Check Out Our Shop
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Camera FPS question - Film v Digital

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    2,490

    Camera FPS question - Film v Digital

    To take digital action shots it seems like you need a camera capable of at least 8 fps, or use a lower resolution when < 8fps is availble (still challenging).

    Is this the same for 35mm film cameras? Or, can you use a much lower fps to capture action shots with a 35mm SLR?

    Thanks in advance.
    "Steve McQueen's got nothing on me" - Clutch

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Durango, CO
    Posts
    758
    It's the same with film as it is digital. However, it's easier to find a faster film body for a whole lot less money. I would agree with you that for professional quality sports shots, 8fps is about the minimum. I shoot the Canon 20D at 5fps and it just doesn't quite cut it. Let me know if you're in the market for a good film body and I may be able to hook you up with a Canon 1v, 1N or Eos 3.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    23,135
    Hmmm dunno where 8fps came out as a minimum as you really can't get must faster than 8 and the difference between 8 and 9 is not all that much...

    I think 6 or 7 is around the minimum.

    You can get an EOS 5 (Canon EOS A2) on ebay for about $150 and it does 5fps. Same for digital? About $1200.

    Then its about how much $$$ you are willing to spend, your desired workflow, and how many pictures you take a year.
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunriver, Orygun
    Posts
    529
    8 fps is what sold me on my F5. Though as soon as I get an extra $4K+ I'm gonna get me a new Nikon D2X. It's just the $4 grand that's holdin me back.
    If you're not shooting all that much hi speed action, 5-6 is ok but that 2 more fps can be the difference. I see it especially shooting race cars, 150 mph+ across frame. Skiing shots almost seem slow compared to that.
    Some of the new mini dv cams (30 fps), like Sony pc350 you can get some pretty good frame grabs. Not 13x19 printable but 5x7+.
    Last edited by Schralper; 12-01-2005 at 09:25 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earf
    Posts
    298
    i just like the look of film better. inkier black tones and milkier whites
    Cruise-ships of choice:
    http://www.skif-sport.ru/skis/img/salomon/AK%20Rocket%20Pilot%2003%20892214.GIF

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Bellingham WA
    Posts
    1,932
    Film Vs. Digi

    I think of it this way. You PAY to shoot wither way with film its for the film and processing. With DIGI you PAY by spending hours infront of the computer.

    I know of one photog that shot the cover of Snowboarder, and Snowboard the same month and has a cover in europe all shot with his 5FPS Canon A2.

    5 FPS will get you by, but once you experiance a faster camera you wont go back. I personally shoot at 10 FPs and that even seems slow some times.
    The Ski Journal theskijournal.com
    frequency TSJ frqncy.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •