Sigma SD1 - 7-fps not bad
So I have seen lots of news on the SD1 and I am very intrigued about this camera, I have a 7D now that I use and love but would not mind switching to a SD1 if it could keep up in the sports area. I sent an email to Sigma yesterday and received a reply today saying this ans I quote.
Thank you for choosing Sigma products.
I am being told it is 7 FPS.
Now if this is true, that is not bad for shooting sports as well as studio work.
There are several articles about the SD1 in Japanese magazines.
According to them, the frame rate is 5pics/sec 7 pictures at High resolution and 6pics/sec 15 pictures at Mid and Low resolution.
A 7 frame buffer is not good. That's what the SD14 has and I run into it all the time--really frustrating. Sigma is still making compromises with the SD1, the small buffer is one example as is the very slow file write time, again almost as long as the SD14. The 470K screen is another compromise as the common standard for semi-pro and pro cameras is 920K.
A 7 frame buffer is not good. That's what the SD14 has and I run into it all the time--really frustrating. Sigma is still making compromises with the SD1, the small buffer is one example as is the very slow file write time, again almost as long as the SD14.
this has always been the issue - the SD14 takes longer to write a 4.6Mp X3F than an ancient SD9 takes to write a 3.3Mp one same for the DP series (in otherwords, there's no card write speed improvement since 2003) - If the SD1 takes as long to write a 15Mp X3F then it's actually gained write speed, an unbelievably fast card interface would be needed to pot colossal SD1 X3Fs at the same speed as even something like a 1DS MK3 or D3X RAW and I doubt Sigma have the technology .
How fast is the Pentax 645D - that's the kind of file and buffer it needs to be compared to
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge
it is is the processor.
When you compare a 5DMKII, which writes 1 RAW in 1 sec. With a 3 year old Interface, than the SD1 should theoretically write 1 RAW in 2 sec.
I believe the bottleneck are the TRUE Porcessors which might be to slow (Or the RAW developement much more complicted than with Bayer data), and it is also for sure not easy to optimize multiprocessor programms that they get the maximum out of both processors.
rick decker wrote:
7 fps - the OP. Other inaccurate stuff going around. All to be revealed soon.
I found a post which gave a fps a/o a February trade show,
although this info is not in Sigma published specs
Indeed this is the problem with advance 'info' and specs cited before release. Specificationsof prototypes and betas as of any given time point may not be the final release specs.
Best regards, Sandy
Paul North wrote:
HUH, I didn't think it was a trick question to Sigma ? I asked what the FPS would be, meaning Frames Per Sec not buffer size. I didn't think they would confuse the two.
There may be such variables too such as RAW+JPEG vs JPEG vs solely RAW vs variations of resolution within RAW. It's been noted that the SD1 is expected to have various settings IN RAW, ie Hi vs Med vs Low. Current cameras do not; earlier cameras (SD9/10) did.
Such variables can lead to misunderstandings and mis-information too. We're (people posting on this forum) are expecting rather large file sizes too... 40MB to even 60MB with fine detail, highest res... so that's lots of data to push around. I just bought a new 8GB CF card to use on my SD14 now and on the SD1 later. I'm showing about 500 shots in RAW on the SD14... it certainly won't be that number on the SD1 LOL.
I have no idea of frames per second in the various settings, I'm just saying (and I think Rick too) that we'll know when the specifications are officially announced.
Best regards, Sandy
|Umbrellas by pleytime|
from An A to Z of Subjects- Week 21, U
|Glass ball on a perforated metal plate _2 by harubux|