 20D hits 5 frames per sec, but it's over $1000, too. At
about $1400. But the D70 gets in there better than the E-300, 3fps and
under $1000.
BTW, the 1D mkII is a mere sub $4000 and 8.5 fps, not $8000, that would be
the 1Ds mkII.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 11:48:25 AM

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

>I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
>is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
>as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).

I do a lot of this type photography and while I can't offer advice on a
camera under $1,000 (I'm using a 1D Mark II) I would point out that
while the burst rate of the camera is important, it's perhaps more
important that you get a system with lenses that will AF very fast as
well, else a fast burst rate is fairly useless. A lens with a wide
aperture will focus faster than one with a smaller aperture, and a lens
with something like the Canon USM (I think Nikon calls it the 'Silent
Wave', but I'm not sure) will AF faster than lenses from the same
makers without this feature.

So to consistently get the shots you mention you need a system with
three things, a camera with high burst rate and quick AF, a fast lens
and a lens with the focus micro-motor built in to the lens, I feel.

Bill
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 12:15:12 PM

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

>> I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my
>> wants is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots
>> as fast as possible (for taking extreme sport pics...
>> surfing/skating etc).
>>
>> The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
>> burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
>> shots.
>>
>> Can someone point me in the right direction?
>>
>> Thanks, Chris

My Nikon Coolpix 8400 has an ultra-high-speed mode where it takes up to
100 pictures as 30 frames per second in VGA resolution. This seems to be
a fairly common feature of the higher-end Nikon cameras. I don't know if
any DSLR can approach that capability.

David
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 2:13:53 PM

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

On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 07:45:06 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

>"Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:SijIe.2876$ns.1578@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> >
>>> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked for
>>> 5fps.
>>
>> Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk II,
>> for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Take care,
>>
>> Mark & Mary Ann Weiss
>>
>
>Sorry, but the 20D hits 5 frames per sec, but it's over $1000, too. At
>about $1400. But the D70 gets in there better than the E-300, 3fps and
>under $1000.
>BTW, the 1D mkII is a mere sub $4000 and 8.5 fps, not $8000, that would be
>the 1Ds mkII.

He can get a used 1d at 4 Megapixals that will do 8+ fps for about
1100 used.


******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 4:10:07 PM

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

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 07:18:10 GMT, "Mark & Mary Ann Weiss"
<mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote:

>>
>> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked for
>> 5fps.
>
>Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk II,
>for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)

Wrong. the 20D will get him there or even a used 1D will get him 8fps.

You don't keep up with the technology do you?
*********************************************************

"It looked like the sort of book described in library
catalogues as "slightly foxed", although it would be
more honest to admit that it looked as though it had
been badgered, wolved and possibly beared as well."

_Light Fantastic_
Terry Pratchett
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 4:20:57 PM

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

20D will cost more...lucky if you find it for under $1300 for the body
for a USA warranty unit. It shoots 5fps, can accumulate 25 frames of
large JPEG or 6 frames of RAW before running out of buffer memory, then
will need to wait about 7-9 sec (or more, if your memory CF is slow)
August 4, 2005 5:19:15 PM

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

"Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:r6fIe.560$RZ2.493@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

>
> "eastcoast" <cbright99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123087591.647762.258270@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my
>> wants is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots
>> as fast as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating
>> etc).
>>
>> The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
>> burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
>> shots.
>>
>> Can someone point me in the right direction?
>>
>> Thanks, Chris
>>
>
> An Olympus E300 for $946 with the two-lens kit, battery, charger and
> 256MB SD card will get you what you want.
>
> Mark & Mary Ann Weiss

What the hell? The OP has only described one particular feature that he is
keen to have, so you suggest a camera that does not have this feature!

It does seem that you are a person suffering from MPD, but I think that is
a poor excuse for ignoring someone's question and suggesting something that
does not suit them.

I suspect that you are a troll.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 25-June-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
August 4, 2005 5:29:16 PM

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

"Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:SijIe.2876$ns.1578@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:

>>
>> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked
>> for 5fps.
>
> Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk
> II, for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)
>
> Mark & Mary Ann Weiss

Hmmm, another trolling post?

This is at least 2 falsehoods in the one sentence!

There are several D-SLRs that can manage 5fps, including the Canon 20D
which is not anywhere near 8 grand, more like $1400 with lens.

But then again the Canon EOS 1D MkII is not eight grand either, it's
$3899.95 from B&H.




--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 25-June-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 7:47:31 PM

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

"Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> writes:

> "eastcoast" <cbright99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123087591.647762.258270@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > I'm looking to upgrade my camera to a digital-slr, but one of my wants
> > is to be able to do bursts (5+ shots/second) of say 10+ shots as fast
> > as possible (for taking extreme sport pics... surfing/skating etc).
> >
> > The mutliple shots can be at a lower resolution .... say 2mp whem in
> > burst more, but the camera should be in the 5mp+ range for normal
> > shots.
> >
> > Can someone point me in the right direction?
> >
> > Thanks, Chris
> >
>
> An Olympus E300 for $946 with the two-lens kit, battery, charger and 256MB
> SD card will get you what you want.

Ummm, the last time I looked at the specs, an E-300 could only do 2.5 fps for
something like 4 shots before the buffer is full. My E-1 can do 3 fps for 12
shots, but it still isn't what the original poster asked for (5 fps for at
least 10 shots).

One possibility might be to get a used Olympus E-100RS which could do 10 shots
at 15, 7, 5, or 3 fps just for the places you need the high speed shots, and
get a normal DSLR for the other shots. Note, the E-100RS is a 1.3MP camera,
but if you really need the fps, it still hasn't been duplicated.

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 3:51:43 AM

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

"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
> "Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:SijIe.2876$ns.1578@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> >
>>> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked
>>> for
>>> 5fps.
>>
>> Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk
>> II,
>> for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Take care,
>>
>> Mark & Mary Ann Weiss
>>
>
> Sorry, but the 20D hits 5 frames per sec, but it's over $1000, too. At
> about $1400. But the D70 gets in there better than the E-300, 3fps and
> under $1000.
> BTW, the 1D mkII is a mere sub $4000 and 8.5 fps, not $8000, that would be
> the 1Ds mkII.

Note that the 1Ds mk2 only does 4 fps or so, so it doesn't meet the OP's
requirements<g>.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 3:51:44 AM

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

On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 23:51:43 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
<davidjl@gol.com> wrote:

>
>"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>> "Mark & Mary Ann Weiss" <mweissX294@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:SijIe.2876$ns.1578@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>> >
>>>> Except that the E-300 only shoots 2.5 frames per second, the OP asked
>>>> for
>>>> 5fps.
>>>
>>> Oh, well he's not going to get that without going to a Canon EOS 1D Mk
>>> II,
>>> for a mere eight grand for the body alone. :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Take care,
>>>
>>> Mark & Mary Ann Weiss
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, but the 20D hits 5 frames per sec, but it's over $1000, too. At
>> about $1400. But the D70 gets in there better than the E-300, 3fps and
>> under $1000.
>> BTW, the 1D mkII is a mere sub $4000 and 8.5 fps, not $8000, that would be
>> the 1Ds mkII.
>
>Note that the 1Ds mk2 only does 4 fps or so, so it doesn't meet the OP's
>requirements<g>.

But the 1D MkII is not the IDsMkII.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos1d...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos1d...

His best deal is an old 1D.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos1d...
******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
!