Photon
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
As one who has shot a lot of soccer, I agree with skibum's analysis. Sometimes timing a single shot is the way to go, and certainly Dan is right that we often waste bursts of high fps (and even miss the critical moment by machine gunning around it), but 10 fps is really nice to have for many purposes.
When it comes to something like a 5DII replacement, though, I can't help feeling that the main strength of the camera is IQ and portability (compared to 1D), so while there'd be nothing wrong with high fps if it can be incorporated without compromising size and weight (let alone short changing AF performance or anything IQ related), it wouldn't be a priority for me. Just me.
skibum5 wrote:
gdanmitchell wrote:
For all but the tiniest handful of shooters this would, of course, be nonsense. And, in fact, the difference between, say, 5 and 7 fps is truly academic for the vast majority of shooters. Yesterday I spent the evening photographing migratory birds, many of them in flight. Most of the time I didn't even use burst mode, and when I did, a slower rate than either of these worked quite well.
Dan
I think you underestimate how many people shoot sports. And there is a very big difference between 5 and 7.5fps, even between 5fps and 6.3fps. When shooting sports, it just so happens that at 4 fps you virtually never get two ideal key frames of action from any specific action sequence for many sports, at 5fps you might but it's only very rarely, at 6.3fps many times you still only get one key from but all the same you can get two key frames many times too so the extra fps suddenly means a lot know since you can get some reasonable take of two key frames now, once you hit 7.5-8fps you suddenly can get two key frames most of the time.
So no, the differences are not all tech specs pixel peeping nonsense made up by clueless people who never actually take photos.
That said even 12fps isn't enough for some things so 1 shot timing is still important for sports shooting too. If you want ball on bat or soccer ball right on head then timing it yourself gives a far better take than machine gunning at even 8fps (and I'd guess at even 12fps, although I've never used a body with more than 10fps yet). But all the same min 6.3fps and preferably a good 7.5-8fps can be very useful at times.
Even for birds it can be cool, a mockingbird attacks a red tailed hawk, at 8fps you can get a cooler sequence than at 4fps, most of the time.
|
). 
Realistically about 7-8 FPS is where the frames are close enough together for most action. 
