Count those milliseconds!

There was a review in AP complimenting the Nikon D700 on having a shutter lag of only 70ms and it just made me think how little we expect these days...

In 1959 the Compur-shutter SLR from Voigtlander (the Bessamatic) was well known for its relatively slow response time, because of all the necessary mechanical linkages. It took a lethargic 50ms to relase the shutter....

I can't remember the excat figure for the simpler Pentax Spotmatic, but I think it's about 17ms.

Interesting how we have progressed!

Did they actually mean shutter lag, or did that include other things? It may be that the definition has changed over time, with cameras doing more and more stuff between the button press and the exposure.

If it's really just the time, after all the exposure calculations and AF lock, between the final press of the button to the shutter opening, then it's got to be one of the most pointless statistics out there.

For a human being to time any physical action to a precision of less than 1/10 of a second is probably not reliably achievable, and the time taken to do all those other things must be very variable as well, and often a lot longer than 70ms.

So I'm not sure we're comparing apples with apples here.

It would be nice to know what it is they're really measuring.

I've seen other discussions along this line and every time I fail to see what confusion there would be with what defines shutter lag. Yet it seems everyone has different ideas.

As I see it, there is only one measurement that matters... button press to start of exposure.

Human time varies and is of no reasonable consequence to the equation.
If it were, you could say "how long does it take for me to wake up in the morning, eat, and drive to my location before taking the initial photo".

It simply has no bearing on how the camera performs let alone useful for comparing cameras.

A belated response...shutter lag is the time between pressing the shutter release and the shutter actually firing.

Some older digital cameras are so slow in this regard that it's almost painful. We have an early 1.3MP Kodak compact and it seems to take forever before the shutter actually releases. Obviously not good for action shots.

Whatever its speed, the K10D on the other hand is fast enough. The only point I was making was that what was once considered slow would now be considered fast, which I thought was interesting.

It is interesting, but it's a consequence of the fact that there is enormously more for the camera to do between...

In particular, it's got to:

- meter
- focus
- measure the current shake level (if you've got SR on)

It never had to in the day when you'd already done the metering and focusing manually, so the only delay was in the actual release mechanism.

Or is that 70ms in MF, M, and (obviously with the D700) no SR?

Even so, I bet the camera still has stuff to think about when you press the button.

They call it development, John!

The DOS based computers, even the first Windows machines, responded far quicker than the modern XP or Vista-equipped PCs, and with far less powerful processors.

I would rather have the processor work for me than for Bill Gates and his horde of developers.

This may be a little off-topic, but I think the comparison is relevant.

Yikes.
Sounds like we're on the same page, as the shutter fires, exposure starts. (unless I'm, missing something).

Anyway, I just find it slightly amusing because on another forum there was huge arguments and debate that raged for pages about what defined the term. I find the shutter lag an issue mainly for automated triggered firing, for which there is not really an issue that cannot be worked around.

Although one discussion pertained to auto-firing for capturing lighting strikes. It was said to be possible if your shutter lag was small enough, yet no one knew what the shutter lag was for the K10D. (apparently some brand/models of cameras are fast enough). I think it finally came down that there was no possible way to capture any bit of lightning with the K10D if the shutter is not already open.

Ah, I was talking about the Compur-shutter SLRs and forgive me for not explaining a little further.

A compur shutter is an iris like the one in every lens and while it is closed no light gets to the film. Of course no light would get to the mirror either, which would not be useful.

So, winding on lowers the mirror, which seals off the film and prevents it being exposed. The shutter then opens for focusing. The viewfinder is so bright it would amaze you, because it is an aerial image that cannot be focused. Only the centre of the viewfinder is a ground glass and this is where you must carefully focus.

You press the shutter release. The shutter closes, the mirror flips up, the shutter opens for the exposure time set and then closes again. The viewfinder remains dark because it is not an instant-return mirror.

I think it's amazing that all these mechanical linkages operate in just 50ms.

I'm also amazed that another forum found the subject of shutter lag contentious. It just goes to show that anything can be a source of argument!

Not sure you'd post-process many pictures in a lifetime with one of those, though.

I think people have short memories. And it's because we take so much for granted. Try uploading even a small picture using a dial-up modem, and it'll soon come flooding back.

[quote="JR"]
The viewfinder is so bright it would amaze you, because it is an aerial image that cannot be focused. Only the centre of the viewfinder is a ground glass and this is where you must carefully focus.
[/quote]So 50ms to release the shutter, but several seconds to focus, hoping that the subject remains on the central ground glass bit and doesn't move.

This is why I said earlier that the actual shutter lag time is meaningless in terms of all the other stuff that has to happen.

Absolutely, but it's nothing compared with the accuracy of the really good clockwork watches.

Old-style engineering and science were truly mind-boggling, and the people that did it all equally so.

Whilst we're sort of on the subject of how things have changed (generally for the better IMHO) the same Voigtlander Bessamatic had a superb series of lenses.

But just imagine a 135mm lens than cannot focus closer than 13 feet....it was indeed a very different world for the photographer.

Where the bessamatic does score is not in handling speed but in the sheer joy of its superb mechanical quality and finish. The chrome body finish has to be seen to be believed. I had one in as-new condition once and it was just a beautiful object.

The Pentax Spotmatic was however streets ahead if the objective was to take photographs and around half the price as well. Which is why the German photographic products became a niche market.

John I just found this old German made A.Schacht Ulm Travenon 135mm, do you know anything about this old lens. It sure looks the part

link

Schacht made lenses for several camera manufacturers. I wonder what lens mount it is? The Travenon and, I think, Travenar lenses were lower cost options, but no doubt well made. It may well be a simple 3 element design.

Thanks John, it says in the listing its an M42 screw mount.

You can use it on your DSLR with the Adapter K...but I doubt that it would be worth the hassle!