Taking continous Pictures

[epeddy1]

I think it would be helpful to know what exactly you are trying to do. Pulling stills from video can work, but it's going to be hit or miss. Video relies on a bit of motion blur to keep things looking smooth and natural. That means that if there is subject movement in the frame you likely won't be able to pull stills. Likewise if you use a fast shutter speed for video you'd have sharper stills, but then the video would look choppy and unnatural.

I was able to make my Avatar pic of Jupiter taking still frames from a video on a ~$100 modified webcam and free software at about 8 FPS. Plenty of motion blur from tracking error and wobble in my entry-level telescope mount. Granted this is a stacked image where a percentage of "bad" frames were removed. But again, motion blur from the telescope is much worse (depending on what this guy is shooting). Jupiter would literally jump around the frame (like boom boom one side to the other) and sometimes out of frame during shooting despite my best efforts. Not to mention the blur caused by atmospheric conditions (referred to as poor "seeing").

With his $700 budget, he could get a much better quality webcam (or quality camera capable of acting as a webcam) and even have money leftover to buy a sturdy tripod and some software.

...and you still have no idea what he is trying to do. Which is my point. The most we know is that he may have intentions to at some point try to make a music video, somehow. Watch this video to see what I'm talking about with regards to frame rates:

He did say "pictures of me". So as long as he's not doing extreme close ups, no way he could jump across the frame faster than my Jupiter.

Agree though that we need to know what he's trying to do. If he wants to avoid motion blur, just shoot at a higher frame rate and scrap what you don't need. Don't know this for sure, but wouldn't the inverse of the frame rate be roughly the same as the shutter speed? So 8 FPS ~ 1/8? Maybe it differs, but not sure if 8 FPS ends up being 8 frames with 1/8 seconds worth of exposure, or if the exposure time is shorter than 1/8 seconds and the rest of the time is lost between frames.

Can't watch YouTube at work...

 

[Gavjenks]

According to this test the 7D will start to buffer after 22 shots. So I'd say that's a no go on the continuous for 5 minutes.

Canon 7D Review: Full Review - Performance

After 22 RAW FILES, yes. If you look in the table I posted, it says that too. Look at the row for RAW, then over to the right hand side 23 is indicated for non-UDMA cards. Close enough to 22.

That's why I said you'd have to shoot jpeg-only, medium "fine" quality. The smaller the image files, the more it can buffer. So while it can only shoot 22 RAWs before stopping, it can shoot 35,000 medium jpegs before stopping.

Buffering is a memory and bandwidth issue. So smaller packets = higher burst maximums.
Think about standing in line at a hot dog vendor. 5 people join every minute, but they only serve 2. If so, the line gets longer by 3 every minute, and it might reach around the block in an hour.

But if only 3 people join per minute, still 2 get served, so only 1 adds onto the line every minute, and it takes THREE hours to go around the block.

And if only 1 joins per minute, then there will never be any line, no matter how many people are served. Same for the camera burst.

 

[ConradM]

I was actually referring to the part where it says large jpegs, not RAW.

 

[robbins.photo]

According to this test the 7D will start to buffer after 22 shots. So I'd say that's a no go on the continuous for 5 minutes.

Canon 7D Review: Full Review - Performance

After 22 RAW FILES, yes. If you look in the table I posted, it says that too. Look at the row for RAW, then over to the right hand side 23 is indicated for non-UDMA cards. Close enough to 22.

That's why I said you'd have to shoot jpeg-only, medium "fine" quality. The smaller the image files, the more it can buffer. So while it can only shoot 22 RAWs before stopping, it can shoot 35,000 medium jpegs before stopping.

Buffering is a memory and bandwidth issue. So smaller packets = higher burst maximums.
Think about standing in line at a hot dog vendor. 5 people join every minute, but they only serve 2. If so, the line gets longer by 3 every minute, and it might reach around the block in an hour.

But if only 3 people join per minute, still 2 get served, so only 1 adds onto the line every minute, and it takes THREE hours to go around the block.

And if only 1 joins per minute, then there will never be any line, no matter how many people are served. Same for the camera burst.

Ok, so 5 times three divided by one multiplied by.. ah crap. Can I just get a hotdog?

 

[astroNikon]

Ok, so 5 times three divided by one multiplied by.. ah crap. Can I just get a hotdog?

only a RAW hotdog
faster processed hotdogs go through the digestive system too fast

 

[480sparky42 42]

Do these hotdogs have bacon on them? If so, I'll get in line for one.

 

[vimwiz]

Seems unlikely for that price.

Most SLRs ive used shoot 5-10fps, and not for that long a period. You'd also put significant wear on the shutter.

 

[Gavjenks]

Seems unlikely for that price.

Most SLRs ive used shoot 5-10fps, and not for that long a period. You'd also put significant wear on the shutter.

canon eos 5dmkii | Camera Shutter Life Database
If you trust this (which I don't terribly, but whatever), a camera of simmilar build quality to the 7D (the 7D itself doesn't seem to be listed) is estimated to, on average (50% cutoff) last for a couple million actuations or so.
5 minutes * 60 seconds * 8 FPS = 2,400 shutters per shoot like described in the OP

Thus, he could expect on average to do about 1,000 5-minute sessions like that before the shutter died. I don't know if that's likely or not, depending on what he's up to. Just putting it out there for reference.

 

[lambertpix]

Seems unlikely for that price.

Most SLRs ive used shoot 5-10fps, and not for that long a period. You'd also put significant wear on the shutter.

canon eos 5dmkii | Camera Shutter Life Database
If you trust this (which I don't terribly, but whatever), a camera of simmilar build quality to the 7D (the 7D itself doesn't seem to be listed) is estimated to, on average (50% cutoff) last for a couple million actuations or so.
5 minutes * 60 seconds * 8 FPS = 2,400 shutters per shoot like described in the OP

Thus, he could expect on average to do about 1,000 5-minute sessions like that before the shutter died. I don't know if that's likely or not, depending on what he's up to. Just putting it out there for reference.

Agreed. If I were going to do this over and over again, I'd give thought to a mirrorless solution, but a couple sessions like this shouldn't be a huge issue.

 

[BGeise]

What camera would be good for taking continous pictures? Ca. 8 pictures a sec. for up to 5 or 10 min or more.

Would a Samsung NX2000 be capable of doing this? Or others max budget is 700 Dollars

Pictures of me

I would look into the Sony A77. They can shoot at a maximum burst of 12fps which you could slow down to your 8. It usually doesn't take long for the buffer to clear even when at full 12fps you might loose a second or so with a good 95 mb/s card. I have never really had an issue with mine recovering slowly. Also the price is hard to beat at $800 for the body. I would strongly recommend you look into them before buying anything.