Just got my S95. How does shooting RAW affect battery life.

Too bad it's raining like crazy where I'm living, but I can't wait to go out and get some great shots with this thing (a 50D users as well). I hear the S95 has sub-par battery life however, which is ok since I have a spare). I'm hearing about 200 shots, but I assume that's with JPEG. How many shots can I get off a charge if I only shot RAW? I'm assuming RAW is sucking up more battery life. Thanks.

RAW or JPEG won't make any noticeable difference in battery life. It's things like the LCD backlight, shutter mechanism, AF mechanism, IS, and flash that are the big power hogs.

Wouldn't JPEGs require more juice for in-camera processing?

Gedanken wrote in post #11577686
Wouldn't JPEGs require more juice for in-camera processing?

Possibly, but you'd need to weight that against the larger files to (compress and) write if you shoot RAW. The difference would be insignificant compared to blinking lights and spinning gears . . . Electrons aren't as power-hungry as photons or mechanical things. It's going to be the things that you can hear that eat the most power. Motors, flash, speakers, and the like.

i think the raw and jpg does make a difference,

ive gotten 350+ using jpg only, I rarely get over 200 in raw. my camera settings were the same such as low brightness and no flash usage. my usage is fairly consistent, whip out camera, take pic, turn off. i rarely spend alot of time with the camera on. The reason this might be happening is that when taking pictures in raw, the lcd is on a tad longer due to saving the larger file. maybe this could be compensated with a faster card.

Jon wrote in post #11577754
Possibly, but you'd need to weight that against the larger files to (compress and) write if you shoot RAW.

Ah, Thomas Huxley was right: there is nothing so tragic as the collision of a beautiful theory with a single inconvenient fact.