How many FPS is enough?

[Supisiche]

I used a Casio Ex FH100 for high speed video. One outstanding feature was that the FH100 and some other Casio models had very fast shutter speeds down to 25 microsecond or 1/40,000 second and full manual exposure control. Try and find that since the unique Casio's series of high speed video models. See Casio forum, for the Ex-F1, Ex-FH25, Ex-FH100 and some other high speed video models, that also had burst full frame modes. These cameras reduced resolution to record video. They eventually made a special model that synced a few cameras. It would have been perfect for orthogonal views of tennis strokes or similar athletic actions and many other special applications. Was that model.....Model..?....f100? I had someone test ...f100 and posted it in the Kinovea forum.

I had had previous experience with high speed imaging for many years. An interview with a Casio employee indicated that they knew what they wanted to do in high speed videoing. Their unique cameras with full manual control and 25 microsecond shutter speed plus other features were not appreciated vs high speed video cameras without the many Casio features.

I have not kept up with current models for high speed video. Recently, I purchased some used Casio FH100s (~$100) and an F1(~$300) for their great high speed video capabilities for athletic motions.

Chas Tennis

Yes, the Casios were very unique with their HS-video and (first) "Pre-Capture".

I fail to understand why they are still not available in the US, (they were at one time).

They of course were (albeit SOTA) low-resolution at the time. I am not sure what they have now.

Casio also had paradigm changing "calculator" watches, and the smallest hand-held calculator (literally CREDIT CARD size), that had trig & log functions. (used it for work since I needed log-functions).

Phillips used to give away credit card size calculators in the early 1970/1980s when promoting their then very new cd technology for the oil patch. I still have my operational calculator.

Obviously there are different interpretations of "paradigm".

The introduction of digital cameras represents a "paradigm" shift, the rest is simply features.

Digital is not really necessary.

 

[tony field]

I used a Casio Ex FH100 for high speed video. One outstanding feature was that the FH100 and some other Casio models had very fast shutter speeds down to 25 microsecond or 1/40,000 second and full manual exposure control. Try and find that since the unique Casio's series of high speed video models. See Casio forum, for the Ex-F1, Ex-FH25, Ex-FH100 and some other high speed video models, that also had burst full frame modes. These cameras reduced resolution to record video. They eventually made a special model that synced a few cameras. It would have been perfect for orthogonal views of tennis strokes or similar athletic actions and many other special applications. Was that model.....Model..?....f100? I had someone test ...f100 and posted it in the Kinovea forum.

I had had previous experience with high speed imaging for many years. An interview with a Casio employee indicated that they knew what they wanted to do in high speed videoing. Their unique cameras with full manual control and 25 microsecond shutter speed plus other features were not appreciated vs high speed video cameras without the many Casio features.

I have not kept up with current models for high speed video. Recently, I purchased some used Casio FH100s (~$100) and an F1(~$300) for their great high speed video capabilities for athletic motions.

Chas Tennis

Yes, the Casios were very unique with their HS-video and (first) "Pre-Capture".

I fail to understand why they are still not available in the US, (they were at one time).

They of course were (albeit SOTA) low-resolution at the time. I am not sure what they have now.

Casio also had paradigm changing "calculator" watches, and the smallest hand-held calculator (literally CREDIT CARD size), that had trig & log functions. (used it for work since I needed log-functions).

Phillips used to give away credit card size calculators in the early 1970/1980s when promoting their then very new cd technology for the oil patch. I still have my operational calculator.

Obviously there are different interpretations of "paradigm".

The introduction of digital cameras represents a "paradigm" shift, the rest is simply features.

Indeed. It changed from film to digital recording and chemistry to computer development. These are fundamental changes to the underlying nature of the photographic process. IMHO, these are major paradigm shifts which allows any person to become a "photographer".

Unchanged is what we shoot such as sports, scenic, nature, astronomy, fashion, documentation of unfolding history, male/female art, etc

--
Charles Darwin: "ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
tony

 

[PhotoTeach2]

I used a Casio Ex FH100 for high speed video. One outstanding feature was that the FH100 and some other Casio models had very fast shutter speeds down to 25 microsecond or 1/40,000 second and full manual exposure control. Try and find that since the unique Casio's series of high speed video models. See Casio forum, for the Ex-F1, Ex-FH25, Ex-FH100 and some other high speed video models, that also had burst full frame modes. These cameras reduced resolution to record video. They eventually made a special model that synced a few cameras. It would have been perfect for orthogonal views of tennis strokes or similar athletic actions and many other special applications. Was that model.....Model..?....f100? I had someone test ...f100 and posted it in the Kinovea forum.

I had had previous experience with high speed imaging for many years. An interview with a Casio employee indicated that they knew what they wanted to do in high speed videoing. Their unique cameras with full manual control and 25 microsecond shutter speed plus other features were not appreciated vs high speed video cameras without the many Casio features.

I have not kept up with current models for high speed video. Recently, I purchased some used Casio FH100s (~$100) and an F1(~$300) for their great high speed video capabilities for athletic motions.

Chas Tennis

Yes, the Casios were very unique with their HS-video and (first) "Pre-Capture".

I fail to understand why they are still not available in the US, (they were at one time).

They of course were (albeit SOTA) low-resolution at the time. I am not sure what they have now.

Casio also had paradigm changing "calculator" watches, and the smallest hand-held calculator (literally CREDIT CARD size), that had trig & log functions. (used it for work since I needed log-functions).

Phillips used to give away credit card size calculators in the early 1970/1980s when promoting their then very new cd technology for the oil patch. I still have my operational calculator.

Obviously there are different interpretations of "paradigm".

The introduction of digital cameras represents a "paradigm" shift, the rest is simply features.

A definition of "paradigm" is: A paradigm is a way of looking at something, or distinct set of concepts or thought patterns that contribute to a field.

I can agree to some extent that digital was paradigm-changing, (from our old way of thinking), but we were still limited by the mirrors in dSLR's.

ML, (and now stacked-sensors), freed us from those limitations, that now allows paradigm-changing options & features, (aka Pre/Pro-Capture that allows capturing the "peak" of action AFTER the "peak" -- never before easily possible).

Thus higher-frame-rates and Post/Stacking-Focus is also something easily now possible.

 

[Guy Parsons]

A definition of "paradigm" is: A paradigm is a way of looking at something, or distinct set of concepts or thought patterns that contribute to a field.

I can agree to some extent that digital was paradigm-changing, (from our old way of thinking), but we were still limited by the mirrors in dSLR's.

ML, (and now stacked-sensors), freed us from those limitations, that now allows paradigm-changing options & features, (aka Pre/Pro-Capture that allows capturing the "peak" of action AFTER the "peak" -- never before easily possible).

Thus higher-frame-rates and Post/Stacking-Focus is also something easily now possible.

That's simply features that came with digital cameras, many are old hat as far as compact cameras were concerned, they were doing clever stuff many years before the dinosaur SLR design woke up to becoming mirrorless and started to copy the old compact camera features.

Many here seem to believe that you are stretching the use of the word paradigm.

In your particular instance it is simply a feature that made getting the timing right easy. Nothing new as a clever/careful operator could do that anyway with any old camera.

The word stems from Greek and means "pattern" and in my mind more applies to the invention of digital cameras as a whole, the rest is simply features that followed on, first in the already mirrorless compact cameras and much later to system cameras when they evolved to mirrorless.

 

[tony field]

I used a Casio Ex FH100 for high speed video. One outstanding feature was that the FH100 and some other Casio models had very fast shutter speeds down to 25 microsecond or 1/40,000 second and full manual exposure control. Try and find that since the unique Casio's series of high speed video models. See Casio forum, for the Ex-F1, Ex-FH25, Ex-FH100 and some other high speed video models, that also had burst full frame modes. These cameras reduced resolution to record video. They eventually made a special model that synced a few cameras. It would have been perfect for orthogonal views of tennis strokes or similar athletic actions and many other special applications. Was that model.....Model..?....f100? I had someone test ...f100 and posted it in the Kinovea forum.

I had had previous experience with high speed imaging for many years. An interview with a Casio employee indicated that they knew what they wanted to do in high speed videoing. Their unique cameras with full manual control and 25 microsecond shutter speed plus other features were not appreciated vs high speed video cameras without the many Casio features.

I have not kept up with current models for high speed video. Recently, I purchased some used Casio FH100s (~$100) and an F1(~$300) for their great high speed video capabilities for athletic motions.

Chas Tennis

Yes, the Casios were very unique with their HS-video and (first) "Pre-Capture".

I fail to understand why they are still not available in the US, (they were at one time).

They of course were (albeit SOTA) low-resolution at the time. I am not sure what they have now.

Casio also had paradigm changing "calculator" watches, and the smallest hand-held calculator (literally CREDIT CARD size), that had trig & log functions. (used it for work since I needed log-functions).

Phillips used to give away credit card size calculators in the early 1970/1980s when promoting their then very new cd technology for the oil patch. I still have my operational calculator.

Obviously there are different interpretations of "paradigm".

The introduction of digital cameras represents a "paradigm" shift, the rest is simply features.

A definition of "paradigm" is: A paradigm is a way of looking at something, or distinct set of concepts or thought patterns that contribute to a field.

I can agree to some extent that digital was paradigm-changing, (from our old way of thinking), but we were still limited by the mirrors in dSLR's.

ML, (and now stacked-sensors), freed us from those limitations, that now allows paradigm-changing options & features, (aka Pre/Pro-Capture that allows capturing the "peak" of action AFTER the "peak" -- never before easily possible).

Previously you stated (approximately) that if you use a camera without this feature, you select an appropriate shutter frame rate, fire with the shutter with button down earlier than your anticipated peak action, and only release the shutter well after the peak action.

IMHO this is an easily possible close to equivalent of Pre/Pro-Capture. Definitely trivial for any shooter. I use a variation of this shooting single frame

Thus higher-frame-rates and Post/Stacking-Focus is also something easily now possible.

--
Charles Darwin: "ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
tony

 

[Chas Tennis]

Here is a videos showing what is true about the tennis serve.

This was confirmed about 1995 by tennis researchers. It's Internal Shoulder Rotation and provides the most significant racket head speed leading to and at impact. For ISR, the upper arm bone (humerus) spins like a top. High speed videos show what is happening. It was missed by photographers and tennis researchers until 1995. And still hardly a percent of active tennis players understand Internal Shoulder Rotation or speak the word! Most active tennis players use a different serving technique, but not the ATP.

From start to ball impact ISR lasts about 25 milliseconds. 10 fps sometimes would get only one frame. 240 fps was used to record this video.

Go full screen.

To single frame on Youtube, stop video, and use the period & comma keys. Hold down the period or comma keys to move through the long pauses.



Tennis stroke video analyses posted in the Talk Tennis Forum. See Gallery.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

I used a Casio Ex FH100 for high speed video. One outstanding feature was that the FH100 and some other Casio models had very fast shutter speeds down to 25 microsecond or 1/40,000 second and full manual exposure control. Try and find that since the unique Casio's series of high speed video models. See Casio forum, for the Ex-F1, Ex-FH25, Ex-FH100 and some other high speed video models, that also had burst full frame modes. These cameras reduced resolution to record video. They eventually made a special model that synced a few cameras. It would have been perfect for orthogonal views of tennis strokes or similar athletic actions and many other special applications. Was that model.....Model..?....f100? I had someone test ...f100 and posted it in the Kinovea forum.

I had had previous experience with high speed imaging for many years. An interview with a Casio employee indicated that they knew what they wanted to do in high speed videoing. Their unique cameras with full manual control and 25 microsecond shutter speed plus other features were not appreciated vs high speed video cameras without the many Casio features.

I have not kept up with current models for high speed video. Recently, I purchased some used Casio FH100s (~$100) and an F1(~$300) for their great high speed video capabilities for athletic motions.

Chas Tennis

Yes, the Casios were very unique with their HS-video and (first) "Pre-Capture".

I fail to understand why they are still not available in the US, (they were at one time).

They of course were (albeit SOTA) low-resolution at the time. I am not sure what they have now.

Casio also had paradigm changing "calculator" watches, and the smallest hand-held calculator (literally CREDIT CARD size), that had trig & log functions. (used it for work since I needed log-functions).

Phillips used to give away credit card size calculators in the early 1970/1980s when promoting their then very new cd technology for the oil patch. I still have my operational calculator.

Obviously there are different interpretations of "paradigm".

The introduction of digital cameras represents a "paradigm" shift, the rest is simply features.

A definition of "paradigm" is: A paradigm is a way of looking at something, or distinct set of concepts or thought patterns that contribute to a field.

I can agree to some extent that digital was paradigm-changing, (from our old way of thinking), but we were still limited by the mirrors in dSLR's.

ML, (and now stacked-sensors), freed us from those limitations, that now allows paradigm-changing options & features, (aka Pre/Pro-Capture that allows capturing the "peak" of action AFTER the "peak" -- never before easily possible).

Previously you stated (approximately) that if you use a camera without this feature, you select an appropriate shutter frame rate, fire with the shutter with button down earlier than your anticipated peak action, and only release the shutter well after the peak action.

IMHO this is an easily possible close to equivalent of Pre/Pro-Capture. Definitely trivial for any shooter.

Not At All equivalent.

1.) There may 'never' be a lightning strike where your camera is pointed, (you could fill an entire CF/SD/disc or HD 'waiting').

With Pre/Pro-Capture, only the last (needed) 1-5 seconds are recorded.

2.) Typical 5-6fps can be insufficient even for relatively slow-moving action. And 10-12fps can easily be insufficient for fast action.

A minimum of 30/60fps is essential for typical faster action. (And there is now an example post below where 240fps was essential.)

I use a variation of this shooting single frame

Nonsense ... you keep missing the entire point, (typical of past photographers who dismissed auto-metering, AF, & ML, etc.).

Even "Anticipating The Action" is still a guess, (maybe an educated guess w/ predictable action, but impossible w/ unpredictable/spontaneous events).

Thus higher-frame-rates and Post/Stacking-Focus is also something easily now possible.

 

[tbcass]

On the downside, 40fps requires using the electronic shutter which in this case resulted in rolling shutter making the ball look oval. Of course, an oval ball is better than not getting the shot at all. I'm glad to see this thread because it shows quite well the advantage of being able to use high-speed bursts. People who don't do this type of photography might be unaware of how useful it can be.

Or how close does one get with only one at bat to attempt this kind of shot (cropped in for identity privacy)

--
Tom

 

[Supisiche]

On the downside, 40fps requires using the electronic shutter which in this case resulted in rolling shutter making the ball look oval. Of course, an oval ball is better than not getting the shot at all. I'm glad to see this thread because it shows quite well the advantage of being able to use high-speed bursts. People who don't do this type of photography might be unaware of how useful it can be.

Or how close does one get with only one at bat to attempt this kind of shot (cropped in for identity privacy)

 

[angelo-d-schurman]

Great question, and one that's sparked a lot of debate lately in the photography world.

In my humble opinion, it really depends on what you're shooting. Are you doing wildlife photography, sports, or any fast-paced action that necessitates rapid-fire shots to catch that perfect moment? Then yeah, a high fps might be useful. But if you're mainly into landscape, portrait, or other forms of slow-paced photography, you probably won't benefit much from anything beyond the traditional 10-20 fps.

Don't get me wrong, shooting at 100 fps can feel quite liberating, but it can also be daunting when you have to sort through thousands of photos just to find the few that really hit the mark. Plus, let's not forget about the storage space those photos will consume - it's not exactly negligible.

Now, for the question of "feeling inadequate," I think it's more about perspective. In the end, a camera is just a tool. It's your skill, your eye, your creativity that make the photos. And let's be real, some of the most beautiful and impactful images were taken with gear that's now considered 'outdated'.

I've known photographers who've upgraded to a high fps camera just because they could, only to find it didn't really enhance their work. Others, though, have found it incredibly useful. Like most things in photography, it's not one-size-fits-all.

And if you're considering buying a new camera, just because it has a high fps, I'd recommend asking yourself whether you need it or just want it. Because while it might be cool to have a machine-gun-like burst mode, you might be better off investing in new lenses, lighting equipment, or maybe even some photography classes.

At the end of the day, just remember: the best camera is the one you have with you. And you definitely don't need a high fps camera to create outstanding images.

Happy shooting!

 

[JustUs7]

On the downside, 40fps requires using the electronic shutter which in this case resulted in rolling shutter making the ball look oval. Of course, an oval ball is better than not getting the shot at all. I'm glad to see this thread because it shows quite well the advantage of being able to use high-speed bursts. People who don't do this type of photography might be unaware of how useful it can be.

Or how close does one get with only one at bat to attempt this kind of shot (cropped in for identity privacy)

--
Tom

And the R6II reads in 14 milliseconds, which is the fastest read of a non-stacked sensor in the industry. Many cameras would be a lot worse.



Read speed and a stacked sensor is what makes the Z9 work without a shutter at all. The R3 would be close to a round ball. But some very good high resolution cameras would take over four times as long to read the sensor, making e-shutter virtually useless outside of static subjects.