Nikon D750 slow when using LCD ...

Steve Wallace

Steve Wallace

Suspended / Banned
Messages
13
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

Odd one but when I look through the eye viewfinder the pics take immediately and isn't a problem.

My issue is when I use the rear LCD viewfinder the image can take ages to take sometimes I have to hold the shutter button for 5 secs before it finally takes same pic ?

Its very frustrating!

Any ideas?

Thanks alot
 
Auto focus? Switch to manual focus just to try shutter button any different
 
Liveview sucks on the majority of DSLRs (especially in low light), it's one area that mirrorless (and SLT) wins hands down. I still don't know why you can't get fast AF with liveview on DSLRs, I don't know why it's any different to mirrorless when in liveview.
 
Oh ok, i never had an issue with my old Sony A55 both were same speed, i always prefer the eye but sometimes the LCD is more convenient like at arm's reach or someone taking a pic for you who's not so hot on it all
 
Just found this....

There is more shutter lag because the shutter has to close first before opening again to expose the shot. When you turn on live view, the mirror is raised and the shutter is opened, so the image formed by the sensor can be fed constantly to the LCD. When you take a shot in live view, the shutter closes again to 'reset' the sensor before the actual exposure is made.

When shooting with the viewfinder, the process (simplified) is:

Press button -> mirror lifts -> shutter opens -> light hits sensor which registers it -> shutter closes

When shooting with Live View, the process is:

Press button -> shutter closes -> sensor 'resets to 0' -> shutter opens -> light hits sensor -> shutter closes

Essentially, the mirror lifting is a quicker process than the shutter closing and the sensor 'resetting'.
 
Steve Wallace said:
Just found this....

There is more shutter lag because the shutter has to close first before opening again to expose the shot. When you turn on live view, the mirror is raised and the shutter is opened, so the image formed by the sensor can be fed constantly to the LCD. When you take a shot in live view, the shutter closes again to 'reset' the sensor before the actual exposure is made.

When shooting with the viewfinder, the process (simplified) is:

Press button -> mirror lifts -> shutter opens -> light hits sensor which registers it -> shutter closes

When shooting with Live View, the process is:

Press button -> shutter closes -> sensor 'resets to 0' -> shutter opens -> light hits sensor -> shutter closes

Essentially, the mirror lifting is a quicker process than the shutter closing and the sensor 'resetting'.
Click to expand...

This accounts for a tiny difference, fractions of a second. The 5 seconds ish that you mentioned can only be the auto focus hunting. It's slow but very accurate. That's just how dslr's seem to behave.

As someone else mentioned, try it in manual focus mode. You should find the response time pretty much instant in both live view and viewfinder shooting.
 
Steve Wallace said:
Just found this....

There is more shutter lag because the shutter has to close first before opening again to expose the shot. When you turn on live view, the mirror is raised and the shutter is opened, so the image formed by the sensor can be fed constantly to the LCD. When you take a shot in live view, the shutter closes again to 'reset' the sensor before the actual exposure is made.

When shooting with the viewfinder, the process (simplified) is:

Press button -> mirror lifts -> shutter opens -> light hits sensor which registers it -> shutter closes

When shooting with Live View, the process is:

Press button -> shutter closes -> sensor 'resets to 0' -> shutter opens -> light hits sensor -> shutter closes

Essentially, the mirror lifting is a quicker process than the shutter closing and the sensor 'resetting'.
Click to expand...
Yes, but this is how mirrorless works too (although many now also have electronic shutters you can use too). However this is fractions of seconds and has nothing to do with focussing speed.

Sony has SLT (as I mentioned previously) which has a fixed semi translucent mirror so is a hybrid between DSLR and mirrorless. Some of the light entering reflects off the mirror onto the AF module like it does on DSLR, hence why it's so quick to focus and tracks well, but some light also goes straight onto the sensor like mirrorless, and hence how they use electronic viewfinder rather than optical.

In some ways it's the perfect system, all the AF benefits of DSLR with all the liveview benefits of mirrorless. Also, it has all the EVF benefits such as 'what you see is what you get', focus peaking and other focus aids, histogram etc etc. The biggest downside is that the mirror is fixed and blocks some of the light to the sensor, therefore images tend to be noisier, especially at high ISO. The other issue for some is that they still prefer looking through an optical viewfinder.
 
I always look through the eyepiece! Don't think I've ever used live view
 
its one area were Canon have been better than Nikon, Nikons live view isn't the greatest. not that canons is perfect
 
twist said:
Only certain Canons though, they havent always had DP.
Click to expand...
yep but even before dp canon had better live view than nikon, nikon has/had crap live view across the board.
 
niko said:
wasn't it nikon were you couldn't change f.stop in live view with out turning off 1st?
Click to expand...
Dunno, certainly can change all settings in LV on my D750.
 
Lots of Nikons don't allow you to change aperture in LV or indeed while shooting video. It's some sort of hardware reason I believe but cannot recall what exactly.
 
gad-westy said:
Lots of Nikons don't allow you to change aperture in LV or indeed while shooting video. It's some sort of hardware reason I believe but cannot recall what exactly.
Click to expand...
hardware reason or poorly designed hardware? :p ;)
Canon, Sony and Pentax seem to manage somehow...
 
nandbytes said:
hardware reason or poorly designed hardware? :p ;)
Canon, Sony and Pentax seem to manage somehow...
Click to expand...

You mean like the Sonys that overheat? Or the slts that only shoot af video at f3.5? Or the studio issues flash and newer pdaf issues? ;)
 
Last edited:
twist said:
You mean like the Sonys that overheat? Or the slts that only shoot video at f3.5? ;)
Click to expand...

Or the fact that Sony SLTs can't track as well as nikon DSLRs despite not having to deal with mirror blackout. SLT could have been amazing at tracking since it doesn't have limitation of DSLR mirror or the mirrorless. A truly missed opportunity I think.

Overheating was fixed with firmware updates. So don't think its poor hardware design. But tbh there are no other bodies with equivalent sensor size in equally small bodies that shoot 4K to compare with.
 
nandbytes said:
Or the fact that Sony SLTs can't track as well as nikon DSLRs despite not having to deal with mirror blackout. SLT could have been amazing at tracking since it doesn't have limitation of DSLR mirror or the mirrorless. A truly missed opportunity I think.

Overheating was fixed with firmware updates. So don't think its poor hardware design. But tbh there are no other bodies with equivalent sensor size in equally small bodies that shoot 4K to compare with.
Click to expand...
SLT is a great design, just a shame they can't solve the noise issue but there's no way around physics. TBH If Sony had pulled their finger out and not delayed the A99-II so long I could still be a Sony shooter.
 
nandbytes said:
Or the fact that Sony SLTs can't track as well as nikon DSLRs despite not having to deal with mirror blackout. SLT could have been amazing at tracking since it doesn't have limitation of DSLR mirror or the mirrorless. A truly missed opportunity I think.

Overheating was fixed with firmware updates. So don't think its poor hardware design. But tbh there are no other bodies with equivalent sensor size in equally small bodies that shoot 4K to compare with.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen it wasn't really addressed people with a6300 still complaining, a6500 the rear screen dims so much you can't see it apparently and the new a9 seems to be having problems. The a7rii doesn't focus wide open anymore from what I understand.

But the Sony apsc has no lenses so you have to use bigger fe lenses or bigger adapted which makes it bigger than other offerings. Both xt2 and xt20 offer 4k with loads of great lenses.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
SLT is a great design, just a shame they can't solve the noise issue but there's no way around physics. TBH If Sony had pulled their finger out and not delayed the A99-II so long I could still be a Sony shooter.
Click to expand...

You lose about 1/3rd stop ISO performance. Its not a biggy IMO.

twist said:
From what I've seen it wasn't really addressed people with a6300 still complaining, a6500 the rear screen dims so much you can't see it apparently and the new a9 seems to be having problems. The a7rii doesn't focus wide open anymore from what I understand.

But the Sony apsc has no lenses so you have to use bigger fe lenses or bigger adapted which makes it bigger than other offerings. Both xt2 and xt20 offer 4k with loads of great lenses.
Click to expand...

Sony APS-C has more lenses than canon does for EF-S. Plus not all FE lenses are big and same goes for adapter lenses. Sony lenses are overpriced for what they are, but so is fuji gear inc. their bodies tbh.

erm... my A7RII focusses fine wide open! Doesn't overheat also.
As I said is there any other APS-C or FF body that shoots 4K and maintains the same small size as A7RII and A6500 while providing similar capabilities?
p.s. I am not justifying the overheating problem, they should fix it for sure. Just asking is there a better design out there to compare against?
 
nandbytes said:
You lose about 1/3rd stop ISO performance. Its not a biggy IMO.



Sony APS-C has more lenses than canon does for EF-S. Plus not all FE lenses are big and same goes for adapter lenses. Sony lenses are overpriced for what they are, but so is fuji gear inc. their bodies tbh.

erm... my A7RII focusses fine wide open! Doesn't overheat also.
As I said is there any other APS-C or FF body that shoots 4K and maintains the same small size as A7RII and A6500 while providing similar capabilities?
p.s. I am not justifying the overheating problem, they should fix it for sure. Just asking is there a better design out there to compare against?
Click to expand...

The new firmware for the a7rii messed up the focus as it stops down instead of remaining wide open, it's quite well documented and so is the overheating of their cameras.

But the fe lenses are big as big as other ff camera lenses which makes the package bigger... and much more expensive. As I said, yes, Fuji. Add the standard FL fe lenses to a a6500 then compare against Fuji for size.

Not saying Sonys poor just that they all have issues.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
You lose about 1/3rd stop ISO performance. Its not a biggy IMO.
Click to expand...
That's what I've read too but I still found the A77-II noisier than I'd have liked and more comparable to m4/3 than other APS.
 
twist said:
The new firmware for the a7rii messed up the focus as it stops down instead of remaining wide open, it's quite well documented and so is the overheating of their cameras.

But the fe lenses are big as big as other ff camera lenses which makes the package bigger... and much more expensive. As I said, yes, Fuji. Add the standard FL fe lenses to a a6500 then compare against Fuji for size.

Not saying Sonys poor just that they all have issues.
Click to expand...

oh you mean can't focus wide open in that sense. Yes that annoyed the hell out of me :mad: and the star eating problem they introduced in new FW too :mad::punch:

I only own one native lens, I adapt the rest :D:p
 
twist said:
But the Sony apsc has no lenses so you have to use bigger fe lenses or bigger adapted which makes it bigger than other offerings. Both xt2 and xt20 offer 4k with loads of great lenses.
Click to expand...

I could understand it if you said "Sony APS-C has no lenses I'm interested in" but to say Sony APS-C has no lenses is plainly wrong and daft. Of course there are loads of Sony APS-C lenses, there are gaps in the line up to be sure and the lack of a range of APS-C f2.8 zooms comes to mind but for other people the Sony APS-C lens line up could have every lens they want.

Whilst the Fuji lenses may suit you more I'd have to compromise on pretty much every single one whereas if I bought an A6000 or A6300 the only lenses that would be missing would be a compact and reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 and a ditto 18-50mm f2.8.

Anyway, just wanted to add balance and say I've told you a thousand times not to exaggerate! :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I could understand it if you said "Sony APS-C has no lenses I'm interested in" but to say Sony APS-C has no lenses is plainly wrong and daft. Of course there are loads of Sony APS-C lenses, there are gaps in the line up to be sure and the lack of a range of APS-C f2.8 zooms comes to mind but for other people the Sony APS-C lens line up could have every lens they want.

Whilst the Fuji lenses may suit you more I'd have to compromise on pretty much every single one whereas if I bought an A6000 or A6300 the only lenses that would be missing would be a compact and reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 and a ditto 18-50mm f2.8.

Anyway, just wanted to add balance and say I've told you a thousand times not to exaggerate! :D
Click to expand...

No, Not daft. Next to Canon csc they have no apsc lenses (in comparison to their ff offerings). They just aren't bothered with apsc. Every lens Fuji puts out is high quality, even the non xf lenses are optically good.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
No, Not daft. Next to Canon csc they have no apsc lenses (in comparison to their ff offerings). They just aren't bothered with apsc.
Click to expand...

you are exaggerating. As I mentioned above there are more APS-C options on Sony e-mount than Canon have for EF-S (i.e. DSLR mount). As with other brands i.e. Canon and Nikon that support both APS-C and FF format, the manufacturer normally provides more FF lenses and expects users to use them on both APS-C and FF. APS-C specific lenses are normally provided for areas like UWA. Fuji on the other hand support a single sensor format i.e. APS-C so they have only APS-C lenses.
 
woof woof said:
I bought an A6000 or A6300 the only lenses that would be missing would be a compact and reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 and a ditto 18-50mm f2.8.
Click to expand...
Well such a lens would be big. But you are no option-less per say even this area.
1. LA-EA1+SAL 16-50mm/2.8 - as sharp as fuji, not more bulkier, cheaper, stabilised on A6500 but you don't have all the native AF support
2. MC11+sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 - pretty sharp but not as sharp as Sony or fuji. Stabilised but one stop slower at long end. Not as wide but longer. Also will be about the same bulk as fuji and cheaper.
 
nandbytes said:
you are exaggerating. As I mentioned above there are more APS-C options on Sony e-mount than Canon have for EF-S (i.e. DSLR mount). As with other brands i.e. Canon and Nikon that support both APS-C and FF format, the manufacturer normally provides more FF lenses and expects users to use them on both APS-C and FF. APS-C specific lenses are normally provided for areas like UWA. Fuji on the other hand support a single sensor format i.e. APS-C so they have only APS-C lenses.
Click to expand...

Am I, because I'm pretty certain I said fuji in my initial comment. You brought up Canon. Does Sony apsc offer as many quality lenses as fuji? Sony apsc offerings are lacklustre in comparison.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Am I, because I'm pretty certain I said fuji in my initial comment. You brought up Canon. Does Sony apsc offer as many quality lenses as fuji? Sony apsc offerings are lacklustre in comparison.
Click to expand...
yes you are. please re-read what I said about manufacturers supporting both APS-C and FF. Fuji only supports APS-C.

This is not helping OP and has gotten severely off topic. I apologise.
 
nandbytes said:
yes you are. please re-read what I said about manufacturers supporting both APS-C and FF. Fuji only supports APS-C.

This is not helping OP and has gotten severely off topic. I apologise.
Click to expand...

So what. They still have more quality native offerings. True, it's not but the initial question was answered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top