D5300 Time-lapse.... Internal v External?

[mike_halliwell]

<p>The internal Intervalometer on my D5300 is limited to 999 frames. Unless my maths is off, that's 999/25 (fps) = 39 secs final footage real time. </p>

<p>So, if I want a full minute I have to reset the thing in the 'Dark Time' between frames?</p>

<p>Why is there such a limiting limit?</p>

<p>Maybe I can get an external Intervalometer such as the Nikon MC-36A for £129 ($200)?.....No wait, that's got a 10pin connector.. I'll get the one designed for my camera...except they don't make one. Hey maybe there's a Nikon 10pin to D5300 connector adapter...err No.</p>

<p>Ah well, I'll just have to go get one on flea bay or Amazon. They seem to have a limit of 9999 and a similar start...stop interface...Oh, and they're ~ £15</p>

[jorish]

<p>While the final footage is indeed shown at 25fps (in the States at least), I doubt that you'll want to put a time-lapse in the final footage at the same speed with which it was recorded; usually you'll want an image to stay for a bit longer, because you want the viewer to register the individual images (albeit shortly). The 25 fps were designed to NOT make you notice individual frames.<br>

I can't find the time lapse app I used on my iPhone (I probably deleted it), so from the top of my head, I think I was using something like 2~5 images per second.<br>

If my memory is indeed correct, that would give you 200~500 secs of final footage. Still no feature length though ;)</p>

[MichaelChang]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"Why is there such a limiting limit?"</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>The 999 frame limit was likely selected as a reasonable companion to the expected battery capacity. </p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Indeed...a likely reason....:-(</p>

<p>That's why they also gave it a mains-fed power lead...:-)</p>

<p>............but failed to make a battery grip...Doh!</p>

<p>.......not all time-lapse films are in the middle of the forest...although many are admittedly far away from the wall socket!</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>Mike, if the camera is static and a user merely wanted more frames than an internal battery will provide, it conceivable to use its mains adapter plugged into a battery-inverter combo for extended field use (with a £15 cheap controller).</p>

<p>However, it has become more popular to acquire elaborate time-lapse using pan-tilt heads mounted on sliders which makes it exponentially more complex, and given the specialized nature of these types of setups, I think it's reasonable for camera makers to leave it up to the user to determine an appropriate solution while providing rudimentary built-in features for the hobbyist. </p>

<p> </p>

[jonb]

<p>Nobody outside of Nikon knows the actual <em>why</em> of that design decision. But it's interesting that while the D800 and D4 were limited to 999, the D810 and D4S will go 9999. So maybe the D5400 will, too!</p>

<p>That said, I don't think I've ever seen a 40-second time lapse that was 40 seconds worth of interesting. (Yes, I know you can edit it.)</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>That said, I don't think I've ever seen a 40-second time lapse that was 40 seconds worth of interesting.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>True, as a single take at least!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>So maybe the D5400 will, too!</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Not forgetting the D7200 with a 4K Time-Lapse preset function, that outputs the finished article like the D800 does...:-)</p>

<p>These are quite good though.......and are all edited together to make longer films.</p>

<p>http://www.nphotomag.com/2013/01/26/nikon-photography-top-five-time-lapse-films-shot-using-nikon-dlsrs/</p>