FPS or bust rate affected by file type?

I understand the buffer fills up faster when shooting RAW. But, are the fps (frames per second) the same for each file type? RAW, sRAW1, sRAW2. I prefer not to shoot jpg.

I searched several threads with no luck on an answer.

Thanks for any feedback.

No......the speed is the function of the shutter and the speed of the mirror flaps.

Depends on the camera type (One of the newer Nikon bodies gets an extra frame a second or so if you shoot in the mid sized raw or a crop apparently. Would have to look it up again) but the majority of bodies I've seen have the Rate as a fixed value for their max speed regardless of file setting.

So my 7D can shoot at 8 frames per second in high speed continuous, I think 4 in mid speed continuous, and I'm assuming I can do 8 in 'single shot' if I had a fast enough trigger finger. (Now I'm wondering if I can mod my camera to have a paintball type double finger trigger...)


But yes, file type will change your buffer fill rate, so smaller files let you shoot more photos before the camera stalls to clear the buffer.

And now I'm wondering which file size will let me empty the buffer faster than I can fill it.

The file size and the write speed of the camera/card will not change the fps directly but they will change how quickly the buffer fills, at which point shooting will slow.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #15652028
The file size and the write speed of the camera/card will not change the fps directly but they will change how quickly the buffer fills, at which point shooting will slow.

This^^
I've been lead to believe using class 10 cards with high write speeds will help avoid your buffer filling.

Jarhed27 wrote in post #15653287
This^^
I've been lead to believe using class 10 cards with high write speeds will help avoid your buffer filling.

No, in most bodies the weak link is the speed with which the camera can write, not the speed with which the card can receive.

tzalman wrote in post #15653370
No, in most bodies the weak link is the speed with which the camera can write, not the speed with which the card can receive.

Well that does depend on the exact body, so the question is rather variable. Using cheap low end Class 2 SD cards in your camera sure isn't going to help.

Plus using higher speed cards is nice when it comes to downloading them anyway, especially if you are going to use a few cards and swap them around anyway, in which case using a card reader makes a lot of sense.

As far as I know, the only camera where file type impedes direct drive speed is the 1DX, where you can get 14fps only by shooting jpeg with the mirror up and manual focus; not especially useful though.

At it's normal speed of 12fps, file type still doesn't have an effect on fps except how fast the buffer fills and can dump (depending on card), but things like shutter speed, aperture, and ISO can slow the rate down to 10fps.

Luckless wrote in post #15653406
Well that does depend on the exact body, so the question is rather variable. Using cheap low end Class 2 SD cards in your camera sure isn't going to help.

Plus using higher speed cards is nice when it comes to downloading them anyway, especially if you are going to use a few cards and swap them around anyway, in which case using a card reader makes a lot of sense.

Well said. In my opinion the cards are the cheapest and potentially weakest link in the whole setup, and in the grand scheme of things throwing a few extra dollars at memory cards to the point of overkill only makes sense. I know for a fact that a class 4 card gets outperformed in the fps/writing category by my class 10 cards everytime on my 60d.

I haven't bought a memory card for a few years but I do agree that having faster cards makes a difference, both in the camera (writing to the buffer, each camera has a "spec" of how fast it can do this and at a minimum you should buy a card that meets/exceeds that spec) and then in downloading -- when dealing with multiple GigaBytes of files, speed makes a difference!

And then, along the same "downloading line", the card reader also makes a real difference. A good clear illustration is the difference between a card reader that is only USB1.0, and comparing it with a USB2.0 card reader, and then a USB3.0 or Firewire 400 card reader, significant differences! But,what may not be so well-known is the fact that there can be significant differences between the performance/speed of one card reader and another that both are in the same "port category". A few years ago I tested several Sandisk USB 2.0 card readers, several models (and so several "dates" of release) and found enough of a difference to permanently "shelve" my older ones and keep one for my "go-to" reader.

So, this is significant no matter what your fps is -- my "general purpose" camera is my trusty ol' 5D "Classic", with a notoriously slow fps, but for what I shoot I don't need the higher fps speeds (although when I was doing sports and a ton of wildlife shooting I gladly would tote my 10fps 1DM3)!

But with an active shoot with the 5D3 I've "filled" my 8 GB card and switched to another in the middle of the day's shooting, this is not a rarity, and so having good cards with a good fast card reader makes a big difference!

tonylong wrote in post #15655396
I haven't bought a memory card for a few years but I do agree that having faster cards makes a difference, both in the camera (writing to the buffer, each camera has a "spec" of how fast it can do this and at a minimum you should buy a card that meets/exceeds that spec) and then in downloading -- when dealing with multiple GigaBytes of files, speed makes a difference!
And then, along the same "downloading line", the card reader also makes a real difference.

I agree, faster cards also make a difference in video

watt100 wrote in post #15655753
I agree, faster cards also make a difference in video

Video is one of the least demanding tasks a dSLR can impose on a memory card. The 7D manual says that a write speed of anything more than 8MB/s will be fast enough. Is it even possible to buy a card that slow nowadays?

hollis_f wrote in post #15656953
Video is one of the least demanding tasks a dSLR can impose on a memory card. The 7D manual says that a write speed of anything more than 8MB/s will be fast enough. Is it even possible to buy a card that slow nowadays?

Unless it's the 1DC in 4K mode, you're looking at having to buy 1000x cards or bust, because of the 500+mbps data rate.

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15651801
I understand the buffer fills up faster when shooting RAW. But, are the fps (frames per second) the same for each file type? RAW, sRAW1, sRAW2. I prefer not to shoot jpg.

I searched several threads with no luck on an answer.

Thanks for any feedback.

No, shooting low quality jpg will give me much faster fps than shooting RAW + jpg, at least on my camera.

Azathoth wrote in post #15665477
No, shooting low quality jpg will give me much faster fps than shooting RAW + jpg, at least on my camera.

Not really, all it does it keeps the buffer from filling up as quickly.

That body will shot at its max rate in raw for maybe 5 images, and then drop down to a lower rate when it stalls waiting for the buffer to clear before you can take another photo. RAW or JPEG, you will shoot at the same rate until you fill your buffer. They will both start at the same fps, just the JPEG will keep going at that speed longer.