lets end this whole evf lag now

  • Thread starter Thread starter Donald B
  • Start date Start date
A nice example of how not to do an EVF timing test.

Things to fix:

1) Need to have a high resolution clock. This one clearly isn't with both .x2 and .x7 being displayed in some frames.

2) Camera display and main screen have to be at the same vertical position in the recording sensor, otherwise there is an unknown delay between the two in the readout rate of the recording sensor. At least mention whether the recording camera was in electronic or mechanical shutter.
none of that matters. a photo is a photo is a photo.

Don
 
What exactly is the question being discussed here?

Is it a question is or is there not EVF shutter lag?

Or is the question how to measure it?

Or is it what is the values of the EVF lag for current mirrorless cameras?

There is definitely EVF lag because cameras EVFs have finite refresh rates. I think the Sony say their latest mirrorless have EVF with a fast 240 fps which means the EVF is at least 4.2 milliseconds. I see some recent Fuji mirrorless cameras state a 5 millisecond EVF lag.

So exactly what is the debate of this thread?
you win the lucky door prize.
You are still wandering around in another universe.
 
What exactly is the question being discussed here?

Is it a question is or is there not EVF shutter lag?

Or is the question how to measure it?

Or is it what is the values of the EVF lag for current mirrorless cameras?

There is definitely EVF lag because cameras EVFs have finite refresh rates. I think the Sony say their latest mirrorless have EVF with a fast 240 fps which means the EVF is at least 4.2 milliseconds. I see some recent Fuji mirrorless cameras state a 5 millisecond EVF lag.

So exactly what is the debate of this thread?
you win the lucky door prize.
You are still wandering around in another universe.
always ,didn't you read the guys post testing the sony a73 and a6400 ? .005 .why doesn't anyone actually do the test ? cant anyone take an image ? I mean not many have any galleries so I guess not ;-) lots of sale reps trying to close this debate down though.

Don
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)

Don

--
Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1
 
Last edited:
none of that matters. a photo is a photo is a photo.
A comment like that would make me feel sorry for your clients.

But as much time as you spend here arguing that you have the best camera, biggest yacht, and how DSLRs can't take pictures... there is no way you have any.
LOL sure your name isnt wayne kerr :-)

Don
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)
Okay, shoot video this time, use a millisecond timer, and give me the video and I'll process it.
 
But as much time as you spend here arguing that you have the best camera, biggest yacht, and how DSLRs can't take pictures... there is no way you have any.
It was Lee Jay claiming mirrorless cameras can't take photos of moving objects because of EVF lag.
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)
Okay, shoot video this time, use a millisecond timer, and give me the video and I'll process it.
shot this afternoon a 2sec sequence of a car traveling at 80klm per hour with a 120mm lens (ff eq) car was 40 meters away shot 20 images with the car filling half the frame and perfectly in the center, how many rpm was i panning at ? and how fast would the car have to be traveling to exit the vf ? and what would be the rpm of my body panning :-)

Don
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)
Okay, shoot video this time, use a millisecond timer, and give me the video and I'll process it.
shot this afternoon a 2sec sequence of a car traveling at 80klm per hour with a 120mm lens (ff eq) car was 40 meters away shot 20 images with the car filling half the frame and perfectly in the center, how many rpm was i panning at ? and how fast would the car have to be traveling to exit the vf ? and what would be the rpm of my body panning :-)
And how am I going to make a spreadsheet from that useless information?
 
Don't have the slightest idea what this is trying to show. Just look through the viewfinder and pan side to side quickly. There it is and if you say you can't see it, you are not telling the truth. You will never see it with a motionless camera and subject.
Donald is the epitome of denial.
 
But as much time as you spend here arguing that you have the best camera, biggest yacht, and how DSLRs can't take pictures... there is no way you have any.
It was Lee Jay claiming mirrorless cameras can't take photos of moving objects because of EVF lag.
And taking photos of a timer on a computer monitor sure put that to rest..... ;)

Regardless, your comment has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)
Okay, shoot video this time, use a millisecond timer, and give me the video and I'll process it.
shot this afternoon a 2sec sequence of a car traveling at 80klm per hour with a 120mm lens (ff eq) car was 40 meters away shot 20 images with the car filling half the frame and perfectly in the center, how many rpm was i panning at ? and how fast would the car have to be traveling to exit the vf ? and what would be the rpm of my body panning :-)
And how am I going to make a spreadsheet from that useless information?
your kidding arnt you ;-) i can write a celestial navigation program on excel with no references needed , this is a simple task i have asked.

Don
 
camera em1mk2 vers 3.0 firmware
It is obvious that the timer does not have very much resolution. One image, for example, is a blend of .62 and .67. Did you not notice that? That means that it sat on 0.62 for .05 seconds, and then jumped to .67.

You have to have both versions of the timer at the same horizontal position in the frame of the camera recording this. Different horizontal lines happen at different times.
your not thinking are you John ;-) the shutter speed of the camera taking the image is 1/25 sec :-) i expected more from you mate.
If the resolution of the timer were 0.01s, we would see a blend of 4 or 5
successive values, not 2 values 0.05s apart. Have you ever seen a kitchen scale that starts at 0 grams, then you keep adding salt, and it stays at 0, and then suddenly jumps to 4, and then 7 eventually, then 11, then 14? That's what this timer seems to be like.
 
camera em1mk2 vers 3.0 firmware
It is obvious that the timer does not have very much resolution. One image, for example, is a blend of .62 and .67. Did you not notice that? That means that it sat on 0.62 for .05 seconds, and then jumped to .67.

You have to have both versions of the timer at the same horizontal position in the frame of the camera recording this. Different horizontal lines happen at different times.
your not thinking are you John ;-) the shutter speed of the camera taking the image is 1/25 sec :-) i expected more from you mate.
If the resolution of the timer were 0.01s, we would see a blend of 4 or 5
successive values, not 2 values 0.05s apart. Have you ever seen a kitchen scale that starts at 0 grams, then you keep adding salt, and it stays at 0, and then suddenly jumps to 4, and then 7 eventually, then 11, then 14? That's what this timer seems to be like.
that because the dr of the scale is very low ;-) but isnt the shutter open for only half the time :-) like shooting video :-)

Don
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)
Okay, shoot video this time, use a millisecond timer, and give me the video and I'll process it.
shot this afternoon a 2sec sequence of a car traveling at 80klm per hour with a 120mm lens (ff eq) car was 40 meters away shot 20 images with the car filling half the frame and perfectly in the center, how many rpm was i panning at ? and how fast would the car have to be traveling to exit the vf ? and what would be the rpm of my body panning :-)
And how am I going to make a spreadsheet from that useless information?
just did a quicky dont quote me my brain isnt as good as it used to be :-) for the back of the car to reach the side of the image it would have to be traveling at over 600klm i would have to be panning at over 40 rpm ( id be dizzy) my conclusion is its impossible for anyone to pan that quick as the car would be visible for .25secs and your human response of .20 you wouldnt even get away 1 shot.

Don
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
 
But as much time as you spend here arguing that you have the best camera, biggest yacht, and how DSLRs can't take pictures... there is no way you have any.
It was Lee Jay claiming mirrorless cameras can't take photos of moving objects because of EVF lag.
 
Average them out...that sounds like 20ms or so - about the same as my test where I had to reduce focal length by a factor of three (600mm to 200mm) because of 25ms of lag, measured exactly this way.
show us the math on an excell spread sheet for all us to see and ad some of our own numbers in :-)
Okay, shoot video this time, use a millisecond timer, and give me the video and I'll process it.
shot this afternoon a 2sec sequence of a car traveling at 80klm per hour with a 120mm lens (ff eq) car was 40 meters away shot 20 images with the car filling half the frame and perfectly in the center, how many rpm was i panning at ? and how fast would the car have to be traveling to exit the vf ? and what would be the rpm of my body panning :-)
And how am I going to make a spreadsheet from that useless information?
your kidding arnt you ;-) i can write a celestial navigation program on excel with no references needed , this is a simple task i have asked.
Do you have dementia or something?

The question is "how much lag does your EVF have", and I tried to estimate that from the lousy pictures you provided. You asked for the math so I asked for you to shoot a video of a millisecond timer so I could calculate it. Now you're talking about a car. What the heck are you talking about?
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top