Vis-a-vis, Frank, :), I'm referring to what tends to happen when shooting
wildlife or birds. You wait for what seems an endless time for the bird to
be in exactly the right spot, right orientation, etc. When everything lines
up, the bird keeps moving around, and you keep trying to shoot and catch it
in that second, split-second, where the pose and composition is what you
want. So, it's easy to fire off 5 or 6 shots in quick sucession. A number
of these will be bad shots because the subject moved so quickly. Buffer
fills, now wait for a minute or more (I seem to remember) and the subject is
still there ready for more shots, but the camera won't fire. Yay! buffer
empties, camera is ready, but bird has flown, and it's time to take a few
more swigs of coffee, and wait.
A buffer that can handle 5 times the number of exposures is very useful. In
fact this is one area, where film cameras may indeed excel. The buffer is
large as the number of exposures left on the roll.
Tom C.
From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 22:49:34 -0400
On 5/25/05, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> geez Tom, we get it already... :-)
I wasn't too clear on Tom's position, vis-a-vis his take on Herb's
second point, or the pertinancy thereof.
What's your take on it, Canon-boy (oops, I mean Christian)?
cheers,
frank
<vbg>
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
