"Who needs 8fps? "

Neal Martin · Mar 24, 2004

Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO, that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos. Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some quality features available, I've used them well, even though I never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford. Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

jim kelly · Mar 24, 2004

shots that can be spaced at intervals of 1/8 of a second. It is your choice to blast off 3 or 4 ( my usual ) or 10 or 40.

Jim

http://users.erols.com/jamesgkelly/c2100uz.html

MarkMiller · Mar 24, 2004

you can also set the burst rate to limit the number of shots taken - I agree that even in studio 8fps is good for changing expressions etc.

jim kelly said:
shots that can be spaced at intervals of 1/8 of a second. It is
your choice to blast off 3 or 4 ( my usual ) or 10 or 40.

Jim

http://users.erols.com/jamesgkelly/c2100uz.html

--
~ there are those that do ~ and those that talk about it ~

'Ozy' · Mar 24, 2004

I shoot racing photography at a very low shutter speed. I do this to attain the "motion blur" feeling of both the background and wheels. I do not want a picture that looks like the car is parked on the track. Because I have to shoot between 1/125 - 1/200sec and shooting a 300 f2.8 IS, I am way under the 1/focal length rule. Shooting at 8FPS helps me guarantee I'll get at least one or two sharp shots. I usually have a 10% keeper rate when I shoot this way. If i only had 3fps, there is NO way i would be able to get as many choices.

A few shots from the Ferrari Challenge on Saturday.

300mm @ 1/125

and my 300 with a 2x TC on it

Neal Martin said:
Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

--
Ozy / http://www.carandmodel.com
1D, 300L f2.8 IS, 70-200L IS, 16-35L, 24-70L, 100 f2.8 macro
135L f2, 85L f1.2, 50 f1.4 / 550EX & MT-24EX Flash

wolfpv · Mar 24, 2004

I'm just a plain old amateur, and I'm on the list for a MarkII, upgrading from a Drebel.

Do I need 8 FPS? Well, my daughter jumps horses, and right now I'm lucky to get one great shot in a two day horse show. 2 1/2 fps is really one try when the horse is ascending over the jump. With the DRebel's response speed, I've got to time the shutter just right. I believe that 8 fps will allow me to do a burst and capture a lot more. It should completely change the way I shoot these events.

Last week I was shooting whales from a boat. Do you have any idea how quickly a whale breaches and dives? Boy, I would have liked 8 fpm.

I could go on and on. There are many times in every shoot when a quick burst of shots would increase my chances of capturing the right instant. Will it make me a great photographer? Naahh. Will I get more really good shots? I sure hope so!

It's also a lot cheaper than a Porsche.

-Steve

Neal Martin said:
Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

Rich A · Mar 24, 2004

I would rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it. There is no economy in buying and selling camera equipment. I hope the mark II will keep me happy for a number of years. The 10D has me wishing for more. I am #1 on my local suppliers list for the MK II.

Rich

Neal Martin said:
Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

--
Thanks

Rich

Yohan Pamudji · Mar 24, 2004

Ozy,

Wow, beautiful shots! Boy, that 300mm IS and 1D combo sure does take some purty pictures

Just kidding ya. Even with 8 fps and IS, it takes skill to get shots like you do on a consistent basis. I enjoy your racing shots immensely.

Who needs 8 fps? How about somebody trying to photograph 30 kids who absolutely won't stay still? 8 fps might guarantee one shot in 40 of all 30 kids looking straight at the camera and not blinking

Not as sexy as sports or cars, but there's a need for 8 fps in all sorts of places.

To a certain extent a capable camera does make one a better photographer, if part of the definition of a good photographer is one who is capable of capturing the candid moment perfectly down to the smallest expression or gesture.

-Yohan

'Ozy' said:
I shoot racing photography at a very low shutter speed. I do this
to attain the "motion blur" feeling of both the background and
wheels. I do not want a picture that looks like the car is parked
on the track. Because I have to shoot between 1/125 - 1/200sec and
shooting a 300 f2.8 IS, I am way under the 1/focal length rule.
Shooting at 8FPS helps me guarantee I'll get at least one or two
sharp shots. I usually have a 10% keeper rate when I shoot this
way. If i only had 3fps, there is NO way i would be able to get
as many choices.

Tom O'Neil · Mar 24, 2004

I don't "need" it but I use it once in a while. Shoot two Blue Angels coming at each other and see far far they travel in that 1/8 of a second.

Neal Martin said:
Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

Jonathan Lefcourt · Mar 24, 2004

AIServo or do you prefocus on one area to get those shots?

Jonathan

'Ozy' said:
A few shots from the Ferrari Challenge on Saturday.

300mm @ 1/125

and my 300 with a 2x TC on it

Neal Martin said:

Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

Click to expand...

--
Ozy / http://www.carandmodel.com
1D, 300L f2.8 IS, 70-200L IS, 16-35L, 24-70L, 100 f2.8 macro
135L f2, 85L f1.2, 50 f1.4 / 550EX & MT-24EX Flash

--
Jonathan Lefcourt
2003 NYC-Central Park Winter Scenes
http://www.pbase.com/jlefcourt/nyc_central__park

westgorge · Mar 24, 2004

Rich A said:
Rich

Neal Martin said:

Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

Click to expand...

--
Thanks

Rich

'Ozy' · Mar 24, 2004

AI Servo and Center AF point with auto 7 point expansion enabled. I track the car through the entire turn. The EOS-1 line AF is so awesome.

Jonathan Lefcourt said:
AIServo or do you prefocus on one area to get those shots?

Jonathan

--
Ozy / http://www.carandmodel.com
1D, 300L f2.8 IS, 70-200L IS, 16-35L, 24-70L, 100 f2.8 macro
135L f2, 85L f1.2, 50 f1.4 / 550EX & MT-24EX Flash

MikeDitz · Mar 24, 2004

to go with my 48" flat screen TV and my car with a 160mph speedometer and my 400 channels beamed to me from outer space (on my 48" flat screen TV!) and my Viking commercial grade stove, and so on...

Is it just digital or did everybody used to shoot with Canon 1vHS, weren't they 10 fps? I guess with enough fps there should be one keeper in there.

Whatever happend to the "decisive moment"?

8fps in the studio? What sort of strobe can keep up with that?

I can convince myself that I need almost anything!
--
-Kel 2K

Bill Bradstreet · Mar 24, 2004

I've had my D60 for around two years. It has served me well. I'm hoping to get my hands on a 1DmkII as soon as I can. Then I have a feeling I'll have a camera for the next X years. It is hard to say how long I'll keep it, but I expect it to last longer than my D60.

The 8fps is just one reason why expect this to be true.

Rich A said:
Rich

Neal Martin said:

Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

Click to expand...

--
Thanks

Rich

--
Regards,

Bill

http://public.fotki.com/o2bnme/ (plenty of sample shots in the Public/Miscellaneous folder)

HappyCamper · Mar 24, 2004

Neal Martin said:
Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

Neal Martin · Mar 24, 2004

Anyone would predict that 8fps for cars, planes, etc. is useful. I'm with Mark, though, and his example of the multi-shots for studio. For example, catching the subject just going into the smile instead of the full grin; catch the half blink instead of eyes open or shut. In my case, I'm shooting lots of people who are simply talking. I'm pretty good at anticipating expressions and sometimes catching them if my sluggish D60 doesn't decide to refocus. Sometimes there's just a micro-second difference between an engaging expression and a stupid gesture, and a good photographer catches the character that would please both the viewer and the subject. I expect that the MKII will make me better.
Neal

MarkMiller said:
I agree that even in studio 8fps is good for changing expressions

etc.

jim kelly said:

shots that can be spaced at intervals of 1/8 of a second. It is
your choice to blast off 3 or 4 ( my usual ) or 10 or 40.

Jim

http://users.erols.com/jamesgkelly/c2100uz.html

Click to expand...

--
~ there are those that do ~ and those that talk about it ~

--
Neal Martin

Nill Toulme · Mar 24, 2004

Nill
~~
http://www.toulme.net

golferstub · Mar 24, 2004

Nill Toulme said:
Nill
~~
http://www.toulme.net

You made your point. Yes, we need it. Awesome series.

Dan Higgins · Mar 24, 2004

I'm with Nil. I almost exclusively shoot soccer. It is not only sequences like this but it is also the speed when you need it. I frequently shoot sequences of 2-3 shots in rapid succession. 3 shots, quickly swing to another player and 3 shots again, then swing to something else and do it again. To use 8fps effectively you need fast autofocus and overall camera speed. Otherwise you get 8 bad pictures per second!

Of course it is the advent of quality digital photography that has made this all possible! With film, it would not have been the camera that would have limited my shooting speed!

Dan

(I shoot with a 1D.)

Nill Toulme said:
Nill
~~
http://www.toulme.net

Mr Majestyk · Mar 24, 2004

Kel Tookay said:
to go with my 48" flat screen TV and my car with a 160mph
speedometer and my 400 channels beamed to me from outer space (on
my 48" flat screen TV!) and my Viking commercial grade stove, and
so on...

Is it just digital or did everybody used to shoot with Canon 1vHS,
weren't they 10 fps? I guess with enough fps there should be one
keeper in there.

Whatever happend to the "decisive moment"?

8fps in the studio? What sort of strobe can keep up with that?

I can convince myself that I need almost anything!
--
-Kel 2K

Ever photographed a breeching whale; a landing bird; a motorcycle race?

I can think of dozens of uses for 8fps and have used 6 fps many times on my EOS 3.

Tell me when you get to photo a whale breeching, from a rocking boat when the decisive moment is. You better be ready to fire off a burst IMO.

T3 · Mar 24, 2004

"Without limitations". I think that's one driving motivation to get something that you may not use. At least you know that it is there if you do need it. At least you know you won't be limited by it.

Neal Martin said:
Consider 2 categories of frequent comments. First, "You won't be a
better photographer just because you have great equipment." IMO,
that's only partly true. Better gear helps me take better photos.
Second, "I'm not a sports shooter, so who needs 8 fps?" or "I'm
mostly in the studio, so who needs instant af?" Having some
quality features available, I've used them well, even though I
never thought I "needed" them. It all makes me go for the best
camera and features I can imagine myself using and can afford.
Anyone else do the extravagant thing and buy a camera with features
and/or quality you couldn't "justify" but nevertheless it turned
out to be a good choice?
--
Neal Martin

"Who needs 8fps? "

Neal Martin

Guest

jim kelly

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Neal Martin

Guest

Veteran Member

New member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts