If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! It's way cool! I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. Huh? I thought the sutters were solid state? He also implied that mechanical shutters would be better suited. quoted from a conversation at: http://www.diyphotography.net/how-to...ource-software September 8, 2009 If you're using a digital still camera to capture frames for time lapse, keep in mind that these things have a much shorter per-frame lifespan than a traditional video camera. For example, the Canon xxD-series DSLRs have shutters rated for about 100,000 frames or less, before you have to send them in for repair (at your expense). At 25 frames per second on a time lapse movie, this is just over an hour's worth of time-lapse output. Looking at it another way, if you used your Canon 40D to "film" an event that generated a 2-minute time lapse, you just chewed up 3% of your shutter's lifespan. I wasn't able to dig up any shutter life data on the point-and-shoots. I suspect they're probably longer, due to the simpler mechanical action involved - but they're also likely not "built as tough" as their DSLR bigger brothers. ...much better idea to shoot the thing in video, then use your favorite video editor (e.g. Windows Movie Maker, which is free) to speed the playback up the appropriate percent. ...If your real-time event is something much longer - flowers growing, building construction, etc. then obviously you're in the realm of the traditional camera - in... =============end quotes Hogwash or not? If that's not all hogwash, can these "Canon 40D" "facts" be generalized to other digital shutters? Thoughts? BTW, any experienced observations or suggestions for *freeware* to convert pics to video? I see no rave reviews in this regard. ...no reviews at all from the usual DL sites. --Doug |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
On 2011-06-25 12:01 , Doug Bashford wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! It's way cool! I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. Huh? I thought the sutters were solid state? No. Mechanical. But a lot simpler than on a SLR so I'd expect it to last for more cycles - but not forever. I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
Alan Browne wrote: On 2011-06-25 12:01 , Doug Bashford wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! It's way cool! I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. Huh? I thought the sutters were solid state? No. Mechanical. But a lot simpler than on a SLR so I'd expect it to last for more cycles - but not forever. I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. Rats! Well if I only get 100K pictures, that does change my plans. If I got 300k, not so much. I wonder how I find out? The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
On 2011-06-25 14:13 , Doug Bashford wrote:
Alan Browne wrote: On 2011-06-25 12:01 , Doug Bashford wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! It's way cool! I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. Huh? I thought the sutters were solid state? No. Mechanical. But a lot simpler than on a SLR so I'd expect it to last for more cycles - but not forever. I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. Rats! Well if I only get 100K pictures, that does change my plans. If I got 300k, not so much. I wonder how I find out? The usual way. Forge ahead until it breaks. The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
Alan Browne wrote: On 2011-06-25 12:01 , Doug Bashford wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! It's way cool! I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. Huh? I thought the sutters were solid state? No. Mechanical. But a lot simpler than on a SLR so I'd expect it to last for more cycles - but not forever. I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. Seems odd. That camera takes 30fps 640x480 AVI videos. That's 108,000 pics/hour. So waz up with that!? It uses no shutter? The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
On 2011-06-25 14:20 , Doug Bashford wrote:
Alan Browne wrote: On 2011-06-25 12:01 , Doug Bashford wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! It's way cool! I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. Huh? I thought the sutters were solid state? No. Mechanical. But a lot simpler than on a SLR so I'd expect it to last for more cycles - but not forever. I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. Seems odd. That camera takes 30fps 640x480 AVI videos. That's 108,000 pics/hour. So waz up with that!? It uses no shutter? That would shutterless. -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
Alan Browne wrote: On 2011-06-25 14:20 , Doug Bashford wrote: Alan Browne wrote: .........snip I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. Seems odd. That camera takes 30fps 640x480 AVI videos. That's 108,000 pics/hour. So waz up with that!? It uses no shutter? That would shutterless. I don't know how that works. Damnit! Knowledge of ignorance I find so distracting! Just thinking aloud...How cool it would be if CHDK (or Canon) could somehow slow that 30 fps to around 1 fps! ...just dial in the desired fps! The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
On 2011-06-25 14:45 , Doug Bashford wrote:
Alan Browne wrote: On 2011-06-25 14:20 , Doug Bashford wrote: Alan Browne wrote: ........snip I'd think you'd be better off with a cine camera - even to do time lapse. Seems odd. That camera takes 30fps 640x480 AVI videos. That's 108,000 pics/hour. So waz up with that!? It uses no shutter? That would shutterless. I don't know how that works. Damnit! Knowledge of ignorance I find so distracting! Just thinking aloud...How cool it would be if CHDK (or Canon) could somehow slow that 30 fps to around 1 fps! ...just dial in the desired fps! The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. Take it to the CHDK forums - maybe there is a way. -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?; On Sat, 25 Jun 2011, RichA wrote: On Jun 25, 12:01*pm, Doug Bashford wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011, : If ya don't know, the Canon CHDK (Firmware freeware hack) supercharges Canon cameras, now DSLRs too! * It's way cool! * I made my first time-lapse attempt with 1,700 640X480 images using CHDK and my 2009 Canon SX120is 12X. Looking for freeware to convert them to video I saw a claim that this will significantly erode the expected shutter life. * *Huh? People serious about variable-shutter rate video (which is what this is) should consider buying cameras dedicated to the task, if they can afford them. But, you could probably decimated 50 crappy Canon P&S's and not be at the price level of a video camera capable of what you want. You woke up with a turd in your mouth? The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Wear out a Digital Shutter? w Time-Lapse ?
Doug Bashford wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011, : quoted from a conversation at: http://www.diyphotography.net/how-to...ource-software September 8, 2009 ...At 25 frames per second on a time lapse movie, this is just over an hour's worth of time-lapse output. Looking at it another way, if you used your Canon 40D to "film" an event that generated a 2-minute time lapse, you just chewed up 3% of your shutter's lifespan. 25 fps isn't time lapse, more like 1 fps, or even 5 seconds per frame. I've worn out a couple DSLRs doing time lapse. It might be nice to have a P&S for some situations but the DSLRs are handy for night shooting, especially star trails where exposures are longer than the interval you want without high ISO, and for extra wide angle, DOF perhaps, also you have more latitude for adjusting exposure in changing light. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaFoyjeAbPk BTW, any experienced observations or suggestions for *freeware* to convert pics to video? I see no rave reviews in this regard. ...no reviews at all from the usual DL sites. VirtualDub works very fast with lots of options for assembling into avi, then you'll probably want something else to edit with. Note that the frames need to be perfectly sequential, no gaps. It's a little geeky to learn but works great. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - Motion Detection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc | Crash! | Digital Photography | 19 | December 4th 10 11:45 PM |
What's a Good Digital Camera for Time-Lapse Work? | Nic[_2_] | Digital Photography | 0 | October 11th 07 02:56 PM |
Digital Rebel Time Lapse? | CRD | Digital Photography | 14 | October 15th 04 06:09 PM |