Who makes the fastest super-zoom camerea?

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

I was about to purchase the FZ20 till I saw the lag times/write speeds.
This is just unacceptable to me; I can deal with a slow start-up, but
having to wait sereval seconds between shots is a deal breaker. Much of
the photos I'll be done while mountain biking with friends... imagine
getting a picture of one friend, but missing the next one because the dang
camera wasn't ready :-(

Anyway, it's a shame because the FZ20 looks to be a great deal in all
other respects.

So, who makes the fastest acting (shutter lag & write speeds) P & S or am
I limiting myself to a DSLR?
--
Slack

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

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 16:27:16 -0800, Frank ess <frank@fshe2fs.com> wrote:

> Slack wrote:
>> I was about to purchase the FZ20 till I saw the lag times/write
>> speeds. This is just unacceptable to me; I can deal with a slow
>> start-up, but having to wait sereval seconds between shots is a deal
>> breaker. Much of the photos I'll be done while mountain biking with
>> friends... imagine getting a picture of one friend, but missing the
>> next one because the dang camera wasn't ready :-(
>>
>> Anyway, it's a shame because the FZ20 looks to be a great deal in all
>> other respects.
>>
>> So, who makes the fastest acting (shutter lag & write speeds) P & S
>> or am I limiting myself to a DSLR?
>
> I don't know that "seeing" lag times and write speed is all that useful
> in gauging the real-world performance of a digital camera. In 2003 I
> took a series of a couple dozen photos of racing cars as they entered
> the track, one after another. According to the EXIF data they were as
> little as two seconds apart, averaging something right under three
> seconds. I don't remember having to wait for the camera to prepare
> itself. The buffer seemed to be emptying itself fast enough to accept
> another image by the time I was ready to give it one.
>
> That was "old" technology: Nikon Coolpix 5700. I reckon you could find
> lag time and write speed data on that one. Whatever it is, one picture
> every three seconds or so is about all you're going to be ready to take,
> your own self.
>
> Have a look at the difference in bulk between a CoolPix 8700 (close to
> the same size as a CP5700) and a 20D Canon. Lotsa weight difference,
> too.
>
> Comparison of the 20D with 24-70 (38.4-112 equiv) and CP8700 with
> 35-280mm equivalent zoom range:
>
> http://www.fototime.com/C898491FBD2A2CB/orig.jpg front
> http://www.fototime.com/A71907824F117BA/orig.jpg top
> http://www.fototime.com/4DED1BD0306F225/orig.jpg rear
> http://www.fototime.com/CBF8735023E6ED7/orig.jpg Left
>
>
Hmmm... maybe I'm being unrealistic with my expectations.

Thanks for the comparison; the 20d looks like a monster, albeit a
beautiful monster. I haven't seen the 20d in person, but I have played
with Nikon's d70. I really liked the feel and it fit my hand like a glove.
--
Slack

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

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:43:41 -0800, <bogus@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Stick one of the Ultra speed SD cards in the FZ20 and lag time
> shouldn't be an issue. Burst mode set to High Speed can capture jpg
> images at 3 per second with a max of 4 or 7 images depending on the
> image quality selected. At Low Speed it can capture images at 2 per
> second with a max of 4 or 7 images depending on the image quality
> selected. When Burst Mode is set to Infinity it can capture images at
> roughly two per second up to the capacity limit of the memory card.
> Using a 512 meg SD card capturing JPG's in Fine mode, the capacity of
> the card will be about 205 images. You can also combine Panning Mode
> with Burst mode if you are standing beside a bike trail or road and
> want to take pictures of friends as they approach and bike past you.


Thank you very much.
--
Slack

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

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:43:19 -0800, Ken <ken@ken.ken> wrote:

>
> "Slack" <slacker7_REMOVE_THIS@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:1110754100.593cb9c7cd5232290643072c87def614@teranews...
>> I was about to purchase the FZ20 till I saw the lag times/write speeds.
>> This is just unacceptable to me; I can deal with a slow start-up, but
>> having to wait sereval seconds between shots is a deal breaker. Much of
>> the photos I'll be done while mountain biking with friends... imagine
>> getting a picture of one friend, but missing the next one because the
>> dang
>> camera wasn't ready :-(
>>
>> Anyway, it's a shame because the FZ20 looks to be a great deal in all
>> other respects.
>
> I recently went down to the local airport to shoot jets landing. I
> captured a 737 wizzing
> past at about 130 knotts. In burts mode I got about 12 frames with good
> focus. I use
> the FZ20 with the Sandisk UltraII cards and never have to wait for the
> camera to write
> before I am ready to take another shot.
>
>
Cool, that pretty much settles it for me. I bought a FZ15 for one of the
managers at my work... I didn't get to play with it much, but I really
liked it.
--
Slack

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

colinstone@hotmail.com wrote:
> Strange comment - see
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pa [...] /page4.asp and the
> extract here:
>
> "With write times averaging around 2.5 seconds for a 14MB TIFF the
> FZ20 is very fast indeed for a 'compact' digital camera -
> approximately 5700KB/s, and JPEGs - whatever the size or quality
> setting - are saved in a second or under (most of this time will be
> taken up by the processing). Very impressive stuff, and proof that
> the Venus II engine is more than mere hype."

Well, on the Nikon 5700, saving a RAW file (which has more information
than the TIFF) takes tens of seconds, but it's not quite comparing the
same thing. The TIFF file has (if I am correct) only the same 8-bit
information as the JPEG files, albeit without the lossy compression. The
RAW files typically have the 12-bit data right off the sensor....

Most well-designed cameras in this class have sufficient buffering that
for up about to a couple of shots per second, writing the files to the
memory card isn't an issue. I would still recommend buying the faster
cards if you can afford the small price uplift. We use Kingmax Platinum
"60X" and haven't seen any card-writing delays.

Cheers,
David