Does shooting in Raw+ Jpeg low down the buffer more than shooting just RAW?

I guess the thread title says it all: Does shooting in Raw+ Jpeg low down the buffer more than shooting just RAW?

I never shoot Jpeg alone. I kind of wish I could (because the buffer rate is far less of an issue), but I'm not that brave. So I usually shoot RAW + Jpeg. That slows things down a bit, obviously.

Will shooting in only RAW be faster than shooting RAW + Jpeg or does it not matter?

Thanks

Yes. You are pushing more data through the buffer.

It depends somewhat on the camera, but yes it does slow things down. My 5D3 is a LOT slower and has a much smaller buffer when I shoot raw + jpeg as opposed to raw.

You don't really need to ask the question on a forum though. Just set your camera to shoot both and fire off a burst, then switch to raw only and fire off a burst and compare the two

sandpiper wrote in post #17273676
It depends somewhat on the camera, but yes it does slow things down. My 5D3 is a LOT slower and has a much smaller buffer when I shoot raw + jpeg as opposed to raw.

You don't really need to ask the question on a forum though. Just set your camera to shoot both and fire off a burst, then switch to raw only and fire off a burst and compare the two

Good point. Doh!

I just put my 6D through the buffer-drill. I use a Sandisk Extreme class 10 45mb/s card. Settings: iso 100, f/2, 1/4000. Listed number is shots at full speed; I stop counting when the buffer slows down the frame rate.

Raw: 23 frames (owner's manual says 17)
Raw+JPG (large/fine): 9 (manual says 8)
JPG (large/fine): I stopped at 50, seems unlimited (manual says unlimited)

In each case the buffer was clear by the time I could look for a red light. I usually use JPG (l/f) for action stuff. I had no idea the 6D could go 23 frames deep and be ready to shoot again in a second or two.

EDIT: Added data from user manual. I guess I can use my 6D for action stuff! I always default to the 60D for that.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17273845
EDIT: Added data from user manual. I guess I can use my 6D for action stuff! I always default to the 60D for that.

I guess that would depend on if you would be focal length limited when shooting with the 6D. Your 60D will still have the advantage of getting on for almost twice the linear resolution of the 6D. Thats a pretty good advantage if you are focal length limited on the FF sensor.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #17274187
I guess that would depend on if you would be focal length limited when shooting with the 6D. Your 60D will still have the advantage of getting on for almost twice the linear resolution of the 6D. Thats a pretty good advantage if you are focal length limited on the FF sensor.

Alan

Certainly true! Would you talk to my wife about a 200-400 w/1.4x and maybe a 600 f/4 for Christmas?

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17274271
Certainly true! Would you talk to my wife about a 200-400 w/1.4x and maybe a 600 f/4 for Christmas?

Well how about you suggest that they are necessary, and introduce the price. Then "settle" for the new Sigma 150-600 Sport? After all it will be about 92% cheaper. That must be an easy ask after the Canon options.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #17274913
Well how about you suggest that they are necessary, and introduce the price. Then "settle" for the new Sigma 150-600 Sport? After all it will be about 92% cheaper. That must be an easy ask after the Canon options.

Alan

And the Sigma weighs less IIRC.

BigAl007 wrote in post #17274913
Well how about you suggest that they are necessary, and introduce the price. Then "settle" for the new Sigma 150-600 Sport? After all it will be about 92% cheaper. That must be an easy ask after the Canon options.

Alan

Right now, I can't talk my wife into a 70-200 f/4 non-IS. She thinks I should get a JOB, before I buy more toys. Where do women get these strange ideas? I have time to shoot now. I need it now.

Yes well those little things like jobs and money seem so important to wives don't they. Like you say though, jobs are such a pita they just take so much time away from hobbies and other more interesting passtimes.

Alan

@ EOS-mike: If you shoot only Raw, running it through Canon's Digital Photo Professional, in batch, should produce identical Jpegs to what you get in camera, based on the picture style you use. If you change anything in the picture style on camera, make the same changes in DPP.
That's the theory anyway.

Well, perhaps not identical, but pretty similar. But you don't have to change the settings if you use DPP to process your RAW files, as DPP knows about the camera's settings and will use them as a default.

apersson850 wrote in post #17276610
Well, perhaps not identical, but pretty similar.

Well, not quite 'identical' but almost 'indistinguishable'.

Here's a gif showing 100% crops from the in-camera jpeg and the DPP-processed raw data.

Frank looking at those images my first guess would be a difference in the level of JPEG compression being applied to the images. The changes all seem to be with fine detail areas of the image.

Alan