D70 sync speed and S2's - not all that different

What is all the fuss about? 1/500th Sync speed ..wow...! We suddenly all became sports photographers ...right.

Back to reality people, the S2 and S3 were never intended to be FPS stop-motion-monsters.

For anything except the extremes, 1/500th is completely and utterly useless.....and I'm feeling silly for pointing out that 24 mb RAW files (which is the result of having the best dynamic range in the world and is a direct result of capturing double the data - highlights and shadows) are hardly suitable for high FPS - write times are just too lengthy even with the best of CF cards (Just like we do not hear 1Ds users complain that it's not a sports camera - because it isnt!) . Alternative would be tremendous buffers - but we're dealing with costs and "target audience" too - and I doubt that any company is going to spend a lot of money for something that only

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

That makes effective 1/250 for the D70...not all that big a difference suddenly is it. No it is not. UNLESS you shoot sports where it is not about the effective shutterspeed but about freezing a subject at shutterspeeds as high as possible.

Good, we know the S2 and S3 are not sports cameras, we now know and see that the EFFECTIVE difference between 1/180 and 1/250 is minimal and we know that the average human will not move at speeds fast enough to render 1/180 useless.

Fine, lets drop it then! thanks, I'm sick and tired of reading the ranting about something that is so completely irrelevant.

majic said:

What is all the fuss about? 1/500th Sync speed ..wow...! We
suddenly all became sports photographers ...right.

Back to reality people, the S2 and S3 were never intended to be FPS
stop-motion-monsters.

For anything except the extremes, 1/500th is completely and utterly
useless.....and I'm feeling silly for pointing out that 24 mb RAW
files (which is the result of having the best dynamic range in the
world and is a direct result of capturing double the data -
highlights and shadows) are hardly suitable for high FPS - write
times are just too lengthy even with the best of CF cards (Just
like we do not hear 1Ds users complain that it's not a sports
camera - because it isnt!) . Alternative would be tremendous
buffers - but we're dealing with costs and "target audience" too -
and I doubt that any company is going to spend a lot of money for
something that only

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

That makes effective 1/250 for the D70...not all that big a
difference suddenly is it. No it is not. UNLESS you shoot sports
where it is not about the effective shutterspeed but about freezing
a subject at shutterspeeds as high as possible.

Good, we know the S2 and S3 are not sports cameras, we now know and
see that the EFFECTIVE difference between 1/180 and 1/250 is
minimal and we know that the average human will not move at
speeds fast enough to render 1/180 useless.

Fine, lets drop it then! thanks, I'm sick and tired of reading the
ranting about something that is so completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

There is way, way more relevance to having 500th sync speed than just shooting fast action or sports. Since you want us to drop it, I won't get into it, except to say that 500th would make my life easier, and I don't shoot sports or action. I do live with/get by with the 180th limitation though.
David

I think the people that want a 1/500 sync speed are the same 3 people on this board who NEED it the most------wedding photogs. Other than that, I think the rest could be complaining about NOTHING. Who actually takes snapshots of the people (your family) on a bright sunny day using EV -1.0 fill flash?

Oh you know what's funny? Photogs who sync indoors @ 1/500 during low light. It's pretty futile, man. Almost the same as shooting 1/125 and quite possibly 1/60.

You know what's even funnier? Those consumer digi-cam photogs who think they're bad a$$ while syncing at 1/1,000, indoors during low light! Hahahahah!

majic said:

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

Click to expand...

You're like Stephen Hawkings explaining black holes and stuff!

I think the 10d only goes 1/200.

--------------------------------------------------------------

--
...been b@nned 7.5 times and counting!

David,

Please enlighten me - I see little difference for regular use since the base ISO if the D70 is 200 - and the base ISO of the S2 and S3 is 100 ...this means effective flash power is increased with the D70.

If 1/180th is not enough to freeze humans I stand corrected, obviously.

First of all the S2 does not sync properly at 1/180
shoot a white wall and you will see .. ???
Never done it ??? I have 2% fall off at top even
with 1/125 .... and 1/250 or 1/500 has nothing to do
with sports .... shott outdoor portraits with 150mm to 200 mm
focal length and you would like to have at least 1/250 working
well or even 1/500 when you want to open the arperture a bit
in normal light ...

I am happy with 1/250 but not with
features which are only working on paper ... and there is more
not just the sync ...

but Kodak is probably not the alternative ... I have lost trust
completly with the latest issue you can read about ...

Kodak is dead for me ... they stopped the ProBack dont get their act
together with the 14n and now the SLR/n is also starting to
show problems .. No .. I am not switching to Canon .. I will
add a tool for different purposes ..

Have fun
gmd

majic said:

What is all the fuss about? 1/500th Sync speed ..wow...! We
suddenly all became sports photographers ...right.

Back to reality people, the S2 and S3 were never intended to be FPS
stop-motion-monsters.

For anything except the extremes, 1/500th is completely and utterly
useless.....and I'm feeling silly for pointing out that 24 mb RAW
files (which is the result of having the best dynamic range in the
world and is a direct result of capturing double the data -
highlights and shadows) are hardly suitable for high FPS - write
times are just too lengthy even with the best of CF cards (Just
like we do not hear 1Ds users complain that it's not a sports
camera - because it isnt!) . Alternative would be tremendous
buffers - but we're dealing with costs and "target audience" too -
and I doubt that any company is going to spend a lot of money for
something that only

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

That makes effective 1/250 for the D70...not all that big a
difference suddenly is it. No it is not. UNLESS you shoot sports
where it is not about the effective shutterspeed but about freezing
a subject at shutterspeeds as high as possible.

Good, we know the S2 and S3 are not sports cameras, we now know and
see that the EFFECTIVE difference between 1/180 and 1/250 is
minimal and we know that the average human will not move at
speeds fast enough to render 1/180 useless.

Fine, lets drop it then! thanks, I'm sick and tired of reading the
ranting about something that is so completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

--
People who quote others have nothing to say - GMD

Hello

Here in Spain many many wedding photographers have bought a S2, because its superb general image quality and, as all we know, of its unmatched skin tones. These guys would like, for sure, higher flash sync. under our usually strong sunlight.

Anyway you always can deal with this (ND filters, etc.). But you can hardly make better the people photos than can be taken with a S2, no matter wich camera you're using...

Regards!

Mr. Stacey said:

Oh you know what's funny? Photogs who sync indoors @ 1/500 during
low light. It's pretty futile, man. Almost the same as shooting
1/125 and quite possibly 1/60.

You know what's even funnier? Those consumer digi-cam photogs who
think they're bad a$$ while syncing at 1/1,000, indoors during low
light! Hahahahah!

Mr. Stacey188461 said:

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

Click to expand...

You're like Stephen Hawkings explaining black holes and stuff!

I think the 10d only goes 1/200.

--------------------------------------------------------------

--
...been b@nned 7.5 times and counting!

Click to expand...

--
http://www.beatusille.net
'Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?'
Groucho Marx

(Gear list in profile)

above shot with 1/180 and top of frame cropped and partly corrected
in full manual ... product shot for packaging
I would have liked to sync at 1/500 to get the front wheel
slowed down a bit .. and the throwing sand a bit cleaner
no way to slow down the wheel mechanicly .. I have more
examples where I want higher flash sync ...
static shots .. no problem .. I use ND for less DOF ...
but just dont judge from your perspective alone ...

I nmade my decision where I am going ...
my new camera system is ordered in a first step and it has
a flash sync of 1/800

have fun
gmd

wing88 said:

I am happy with 1/250 but not with
features which are only working on paper ... and there is more
not just the sync ...

but Kodak is probably not the alternative ... I have lost trust
completly with the latest issue you can read about ...

Kodak is dead for me ... they stopped the ProBack dont get their act
together with the 14n and now the SLR/n is also starting to
show problems .. No .. I am not switching to Canon .. I will
add a tool for different purposes ..

Have fun
gmd

majic said:

What is all the fuss about? 1/500th Sync speed ..wow...! We
suddenly all became sports photographers ...right.

Back to reality people, the S2 and S3 were never intended to be FPS
stop-motion-monsters.

For anything except the extremes, 1/500th is completely and utterly
useless.....and I'm feeling silly for pointing out that 24 mb RAW
files (which is the result of having the best dynamic range in the
world and is a direct result of capturing double the data -
highlights and shadows) are hardly suitable for high FPS - write
times are just too lengthy even with the best of CF cards (Just
like we do not hear 1Ds users complain that it's not a sports
camera - because it isnt!) . Alternative would be tremendous
buffers - but we're dealing with costs and "target audience" too -
and I doubt that any company is going to spend a lot of money for
something that only

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

That makes effective 1/250 for the D70...not all that big a
difference suddenly is it. No it is not. UNLESS you shoot sports
where it is not about the effective shutterspeed but about freezing
a subject at shutterspeeds as high as possible.

Good, we know the S2 and S3 are not sports cameras, we now know and
see that the EFFECTIVE difference between 1/180 and 1/250 is
minimal and we know that the average human will not move at
speeds fast enough to render 1/180 useless.

Fine, lets drop it then! thanks, I'm sick and tired of reading the
ranting about something that is so completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

--
People who quote others have nothing to say - GMD

Click to expand...

--
People who quote others have nothing to say - GMD

majic said:

What is all the fuss about? 1/500th Sync speed ..wow...! We
suddenly all became sports photographers ...right.> SNIP>
For anything except the extremes, 1/500th is completely and utterly
useless....

Click to expand...

Actutally, there are literally thousands of times where a 1/500 sycnh speed comes in handly shooting totally staic,non-moving scenes....like commercial products, wedding groups, single- and multi-person portraits,and basically any situation outdoors in bright sun when one would like to sue some fill flash and NOT be constrained by shooting at 1/125 and at f/9.5 to f/16 at ISO 100.

I agree with you that a lower ISO camera helps quite a bit.....but I grew up using leaf shutter cameras that synched to 1/500,and with focal plane 35mm SLR's that synched to 1/250 second. In actual,real,everyday use, at this time of year in my area, I have been shooting synchro-sun shots at f/9.5 or f/11 at 1/125th second with a very,very powerful Sunpak 622 Super flash unit.

The statement that 1/500th synch is completely and utterly useless is clearly just a throwaway remark. If you'd use your head and think about it, you could come up with some good reasons for 1/500 synch,but if you're narrow-minded and exclusionary,of course you'll probably never figure out when flash at 1/500th might actually "Do" something for your photographs. I guess if you like every shot at f/16 to f/11 outdoors, you'll be happy with 1/125 sycnh....1/180 doesn't really cut it sometimes....depends...it's not 100% evenly-illuminated.

--
Happy Shooting!
Derrel

Wing88,

Yes I should have made more clear that I ment the "semi working 1/180" of the S2 and the now official 1/180 of the S3. Point was about the discussions on the S3 anyways, I dont think the S2 has to prove itself anymore

However your judgement is correct, and I think I should have left out the S2 all together.

Derrel,

That is not what I said - if you read my posting, instead of project other peoples opinion onto it ..you will see.

Tell me the difference between a fictional S3.1 that can sync at 1/250 and the d70? Except for freezing extreme motion there is NONE.

This is my point, yet your reply seems to indicate you mostly ignore the ISO aspect.

Fictional S3.1 with base ISO of 100 and sync speed of 1/250 will provide you with EXACTLY the same flexibility in terms of outdoor filling or indoor flashing as the D70 with base ISO 200 and 1/500th.

Now we agree on that, we go down to the step I made in my initial posting - I dont think that effective 1/180 S3 vs effective 1/250th on the D70 is a difference getting all corkyabout.

I dare even say that in PRACTISE the S3 will prove to give better photos regardless of slightly lower effective flash syncing ..why?

The S3 records highlights several stops higher than the D70 for the same scene...so even with 1/180 we would not blow out the highlights and get a fabulous picture regardless - one containing more shadow and highlight detail than those made by cameras with higher flash sync speeds.

Somehow the pro "high sync" people seem to forget this......

To me it looks like the syncspeed has fallen to the same leagues as "Megahertz" and "Megapixel" ...useless marketing gibberish.

Dynamic range of the sensor and base ISO extend flexibility of a relatively low flash sync speed, and for everything except bullet-stopping-photos we do not need physically faster sync speeds, as long as the EFFECTIVE flash power is low enough to shoot any kind of photo you want.

(And I agree that the S2's 1/125th and regular dynamic range are a far cry from both the S3 and D70 flash performance)

Felipe,

They will be delighted with the S3 then.

Besides higher flash sync speed (1/180 vs 1/125) they also get a huge boost in dynamic range - so the highlights that are blowing out now, and even those highlights that would blow out with a 1/250th flash sync, are completely preserved due to the SuperCCD SR sensor...

The S3 will likely be the wet dream of any weddingphotographer - and I am predicting that the dynamic range might be good enough to shoot WITHOUT fillflash, on occasion!

I said that the S2 and S3 were never high FPS, high flash sync sport cameras, yet you show me exactly that kind of a photo - motion-freezing being the intention!

Now I dont exactly understand the purpose of your reply, since I stated very clearly that sportsphotographers should not buy a camera like the S3 or S2 (since these are aimed at a different target audience).

You would be more satisfied with a D2h or Canon MKII probably - if you really feel that the occasional fast-paced photo is worth shelling thousands of dollars for.

You bring up a good point that if the base ISO of the D70 is 200, it diminishes the sync speed advantage.

But you lose it by thinking that 1/500th applies to sports photographers. It really applies to anyone who wants to do daylight fill flash with wide apertures, such as guys like me who enjoy swimsuit photography or wedding photographers shooting in daylight who want to blur backgrounds.

It's not about stopping motion, but about controlling depth of field by using flash.

I appreciate what you're saying, but your explanation and justification demonstrates a limited understanding of the issue by failing to take into account the need to control depth of field.

Anthony

majic said:

What is all the fuss about? 1/500th Sync speed ..wow...! We
suddenly all became sports photographers ...right.

Back to reality people, the S2 and S3 were never intended to be FPS
stop-motion-monsters.

For anything except the extremes, 1/500th is completely and utterly
useless.....and I'm feeling silly for pointing out that 24 mb RAW
files (which is the result of having the best dynamic range in the
world and is a direct result of capturing double the data -
highlights and shadows) are hardly suitable for high FPS - write
times are just too lengthy even with the best of CF cards (Just
like we do not hear 1Ds users complain that it's not a sports
camera - because it isnt!) . Alternative would be tremendous
buffers - but we're dealing with costs and "target audience" too -
and I doubt that any company is going to spend a lot of money for
something that only

Now watch this :

S2 : ISO 100, 1/180
D70 : ISO 200, 1/500

That makes effective 1/250 for the D70...not all that big a
difference suddenly is it. No it is not. UNLESS you shoot sports
where it is not about the effective shutterspeed but about freezing
a subject at shutterspeeds as high as possible.

Good, we know the S2 and S3 are not sports cameras, we now know and
see that the EFFECTIVE difference between 1/180 and 1/250 is
minimal and we know that the average human will not move at
speeds fast enough to render 1/180 useless.

Fine, lets drop it then! thanks, I'm sick and tired of reading the
ranting about something that is so completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Just curious...why not use a ND filter?

Anthony said:

You bring up a good point that if the base ISO of the D70 is 200,
it diminishes the sync speed advantage.

But you lose it by thinking that 1/500th applies to sports
photographers. It really applies to anyone who wants to do
daylight fill flash with wide apertures, such as guys like me who
enjoy swimsuit photography or wedding photographers shooting in
daylight who want to blur backgrounds.

It's not about stopping motion, but about controlling depth of
field by using flash.

I appreciate what you're saying, but your explanation and
justification demonstrates a limited understanding of the issue by
failing to take into account the need to control depth of field.

Anthony

Click to expand...

THAT'S JUST ONE APPLICATION.

It'll be nice when people stop telling others what they should or should not expect or want from a camera.

majic said:

%&# (#%&@

Click to expand...

Anthony said:

It's not about stopping motion, but about controlling depth of
field by using flash.

I appreciate what you're saying, but your explanation and
justification demonstrates a limited understanding of the issue by
failing to take into account the need to control depth of field.

Click to expand...

Anthony,

I fail to understand how you can excert more control on depth of field with JUST a faster sync speed.

What you say is absolutely true - the flash output power should not limit yourself from using your lenses wideopen to get smooth, out of focus backgrounds.

However, just flash syncspeed is not going to fix this for you, so I do not understand your sneering reply.

If your base ISO is 200, your flash sync speed will not help you to get out of focus buttersmooth backgrounds - since the higher ISO will also force you to stop down to prevent overexposure. The d70 is pointed out as a camera that has excellent flash sync speeds - yet the above is often forgotten.

This has been, and still is my exact point.

S3's SuperCCD Sr sensor will allow you to make photos that would normally have yielded severe overexposure - so the 1/180 flash sync speed is effectively more usefull than D70's 1/500 in several ways, and in practise when shooting girls in bathing suits you will benefit from greater dynamic range, hence less need for fillflash, ergo 1/180 will not limit you unless you are going to shoot sports.

(Which is exactly what I've been saying in the other messages)

earthbound_ca said:

THAT'S JUST ONE APPLICATION.

It'll be nice when people stop telling others what they should or
should not expect or want from a camera.

Click to expand...

What exactly are you going to achieve with the higher 1/500th sync speed of the D70 if the base ISO is also a stop higher? I am falling into repetition - Effective flashadvantage for the D70 is minimal....1/180 vs 1/250th is negicable, especially when taking into account the huge dynamic range on the S3 which will mean that fillflash will be both more controlled AND less of a necessaty.

I have used a polarizer, but it can be a pain to focus through a polarizer or ND filter as it cuts down the light.

Anthony

Jared Hunter said:

Anthony said:

You bring up a good point that if the base ISO of the D70 is 200,
it diminishes the sync speed advantage.

But you lose it by thinking that 1/500th applies to sports
photographers. It really applies to anyone who wants to do
daylight fill flash with wide apertures, such as guys like me who
enjoy swimsuit photography or wedding photographers shooting in
daylight who want to blur backgrounds.

It's not about stopping motion, but about controlling depth of
field by using flash.

I appreciate what you're saying, but your explanation and
justification demonstrates a limited understanding of the issue by
failing to take into account the need to control depth of field.

Anthony

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Doesn't your argument fall apart when we start using NDs or polarizers on the D70 so that ISO effectively becomes ISO100 or lower? We'll always be able to lower effective ISO with filters, but there will never be a work-around for bumping up a slower flash sync.

majic said:

earthbound_ca said:

THAT'S JUST ONE APPLICATION.

It'll be nice when people stop telling others what they should or
should not expect or want from a camera.

Click to expand...

What exactly are you going to achieve with the higher 1/500th sync
speed of the D70 if the base ISO is also a stop higher? I am
falling into repetition - Effective flashadvantage for the D70 is
minimal....1/180 vs 1/250th is negicable, especially when taking
into account the huge dynamic range on the S3 which will mean that
fillflash will be both more controlled AND less of a necessaty.

Click to expand...

You post, and I quote, "I'm sick and tired of reading the ranting about something that is so completely irrelevant," among a bunch of other rants, and then you accuse me of sneering?

It's very simple about depth of field and even with a higher ISO of 200, the faster sync of D70 does allow a little bit more control over depth of field.

Your original post spoke about stopping action, not depth of field. Again, to quote:

"Back to reality people, the S2 and S3 were never intended to be FPS stop-motion-monsters."

So, for you to say now...

"If your base ISO is 200, your flash sync speed will not help you to get out of focus buttersmooth backgrounds - since the higher ISO will also force you to stop down to prevent overexposure. The d70 is pointed out as a camera that has excellent flash sync speeds - yet the above is often forgotten.

"This has been, and still is my exact point. "

...is not the truth. That's not at all what you said in your original post.

What you're saying below is that I should overexpose my pics and trust the sensor's dynamic range to get it right. That's BS in my book. You're better off nailing the exposure right from the get-go.

In actual experience, opening up the aperture forces the shutter speed to be faster. Hence, faster flash sync will allow people to use flash in daylight. And you've missed the point about the D70. The point is that if Nikon can put a 1/500 flash sync in their D70, why can't Fuji put a 1/500 flash sync in the S3?

Heck if I could, I'd take a 1/1000 or 1/2000 flash sync speed, which high-end Nikons and even middling Canons can do. The 1/500 of the D70, even including the ISO 200, still gives an edge over my S2 and it's 1/125 sync speed with a hot shoe flash. Guess what--that means I can use a bigger aperture.

majic said:

in practise when shooting girls in bathing suits you will
benefit from greater dynamic range, hence less need for fillflash,
ergo 1/180 will not limit you unless you are going to shoot sports.

Click to expand...

Well, people use fill flash even with film which has more dynamic range and exposure latitude than digital. I think I'll leave your statement to stand alone for what it appears, and let people draw their own inferences.

Anthony

majic said:

I fail to understand how you can excert more control on depth of
field with JUST a faster sync speed.

What you say is absolutely true - the flash output power should not
limit yourself from using your lenses wideopen to get smooth, out
of focus backgrounds.

However, just flash syncspeed is not going to fix this for you, so
I do not understand your sneering reply.

If your base ISO is 200, your flash sync speed will not help you to
get out of focus buttersmooth backgrounds - since the higher ISO
will also force you to stop down to prevent overexposure. The d70
is pointed out as a camera that has excellent flash sync speeds -
yet the above is often forgotten.

This has been, and still is my exact point.

S3's SuperCCD Sr sensor will allow you to make photos that would
normally have yielded severe overexposure - so the 1/180 flash sync
speed is effectively more usefull than D70's 1/500 in several ways,
and in practise when shooting girls in bathing suits you will
benefit from greater dynamic range, hence less need for fillflash,
ergo 1/180 will not limit you unless you are going to shoot sports.

(Which is exactly what I've been saying in the other messages)

Anthony said:

It's not about stopping motion, but about controlling depth of
field by using flash.

I appreciate what you're saying, but your explanation and
justification demonstrates a limited understanding of the issue by
failing to take into account the need to control depth of field.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...