Help With My Camera

[Phil May]

I have a question for you photographic boffins. I recently bought  a reasonable Fuji camera which I get on with well bar for one thing, once I have taken the photo there is a delay of approx 5 seconds before the picture is 'processed' and allowing me to take another. The SD card is only 256 MB which I am going to replace, will a bigger card reduce this processing time or am I stuck with it.

                                                  Thanks in advance

                                                                              B.P 

[Andy Green]

There are different specs of memory cards its not only the capacity you have to look for but speed.

 

I always use branded ones - namely Sandisk. Their Ultra range have a write speed of 15MB/s.

 

Andy

[Steve W-O]

five seconds is a very long time for any modern camera.

 

I have a Kodak C813 (don't laugh, I leave it in the car, treat it as disposable!) that does a similar thing, but if I lightly touch the shutter button, it suddenly becomes ready.

 

Check you review time, or turn the review off and see it maybe it helps.

 

 

Forgt to add, I have both Pentax and Olympus DSLRs and they are quick even on cheap memory cards

Edited By Steve W-O on 27/09/2010 10:55:14

[John Privett]

A different size card will not necessarily make any difference.  The problem is the speed at which the file gets written to the card.  It's possible that the camera is the bottleneck, but probably more likely that it's the card that is limiting the speed. 

 

SD cards have different speed ratings,  though the actual speed rating of a particular card is rarely displayed prominently - unless it's one of the very fast ones!  Have a look at Speed Class Ratings.

 

If you're thinking of getting a card bigger than 2 or 4G then there's one more "gotcha".  Bigger cards are SDHC, which are the same physical size as SD.  Newer equipment will handle both,  but older equipment won't recognise SDHC.  So check your camera's capability first!

[Pete B]

There's more than one way to skin a cat. It's all about the buffer speed in the camera, as well as the speed rating of the card.

 

It's worth looking at the file size of the pictures. I don't know what the maximum is for your camera but if you have it set for the highest picture size and quality, try reducing the file size to half and if necessary, reduce the quality from fine to medium - it will all be found in the menus.

 

For most purposes, a 4Mb picture on medium quality will be very satisfactory for resolution. This will be processed much more quickly than the largest file sizes.

 

You only need 8Mb+ if you are going to make 20 x 16 prints!

 

Pete

 

ps, that's a very small capacity card by today's standards, so reducing the file size will fit more piccies onto it.

Edited By Pete B on 27/09/2010 11:51:53

[ken anderson.]

hello BP----i've been into digi photo's and camera's for a while......i would recomend using the best settings you can in the camera......for best quality.....and try and use a 'high speed' card.....the newer camera's need a fairly fast card to record the stuff and perform at a decent rate......my opinion anyway.....what model fuji do you have ?....

 

  ken anderson..ne..1...35mm film/what's that......?

[Phil May]

Thanks guys, I bought a new 8GB SDHC card and it has made a big difference. It is near enough instant now.

                                               B.P 

Edited By Big Phil on 28/09/2010 08:04:42

[Ernie]

Hi Guys,

 A wee bit off thread, butb this is a hobby horse of mine.

In the old days of 36 or less shots, the photographer really needed to LOOK  and THINK before hitting the button.

I despair at the badly composed, and lit shots that abound. It's just too easy to think that with hundreds of shots available, then a couple will surely be OK

 

ernie

Edited By David Ashby - RCME Administrator on 28/09/2010 08:52:08

[Andy Green]

I tend to think that the more open any hobby is, the more people take it up, that drives innovation up and the price down.

 

I must also admit that at shows trying to capture a flying moment (Or football moment)  I fire off in burst mode in the hope that one will be OK.

 

Andy

 

 

 

 

[Steve W-O]

Posted by Ernie on 28/09/2010 08:35:23:

Hi Guys,

 A wee bit off thread, butb this is a hobby horse of mine.

In the old days of 36 or less shots, the photographer really needed to LOOK  and THINK before hitting the button.

I despair at the badly composed, and lit shots that abound. It's just too easy to think that with hundreds of shots available, then a couple will surely be OK

 

ernie

Edited By David Ashby - RCME Administrator on 28/09/2010 08:52:08

 

 

I must admit to doing the same with 35mm, I used to take plenty of shots to make sure i had the ones I wanted, particularly when doing weddings, can't go back and redo it, and often some of the favourite shots were those just taken on the spur of the moment.

 

I used to do a lot of B&W, and thought nothing of 400 shots in a weekend. Didn't print them all, not even a quarter of them.

 

I don't think my habits have changed much with digital, maybe they have improved. If it is something I really want I record raw, and now Gimp is my darkroom, takes up much less space in the house!

[Ernie]

Hi guys,

Sorry David, thought I might just get away with that one..... It is old RAF slang

 

Anyway, I cant argue with Andy or Steve. I suppose my gripe is about lack of thought and understanding. It's great to use the technology to help to get a great shot. I think the more you put into anything, the more you get out the other end

 

ernie

[Terence Lynock]

I use digital for fast shots that need not look too pretty, just for info mainly, and still use my two Nikon film cameras for stuff that matters with Kodacolour Gold or its equiv film.

because a film print is not pixelated as is digital as long as it is a good well focused shot I can enlarge it as much as I want to look at detail, I cant do that with digital unless I use high resolution and end up with 20 Mb+ files.