>
> If I am not mistaken 36 high information film transparencies or negatives
> would then be equivalent to about 1.5 gigabytes that need to be stored.
> Perhaps someone wants an OM5 with a built in specially built shock
> resistant JAZ drive or a 1 meter cable going to a drive/battery pack to
be
> worn in a backpack. Surely no one will argue for 1 good image or 36
> horrible ones? You do not have to make that choice with film.
>
A 3000x2000 pixels 24 bit image is equal to 18MB. After JPEG compressed, it
can be down to 2MB still with very good quality, this is my own experience.
If you do not feel safe, a 4MB file should be excellent. 48MB memory card
is now available which can store 24 images (2MB each). When the price down,
you can buy ten for cycling use. For high capacity storage device, I will
choose PCMCIA Type III hard disk (or 2.5" HD).
> Is there another issue with speed of transfer? I have not used a digital
> camera. Is there a time lag for information transfer between shots. How
> long will it take to transfer a 40 MB image to storage so that you can
take
> the next picture? My Mac has a 5MB/sec transfer rate on its SCSI bus
which
> is not especially fast for SCSI, but is very fast compared to a serial
> connnector on a camera. Will this mean 8 seconds between high quality
> shots? Does this negate the use of sequenced high speed images equivalent
> to film's motor drive?
>
Speed is not really a problem, the 1500x1000 pixel old-tech digital cameras
(pre-95' version) already able to shoot at around 2.5fps. With todays
technologies, I think it is possible to make 3000x2000 pixel digital
cameras to run in this rate. Eventually, the limit will be the mirror
return time, or they can employ the stationary half mirror to shoot at
20fps!
C.H.Ling
> Winsor
>
> Winsor Crosby
> Long Beach, California
> mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|