Why isn't delay between pressing button and taking picture specified?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

tinnews@isbd.co.uk - 27 Nov 2006 13:45 GMT

The subject says it all really! Why isn't the delay that you get with
(most?) digital cameras between pressing the button and the picture
being taken a fundamental part of the specification? It's so
important to the taking of some types of picture that a camera may
be perfect in every other way but be useless because it has a
relatively long delay.

Even independent reviews don't seem to think it's very important.

Signature

Chris Green

Reply to this Message

Richard Polhill - 27 Nov 2006 14:40 GMT

> The subject says it all really! Why isn't the delay that you get with
> (most?) digital cameras between pressing the button and the picture
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Even independent reviews don't seem to think it's very important.

I agree.

I have an old Nikon Coolpix 4300 which may cause one to wonder about the lack
of Sports mode until you try taking a photo of anything that moves. Good for
still lifes I suppose.

Reply to this Message

harrogate3 - 27 Nov 2006 19:03 GMT

> > The subject says it all really! Why isn't the delay that you get with
> > (most?) digital cameras between pressing the button and the picture
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> of Sports mode until you try taking a photo of anything that moves. Good for
> still lifes I suppose.

'Cos if they did no-one would buy 'em!!

If you want to know about shutter lag look at
www.steves-digicams.com
and you may be enlightened.

Generally speaking, in compacts, Casio are the quickest (by far) with
Canon Ixus not far behind; slowest is a toss-up between Nikon and
Olympus, with the rest falling somewhere in between. SLR's are all
quick.

If is DEFINITELY one of those instances where you need to go and play
in a camera retailers to find which suits you best.

Signature

Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Reply to this Message