Hi Bruce sorry, I have not seen that or my email crossed your answer... I see and understand your arguments, especially dual flash usage is not a "easy" thing :-) greetings Markus
>>-----Original Message----- >>From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 5:12 AM >>To: Markus Maurer >>Subject: Re: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon >>competitors?) >> >> >>I thought that I had mentioned the issue there. I do, in fact, have >>two bodies and sometimes it works to do just as you suggested. The >>times it doesn't work are when I am using my flash system on a big >>bracket with a Quantum battery clipped to my side - I couldn't carry >>two such rigs. Or when I need a certain focal length and I don't have >>a duplicate or near duplicate lens. Or when I am holding one body on >>a monopod with a big Sigma 100-300/4 EX lens and can't pick up and use >>the other camera - too unwieldy. >> >>-- >>Best regards, >>Bruce >> >> >>Saturday, June 4, 2005, 7:33:33 PM, you wrote: >> >>MM> Hi Bruce >>MM> what speaks against having a second body with you to >>compensate for the >>MM> shortcomings of the buffer? >>MM> Even an old one with film loaded or a P&S dig cam if you can >>not afford a >>MM> second DSLR or >>MM> what it lighter? >> >>MM> I'm pretty quick with my SFX and the P30 as a backup and >>second body with >>MM> the 24mm mounted >>MM> and set at F8 and 2.2 meters. But I'm still a film user so >>what do I know >>MM> about digital problems :-) >> >>MM> greetings >>MM> Markus >> >> >> >> >>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 11:07 PM >>>>>To: John Dallman >>>>>Subject: Re: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon >>>>>competitors?) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Hello John, >>>>> >>>>>Here is a very simple example. You are shooting a wedding - the party >>>>>is coming up the aisle two by two - there are 8-10 groups coming >>>>>through in short order. You are shooting raw. You shoot one, wait >>>>>about 2-3 seconds, shoot the next, etc. The problem is that the >>>>>buffer fills after 5 shots and it takes about 10 seconds or more to >>>>>clear the buffer for just one more shot. So you miss the last couple >>>>>or two. >>>>> >>>>>Here's another. Shooting baseball - runner on 3rd, pitcher throws a >>>>>wild pitch - you take a shot of the catcher, then one of the runner >>>>>coming down, then the start of the slide, then the pitcher coming in >>>>>for the tag, then the end of the slide, then the ump signalling out! >>>>>Your buffer is full. Then during that action, the runner on first is >>>>>coming around for a dramatic slide into 3rd. All you can do is watch. >>>>>Buffer full. >>>>> >>>>>Here's another - taking candid portraits of a young kid who is moving >>>>>around and you are catching some great facial expressions. Click, >>>>>click, click as you go. Suddenly you he puts on the cutest grin and >>>>>the BUFFER is FULL. >>>>> >>>>>When shooting RAW on the *istD, the fastest cards take about 7-9 >>>>>seconds per shot to write out. Slower cards can take up to 15 seconds >>>>>per shot. With a full buffer, that is quite a bit of time to elapse. >>>>>The *istDS by my tests takes about 4-5 seconds per raw shot. The >>>>>Nikon D70 takes about 1-2 seconds per raw shot. >>>>> >>>>>It is not really the rapid fire burst that is the problem here, it is >>>>>the ongoing shooting that can occur with many events that are not >>>>>really considered sports. People getting awards, one after the other >>>>>would be just another example. >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>Best regards, >>>>>Bruce >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Thursday, June 2, 2005, 1:30:00 PM, you wrote: >>>>> >>>>>JD> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>JD> (Shel Belinkoff) wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Higher resolution and a faster, bigger buffer make sense, >>shouldn't add >>>>>>> bulk or weight to a camera. >>>>> >>>>>JD> Higher resolution is fine, but I'm baffled by the need for a faster >>>>>JD> buffer. I spot the potential picture, get ready, and take it. >>>>>If it's a >>>>>JD> moving or changing subject I wait for the right moment, >>near as I can >>>>>JD> guess, and press the button. >>>>> >>>>>JD> I guess having learned my photography on a twin-lens reflex with >>>>>JD> twelve shots per roll, where you had to wind on with several >>>>>turns of a >>>>>JD> knob, and cock the shutter by hand[1] explains this. I've >>never used a >>>>>JD> camera with any kind of power wind or motor drive; I just >>>>>don't feel any >>>>>JD> need to shoot in bursts. >>>>> >>>>>JD> [1] Microcord II, post-war British copy of a pre-war Rolleicord. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> >> >> >> >>
