Life expectancy

chromo · 01-05-2012, 01:25 AM

I was just sitting here thinking up ways to play around with time lapse and make a short movie.
Then I remembered 100,000 written in the manual.
Out with the calculator.
I seems that if I make a 66.6 minute movie at 25FPS, with a brand new K-5, it could suddenly become a door stop.

Hmmmm !....That's not a nice thought.

nsolarz · 01-05-2012, 01:37 AM

100,000 is what it's tested for. i.e. its reliable up to 100,000 actuations. that doesn't mean it will shut down at 100,001. its kind of like the warranty on a new car: it will work beyond the warranty, but you're on your own at that point.

chromo · 01-05-2012, 01:46 AM

Yeah...I know.

It would be nice if they designed time lapse so the shutter is always open and just read the sensor at the appropriate times.

Just another thought anyway.

chromo · 01-05-2012, 01:49 AM

One day they might even release a camera with a curved sensor.

RioRico · 01-05-2012, 01:55 AM

Video cams are better for shooting videos. Still cams are better for shooting stills. Video-capable dSLRs are indeed convenient. They are also disposable.

nsolarz · 01-05-2012, 02:42 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

Video cams are better for shooting videos. Still cams are better for shooting stills. Video-capable dSLRs are indeed convenient. They are also disposable.

You're correct, however for time-lapse or stop motion (as the op is looking to do) suggest a series of still shots spliced together to make a video. This requires something that takes still shots, rather than continuous video, like a dslr.

chromo · 01-05-2012, 03:06 AM

I don't think time-lapse would be very easy to do with a video camera, unless it's a model that's optioned for it.

I've got it !!
I'll set the K-5 up in front of my pendulum clock and use up a little of it's life.

Cool.

Geoff H · 01-05-2012, 04:35 AM

Originally posted by chromo

I was just sitting here thinking up ways to play around with time lapse and make a short movie.
Then I remembered 100,000 written in the manual.
Out with the calculator.
I seems that if I make a 66.6 minute movie at 25FPS, with a brand new K-5, it could suddenly become a door stop.

Hmmmm !....That's not a nice thought.

At a shot a minute that's 64 days filming - I wouldn't panic.

chromo · 01-05-2012, 06:26 AM

I wonder what it would cost to get the shutter replaced....$3000 ?

Just kidding but I'll bet it's expensive.

I just did the clock. 100 frames.
When I watched the movie I could see the clock going brighter and darker.
The metering was all over the shop.
Maybe I shouldn't have left it on spot metering.

RonHendriks1966 · 01-05-2012, 06:33 AM

Well a lower framerate is also an option. Thinking that people would watch a time-lapse for 66.6 minutes is the biggest mistake I guess.

I still have a map of pictures made with K-7 at 5.1 fps wich still has to turn into a timelapse. So that are al-in-al almost 4000 pictures taken. It does go quick this way, also when you take a picture every second to see clouds passing buy or so.

RonHendriks1966 · 01-05-2012, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by chromo

I wonder what it would cost to get the shutter replaced....$3000 ?

Just kidding but I'll bet it's expensive.

I think this is just a standard reparejob, so I guess 320 euro overhere.

nsolarz · 01-05-2012, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by chromo

I wonder what it would cost to get the shutter replaced....$3000 ?

Just kidding but I'll bet it's expensive.

I just did the clock. 100 frames.
When I watched the movie I could see the clock going brighter and darker.
The metering was all over the shop.
Maybe I shouldn't have left it on spot metering.

probably best to meter once and then lock it, or shoot in manual.

chromo · 01-06-2012, 01:16 AM

Originally posted by nsolarz

probably best to meter once and then lock it, or shoot in manual.

Yeah , I'll go fully manual next time.

And I know 66 minutes is a long time for a time lapse movie, but 66 x 1 minutes time lapse movies is the same.

It's like if I want to get many years of service out of this camera, I can't do too much time lapse...Real shame cos it's a lot of fun.

dosdan · 01-06-2012, 03:22 AM

Originally posted by chromo

And I know 66 minutes is a long time for a time lapse movie, but 66 x 1 minutes time lapse movies is the same.
.

Well you don't need to have a new shot every frame. If you use a decent video editor (I use Sony Vegas Pro 8), when you import your large set of stills, you can specify how many frames each image is to occupy. Having one still per frame may well be overkill. 3-4 frames/still may be better.

Another thing: video editors can interpolate between frame changes, so they can create "intermediate" positions.

Here is an example from the Sony Vegas Pro User Manual.

Jasvox · 01-06-2012, 03:25 AM

You need a mirror-less ASP-C camera for pretty much unlimited shutter/Time-lapse photography/movie-making. Ever considered the NEX Sony?

Jason

01-05-2012, 01:25 AM	#1
chromo Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North Coast NSW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 581	Life expectancy I was just sitting here thinking up ways to play around with time lapse and make a short movie. Then I remembered 100,000 written in the manual. Out with the calculator. I seems that if I make a 66.6 minute movie at 25FPS, with a brand new K-5, it could suddenly become a door stop. Hmmmm !....That's not a nice thought.

01-06-2012, 03:22 AM	#14
dosdan Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,741	Originally posted by chromo And I know 66 minutes is a long time for a time lapse movie, but 66 x 1 minutes time lapse movies is the same. . Well you don't need to have a new shot every frame. If you use a decent video editor (I use Sony Vegas Pro 8), when you import your large set of stills, you can specify how many frames each image is to occupy. Having one still per frame may well be overkill. 3-4 frames/still may be better. Another thing: video editors can interpolate between frame changes, so they can create "intermediate" positions. Here is an example from the Sony Vegas Pro User Manual. Attached Images Last edited by dosdan; 01-06-2012 at 03:28 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Life is Life Brother and Sister	yasik	Monthly Photo Contests	0	06-15-2011 07:32 AM
Shutter Life v.s. Half-Press AF Life?	shang	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	16	02-06-2011 12:41 AM
Misc Still Life	QFish	Photo Critique	2	10-30-2010 09:51 AM
Nature Still Life	h0nda	Post Your Photos!	7	06-26-2010 01:45 PM
What is the Life Expectancy	mdaaug58	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	05-06-2010 07:12 AM

01-05-2012, 01:37 AM	#2
nsolarz Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 39	100,000 is what it's tested for. i.e. its reliable up to 100,000 actuations. that doesn't mean it will shut down at 100,001. its kind of like the warranty on a new car: it will work beyond the warranty, but you're on your own at that point.

01-05-2012, 01:46 AM	#3
chromo Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North Coast NSW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 581 Original Poster	Yeah...I know. It would be nice if they designed time lapse so the shutter is always open and just read the sensor at the appropriate times. Just another thought anyway.

01-05-2012, 01:49 AM	#4
chromo Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North Coast NSW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 581 Original Poster	One day they might even release a camera with a curved sensor.

01-05-2012, 01:55 AM	#5
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Video cams are better for shooting videos. Still cams are better for shooting stills. Video-capable dSLRs are indeed convenient. They are also disposable.

01-05-2012, 02:42 AM	#6
nsolarz Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 39	Originally posted by RioRico Video cams are better for shooting videos. Still cams are better for shooting stills. Video-capable dSLRs are indeed convenient. They are also disposable. You're correct, however for time-lapse or stop motion (as the op is looking to do) suggest a series of still shots spliced together to make a video. This requires something that takes still shots, rather than continuous video, like a dslr.

01-05-2012, 03:06 AM	#7
chromo Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North Coast NSW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 581 Original Poster	I don't think time-lapse would be very easy to do with a video camera, unless it's a model that's optioned for it. I've got it !! I'll set the K-5 up in front of my pendulum clock and use up a little of it's life. Cool.

01-05-2012, 04:35 AM	#8
Geoff H Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 52	Originally posted by chromo I was just sitting here thinking up ways to play around with time lapse and make a short movie. Then I remembered 100,000 written in the manual. Out with the calculator. I seems that if I make a 66.6 minute movie at 25FPS, with a brand new K-5, it could suddenly become a door stop. Hmmmm !....That's not a nice thought. At a shot a minute that's 64 days filming - I wouldn't panic.

01-05-2012, 06:26 AM	#9
chromo Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North Coast NSW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 581 Original Poster	I wonder what it would cost to get the shutter replaced....$3000 ? Just kidding but I'll bet it's expensive. I just did the clock. 100 frames. When I watched the movie I could see the clock going brighter and darker. The metering was all over the shop. Maybe I shouldn't have left it on spot metering.

01-05-2012, 06:33 AM	#10
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Well a lower framerate is also an option. Thinking that people would watch a time-lapse for 66.6 minutes is the biggest mistake I guess. I still have a map of pictures made with K-7 at 5.1 fps wich still has to turn into a timelapse. So that are al-in-al almost 4000 pictures taken. It does go quick this way, also when you take a picture every second to see clouds passing buy or so.

01-05-2012, 06:34 AM	#11
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by chromo I wonder what it would cost to get the shutter replaced....$3000 ? Just kidding but I'll bet it's expensive. I think this is just a standard reparejob, so I guess 320 euro overhere.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-05-2012, 10:28 AM	#12
nsolarz Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 39	Originally posted by chromo I wonder what it would cost to get the shutter replaced....$3000 ? Just kidding but I'll bet it's expensive. I just did the clock. 100 frames. When I watched the movie I could see the clock going brighter and darker. The metering was all over the shop. Maybe I shouldn't have left it on spot metering. probably best to meter once and then lock it, or shoot in manual.

01-06-2012, 01:16 AM	#13
chromo Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North Coast NSW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 581 Original Poster	Originally posted by nsolarz probably best to meter once and then lock it, or shoot in manual. Yeah , I'll go fully manual next time. And I know 66 minutes is a long time for a time lapse movie, but 66 x 1 minutes time lapse movies is the same. It's like if I want to get many years of service out of this camera, I can't do too much time lapse...Real shame cos it's a lot of fun.

01-06-2012, 03:25 AM	#15
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	You need a mirror-less ASP-C camera for pretty much unlimited shutter/Time-lapse photography/movie-making. Ever considered the NEX Sony? Jason