Fastest non-SLR digital camera?

[elkinm]

For a while now I have mostly ignored non SLR digital cameras.
The issue has always been that the auto focus was to slow. Even a fraction of second was enough to miss a show when it counted.

Anyway I recently saw a Kodak M1063 I was most impressed.
It has the typical slow auto-focus, but if I hit the button, it takes the picture instantly.

There was a very fast double flash, probably for red-eye, but it was still the fastest non-SLR I have seen so far.

Just wondering if there may be an even faster camera out there, one that maybe has a red light for red-eye instead of a double flash.

Thanks
elkinm

 

[996GT2]

What you are describing is not a characteristic unique to the Kodak...you can get similar results from just about any bargain-basement P&S out there today.

Almost every point and shoot has a very fast shutter response once the camera is pre-focused and the flash is set to "Red-Eye Off." That means that with the shutter button held halfway down and the flash set to normal (non red eye) mode, the camera will fire instantly, with just 1 flash.

Better yet, if you turn off the flash altogether when lighting conditions allow, the shutter response is even faster when pre-focused.

 

[ElFenix]

the fastest focusing non-SLR is the panasonic G1.

edit: the leica M8 focuses as fast as you can

 

[elkinm]

Thanks, I just want to clarify.

The Kodak did not need any pre-focusing at all. If I pre-focus and take a picture it was as fast as any other.

The best part is that if I press the button all the way it takes the picture instantly no focus wait that I could notice.
I though the pictures might be out of focus, they were quite good.

Another well-reviewed camera is the Canon IXUS 870, which should also be very fast. I will try it as soon as I can find one.

Also, as far as non-SLR, I mean a compact as I don't want anything big and heavy to take everywhere.

Thanks again.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
edit: the leica M8 focuses as fast as you can

heh, something tells me you just went waaay out of what he was looking for

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: elkinm
Thanks, I just want to clarify.

The Kodak did not need any pre-focusing at all. If I pre-focus and take a picture it was as fast as any other.

The best part is that if I press the button all the way it takes the picture instantly no focus wait that I could notice.
I though the pictures might be out of focus, they were quite good.

Another well-reviewed camera is the Canon IXUS 870, which should also be very fast. I will try it as soon as I can find one.

Also, as far as non-SLR, I mean a compact as I don't want anything big and heavy to take everywhere.

Thanks again.

it's not focusing at all. a lot of cameras can be set to not wait for focus via a setting. if they're smart about it the camera will stop the lens down to f/8 or smaller to get a maximum dof. so, while focus may be way off from your target, basically everything from right in front of the camera to infinity will be good enough. dunno if any are actually smart enough to do that.

 

[elkinm]

I did find a Sony Cyber Shot 170W or something and it had fairly quick zoom. Most importantly, it had a Zoom to infinity mode at f/8 exactly as you mentioned.

I also saw a V1073 which was nice and fast, but it would constantly turn off or get stuck processing as in reviews.
Another one was a M1033 which was also fast but still had the same processing issue from time to time. The strange thing, when moving the camera around, I could see and clear the camera continuously focusing the picture.

I saw a Canon 880 which should be fast, but it could not take a picture at all with a quick press. You have to press and hold to take a picture. Fast focus, but not even close to Kodak or the Sony overall.

How does a basic 35 mm disposable focus. I have seem 35 mm be dim or to bright, but I can't remember blurry pictures and these cameras take pictures absolutely instantly.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: elkinm
How does a basic 35 mm disposable focus. I have seem 35 mm be dim or to bright, but I can't remember blurry pictures and these cameras take pictures absolutely instantly.

The focal points of these lenses are pre-set at their hyperfocal distance. So there is no AF whatsoever.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: elkinm
How does a basic 35 mm disposable focus. I have seem 35 mm be dim or to bright, but I can't remember blurry pictures and these cameras take pictures absolutely instantly.

The focal points of these lenses are pre-set at their hyperfocal distance. So there is no AF whatsoever.

yup, no focus at all. a wide angle lens permanently locked at f/11 (like those things have) is going to have pretty much everything from 6 feet to infinity at 'good enough' focus.

this is a great technique for 'street shooting' or press shooting where simply getting the image is important. set the camera to a small aperture and a hyperfocal distance rather than waiting for the camera to focus. easier with lenses marked for hyperfocal distance.

 

[earlofgrey]

As far as fast compact digital P&S cameras go, I've been on a mission myself.
It started when my beloved Kodak V610 got damaged by the kids. Arggghh. Don't call CPS on me, I was calm about it.
Let me say that as stereo types go, I consider Olympus and Fuji to be seriously NOT worth buying, slow and inferior in this class at least.
On the happy side of those stereo types, Samsung and Kodak have impressed me.

I will discliam that when it comes to the Kodak SLICE/SL/CE/SLCE. Not worth 150usd in my book.
Its not that I care if the camera lacks WIFI/Bluetooth, or TV/HDMI out. What bugs me about the SLICE is:
Limited shoot modes, Horrible menu, poor touch screen, and crappy video (not the biggest deal, but its CRAP).
In "smart mode" the camera is too slow. In action mode, its not bad, and the same for the programmed mode.
In fact, as nearly all Kodaks (excepting the Z915), the flash in action/program is very fast too.
ALL of those kudos are meaningless because everytime you power off the camera, the mode is defaulted to "smart".
A big concern with this camera is the exposed optics - there is only a plastic cover atop the lens.

In contrast, the Samsung CL65 (AKA sT1000) is the opposite of those problems I've seen in the Kodak.
Starting with the lens, its got a cover that moves. And not the I care, but some folks do, it has:
GPS, WIFI, and Bluetooth. Touchscreen is much better and menu is similar but better.
It takes fairly fast and vivid photos. The flash is quick, granted its been charged.
And that's one aspect where the Kodak beats the samsung, the only other is a slight speed advantage.

I've also used the Samsung TL210. It is a ring-style compact which takes even more vivid and deep photos.
But not as fast as the Samsung CL65. My conern with any ring camera is jamming/damage/failure of the motor(s).

If all you want is speed, any kodak can get you a F/11 type picture in an instant. But, the samsung CL65 is so far the best camera for the price, with plenty of features including above-average speed.

Not quite pleased with that compromise, I've tried several of the larger cameras but still no avail.
I've yet to find a big-bodied non-SLR worth its size (i.e. the Nikon 110 or the Fuji S1800 - both junk)

So, its the CL65 for me.

PS
If speed is your sole concern, I advise you stay well away from touchscreens. Needless and un-optimized feature.

PSS
Here's a table of the hopefuls - note I added my expectations of the speed as a contrast, mostly based on body/reviews/price...
PRICESTYLESOURCEMAKESpeedExpected140RINGCOSTCOSAMSUNG TL11055140.3RUGGEDXCOSTCOFUJI XP1065200FEGOKODAKKODAK 91547200RINGSTAPLESKodak M57566100RINGCOSTCOKODAK M38155270VERTXWALMARTKODAK SLICE87209FEGOCOSTCOFUJI S180069170.4RINGCOSTCOSAMSUNG TL21067180.2VERTCCOSTCOSAMSUNG CL6577

 

[Gooberlx2]

My wife grabbed herself a Kodak M1093 when it on sale for like $100 at Costco. I've never been a fan of Kodak products, but I was actually surprised by this one. It is pretty responsive, and the low-light focusing is actually quite good compared to most P&S I've used; due to the extremely bright (and green, instead of red) AF-assist lamp. Picture quality was comparable to most other P&S in the $150-$200 range. Pretty noisy at times, but within reasonable expectations.

She did drop it once and the seam of the casing busted out, losing some of its tabs. Gorilla glue fixed that.