Digital camera question - shutter speed/frames per second

[NewJeffCT]

A few years ago, we bought a pretty good Sony digital camera - 3.2 megapixels with 3x optical zoom. However, one of the disappointments we had is that it does not take pictures quickly. (even worse if the flash is used!) So, if we take one picture, it will often take a few seconds before the camera is ready to take a 2nd pic... and, if you're indoors with the flash, it could be several seconds before we can take a 2nd picture. With a very active almost 3 year old, we can lose out on a lot of good pictures this way, as you often lost the moment in a few seconds.

so, my question is, what should I look for if we want a digital camera that can take pictures at a faster pace? Is it frames per second? Or, is it shutter speed?

Case in point - this Fuji camera Fujifilm FinePix E550 is: Max shutter speed 1/2000 sec Min shutter speed 3 sec according to CNET

While this slightly more expensive Canon Canon PowerShot A620s Max shutter speed 1/2000 sec Min shutter speed 15 sec

What is better for minimum shutter speed? Or, am I totally off base in my thinking?

Or, do I look at something like continuous shooting speed - the Canon is 1.9 frames per second...the fuji camera didn't seem to list that.

[Orsino]

1. You're interested in frames per second.

More is better.

[Oeditpus Rex]

2. 'Continuous' shooting speed is a misnomer

in digital cameras. They'll do that speed only in bursts — which, with all but high-end cameras, is limited to a very few shots. The fastest digital on the market now, AFAIK, is the Canon EOS-1D Mark II N, which will burn 8.5 FPS for 48 frames... but it costs around $7,000. :cry:

This is one area where film cameras still have the advantage. With a true motor drive, you can burn off five FPS for as long as the batteries hold out.

[DS1]

3. It's 4 grand

but at that point, who's counting :cry:

[Oeditpus Rex]

8. Four grand where?

Everyplace I've seen has it for $6,500 and up. :shrug:

[DS1]

9. www.bhphoto.com

N model is not the big daddy

[Guy Fawkes]

4. The difference...

The Shutter: Mechanism that controls the duration of the exposure of film.

Shutter speed is the time the shutter stays open. If you're doing point-and-shoot photography, I doubt you'll ever use less then 1/90 of a second.

FPS, or Frames Per Second: the capture ability of your camera in a continuous shooting mode. The higher the FPS, the more pictures per second or the smoother the video. Note: the human eye sees at about 60fps.

What you want is better reflexes. FPS is only good if you're holding down the shutter button, taking one picture after another. It may also help if you have a camera with built in storage or a storage card, rather then a disk-reader.

[DS1]

5. I want a camera that can do eight 3 second exposures in a second

:crazy:

[RagingInMiami]

6. It's called "lag time"

The more you pay, the less lag time you get. And yes, frames per second is what you should be looking at. Shutter speed has nothing to do with lag time.

Check out www.dpreview.com for in-depth reviews on all digital cameras.

[RagingInMiami]

7. Check this out

http://www.jakeludington.com/ask_jake/20050118_dealing_with_digital_camera_lag.html

[NewJeffCT]

11. another thing we learned

we went to a few places today - Circuit City, Office Max & Ritz Camera and the guy at Ritz was very helpful. I guess a lot of cameras have a "review" mode - after you take a picture, there are a few seconds where it is "reviewed" on your LCD screen before you can take another pic. By setting review to 0, it's much faster - I think the default is 3 seconds.

[eeyore]

10. Part of the issue is how long it takes to save the image to the card....

The more expensive the camera, the faster the image saves. Also, the higher resolution you are shooting at, the longer it takes to save the image. So, get as high of a recycle rate as you can possibly afford.

Shutter speed has little to do with how long it takes the camera to recycle.