Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
Thread started 15 Nov 2014 (Saturday) 14:15
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

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

 
rrblint
Listen! .... do you smell something?
Avatar
23,088 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 2889
Joined May 2012
Location: U.S.A.
     
Nov 17, 2014 08:38 as a reply to  @ post 17276762 |  #16

There's no need to shoot RAW+JPEG in camera, nor to batch convert in DPP. IJFR is so easy and fast to use. HERE'S THE LINK (external link). Give it a try. you'll be glad that you did.


Mark

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
40,862 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8923
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Nov 17, 2014 11:38 |  #17

rrblint wrote in post #17276903 (external link)
There's no need to shoot RAW+JPEG in camera, nor to batch convert in DPP. IJFR is so easy and fast to use. HERE'S THE LINK (external link). Give it a try. you'll be glad that you did.

That does depend on the model. If you have older cameras, this really wouldn't be an option because in the past, the JPG in the raw was a smaller sized "thumbnail". It was perhaps the 7D/1D4 era where this changed so that a full sized JPG is contained inside the raw payload.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
"Man only has 5 senses, and sometimes not even that, so if they define the world, the universe, the dimensions of existence, and spirituality with just these limited senses, their view of what-is and what-can-be is very myopic indeed and they are doomed, now and forever."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rrblint
Listen! .... do you smell something?
Avatar
23,088 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 2889
Joined May 2012
Location: U.S.A.
     
Nov 17, 2014 11:52 |  #18

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17277298 (external link)
That does depend on the model. If you have older cameras, this really wouldn't be an option because in the past, the JPG in the raw was a smaller sized "thumbnail". It was perhaps the 7D/1D4 era where this changed so that a full sized JPG is contained inside the raw payload.

Yes, that's a good point. Good reason to buy a new camera too.:cool:


Mark

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon ­ Amateur
Senior Member
Avatar
358 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Likes: 246
Joined Aug 2010
Location: The Netherlands
     
Nov 17, 2014 12:09 |  #19

EOS-Mike wrote in post #17273663 (external link)
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

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17273845 (external link)
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.

For what it is worth a simple comparison with two other camera's.
I haven't shot and counted as GeoKras did but just looked at the camera info.

7D Raw -> 22 frames burst buffer according to the camera.
7D Raw+L -> 17 frames
7D Raw+M -> 18 frames
7D Raw+S -> 18 frames

50D Raw -> 15 frames
50D Raw+L -> 10 frames
50D Raw+M -> 10 frames
50D Raw+S -> 10 frames


Canon EOS 1Dx / 5D4 / 5Dsr / Fujifilm X-T4 / Lytro illum

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Nov 17, 2014 14:10 |  #20

rrblint wrote in post #17276903 (external link)
There's no need to shoot RAW+JPEG in camera, nor to batch convert in DPP. IJFR is so easy and fast to use. HERE'S THE LINK (external link). Give it a try. you'll be glad that you did.

While I do really like IJFR it does have one problem, the embedded jpegs are highly compressed, although still of fair quality.

Here's the file sizes of some image versions (all the same image)...

original raw - 31.3 MB
original jpeg - 8.0 MB
DPP jpeg - 10.4 MB
IJFR jpeg - 2.9 MB
FastStone jpeg - 3.2 MB

FastStone also extracts the embedded jpeg.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rrblint
Listen! .... do you smell something?
Avatar
23,088 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 2889
Joined May 2012
Location: U.S.A.
     
Nov 17, 2014 21:30 |  #21

hollis_f wrote in post #17277629 (external link)
While I do really like IJFR it does have one problem, the embedded jpegs are highly compressed, although still of fair quality.

Here's the file sizes of some image versions (all the same image)...

original raw - 31.3 MB
original jpeg - 8.0 MB
DPP jpeg - 10.4 MB
IJFR jpeg - 2.9 MB
FastStone jpeg - 3.2 MB

FastStone also extracts the embedded jpeg.

Hmmm, I wasn't aware of that. At a glance they seem to be very good copies, but perhaps I should do some comparisons. Thanks Frank.


Mark

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 262
Joined Jun 2014
     
Nov 17, 2014 22:47 |  #22
bannedPermanent ban

Canon Amateur wrote in post #17277372 (external link)
For what it is worth a simple comparison with two other camera's.
I haven't shot and counted as GeoKras did but just looked at the camera info.

7D Raw -> 22 frames burst buffer according to the camera.
7D Raw+L -> 17 frames
7D Raw+M -> 18 frames
7D Raw+S -> 18 frames

50D Raw -> 15 frames
50D Raw+L -> 10 frames
50D Raw+M -> 10 frames
50D Raw+S -> 10 frames

I'm curious what the Large/Fine jpg buffer is on the 7D. I'm guessing until the card is full.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,726 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Likes: 677
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Nov 18, 2014 03:39 as a reply to  @ GeoKras1989's post |  #23

When shooting jpegs the 7D will write to the card and shoot simultaneously, so it depends a lot on how fast your card is.
If you shoot RAW+jpeg, it will not store images and shoot at the same time, thus card speed is only important for the time to recover from buffer full, not for how long you can shoot until the buffer is full.


Anders

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

3,935 views & 0 likes for this thread, 12 members have posted to it and it is followed by 3 members.
Does shooting in Raw+ Jpeg low down the buffer more than shooting just RAW?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ealarcon
1071 guests, 169 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.