Burst shooting & FPS - Could someone explain it to me please

B

bdigital

Suspended / Banned
Messages
332
Edit My Images
No
Hello,

I have a (probably silly) question about camera fps and how it works in practice.

When im at the race track and i hear other peoples cameras firing off machine gun like captures, are they shooting in JPEG? Or just have really fast cameras that can shoot fast RAW?

The reason i ask is that I like to shoot in raw, but my 550D doesnt quite keep up on the continuous shooting mode. I have been looking at upgrading to the 7D for its 8fps shooting but would that achieve the 'machine gun' fire in RAW? or only in JPEG?

The card I am using is a SanDisk Extreme Pro SDHC Memory Card 95 Mbps 16 GB which is paired with my 550D.

If someone could explain it I would really appreciate it.

p.s the main use is motorsports (superbikes and touring cars) which i think the 7D looks very capable for.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
they may well be shooting jpg, really its a question how fast it can write them to your card, I use Lexar x 600 which is really quick even with raws
 
The higher end bodies have that machine gun like sound when using the faster drive mode. Depending on the photographer, it might be RAW, JPEG or both.

On my 1D I can fire off for a few seconds before the camera slows the rate down to write the images since they fill the buffer very quickly. With smaller JPEGS, I can go that little bit longer cs shooting RAW and large JPEG.

You can easily fire off a very fast burst in RAW like that but trying to do it for more than a few seconds is not likely as the buffer will fill up usually quicker than it takes to write to the card.

To be honest, capturing crashes are all about timing. Even at 8fps, I have missed cars popping flames when racing so I would say you might still miss something but it does give you better chances. I would say the 7D is a good shout since you have the added reach from the crop.
 
I've also got a 7D and shoot motorsports (in the warmer weather lol)

The 7D can shoot RAW very quickly - and can certainly keep up with action shots like you are describing.

I think some of it will come down to the memory card that is being used to? If you've got a fast card, it won't fill buffer as quick.

Obviously it also comes down to the shutter speed that is being used too - the slower the shutter speed, the less fps you will get.
 
The area of memory the camera writes to before the image is written to the card (the buffer) is smaller (and possibly slower) on the lower two levels of cameras, particularly on the bottom two levels. Once the buffer is full it can't accept any further data until it has completed the process of writing the images to your memory card, then once the images are onto the card it can accept more data and will let you shoot again.
Anything that makes the image file size larger will fill the buffer even faster - such as RAW, high ISO or high resolution.

The higher level cameras can take more shots in the buffer which means they can keep shooting for longer before the buffer becomes a bottleneck. The memory card can also be a bottleneck but I think it's the camera in the situations you're talking about.

If you look up the specifications for various cameras it'll tell you how fast you can take images and how many images the buffer can hold before it's full. It's not always in the same format but they should all say the frame rate of the fastest mode, how many RAW images the buffer can take and how many JPEG images the buffer can take.
For example:

550D
3.7 fps
34 Large/Fine JPEG
6 RAW frames

40D
6.5 fps
75 Large/Fine JPEG
17 RAW
14 RAW+JPEG

7D
8 fps
126 JPEGs (with UDMA card)
15 RAW

1D IV
10 fps
121 Large/Fine JPEG
28 RAW

Bear in mind that if you machine gun everything you're going to spend forever going through 10+ slight variants of the same image to find the best one and you're going to eat into memory card space pretty fast.
 
Last edited:
My 650d soon fills it's buffer and slows on continuous but does me ok as an amateur.

If you find you need more then as suggested above it'll mean a new body but do you need it that badly ?
 
Thank you for the helpful information.

The card I am using is a SanDisk Extreme Pro SDHC Memory Card 95 Mbps 16 GB which is paired with my 550D.

Ive found it quite hard to track a motorbike while holding the shutter down and actually get sharp images, so I have stopped trying that and just stick with aiming/timing a single shot.

Im not sure if this is a problem with my technique, settings or a limitation of the camera. But I am presuming its my technique & settings!

The 7D is seriously tempting for its improvements in AF and fps, but I was a little dissapointed to hear that it is the same image quality as the 550D and that the ISO performance was not all that great (ISO performance is one of the gripes i have with my 550D)
 
DazJW said:
550D
3.7 fps
34 Large/Fine JPEG
6 RAW frames

40D
6.5 fps
75 Large/Fine JPEG
17 RAW
14 RAW+JPEG

7D
8 fps
126 JPEGs (with UDMA card)
15 RAW

1D IV
10 fps
121 Large/Fine JPEG
28 RAW
Click to expand...

Note, the 7D was updated earlier this year to have a maximum burst of up to 25 frames in RAW.

Bear in mind that if you machine gun everything you're going to spend forever going through 10+ slight variants of the same image to find the best one and you're going to eat into memory card space pretty fast.
Click to expand...

^^ This.

Drive is nice to have to get the shot when you need it. But over reliance on it will just make editing much harder.
 
bdigital said:
Ive found it quite hard to track a motorbike while holding the shutter down and actually get sharp images, so I have stopped trying that and just stick with aiming/timing a single shot.
Click to expand...

If you can't get what you want with your current camera's burst mode then machine gunning will just get you lots more shots you don't like. You'll be better served working on your technique, if you have a look for some threads about "panning" shots it'll probably help even if you're not pushing for that particular style of shot because they should cover everything that can make a shot be unsharp - like the angles things are moving at and so on.

There's nothing wrong with single shot though, one good shot is better than six naff ones. Don't feel pressured into spamming the shutter because everyone else is, you don't know what their shots are coming out like.
 
Last edited:
I recently did a burlesque show, my first one and it was my first real use for burst, particularly during the can can dance.

I did a couple of long bursts and soon realised it wasn't practical due to the buffer so I ended up anticipating and using short bursts of 5-8 frames. This worked fairly well for me though I'd have to work on my anticipation a bit more, but it did mean the buffer was nearly always near empty. Quick burst, find a new subject in the dance whilst the camera clears the buffer, quick burst again. It also meant I could do a longer burst if I wanted to capture something particularly good. I like to think I captured more than using less bursts even if they would have been longer.
 
With the 7D card speed has zero impact on how long it takes to fill the buffer with raw files. With the new firmware it'll rattle off 22-25 raw images before the buffer fills and the frame rate drops. This is where a fast card comes into its own. My 60 MB/s card will clear the buffer in about 10 seconds. I also have a 1.5 MB/s card that takes nearly 4 minutes.
 
hollis_f said:
This is where a fast card comes into its own. My 60 MB/s card will clear the buffer in about 10 seconds. I also have a 1.5 MB/s card that takes nearly 4 minutes.
Click to expand...

This is generally true ... but only up to a point and that is when you use a card that is faster than the write speed of the camera. Once the camera hits it's maximum write speed using faster cards becomes an expensive, pointless exercise.
 
Thanks everyone. That has helped explain it for me.

The 7D certainly looks a decent package for shooting sports, the only downside from my perspective is that coming from the 550D there doesnt appear to be a difference in IQ or ISO performance.

The IQ from the 550D is decent, but the ISO performance could be better :'(
 
bdigital said:
Thanks everyone. That has helped explain it for me.

The 7D certainly looks a decent package for shooting sports, the only downside from my perspective is that coming from the 550D there doesnt appear to be a difference in IQ or ISO performance.

The IQ from the 550D is decent, but the ISO performance could be better :'(
Click to expand...
Compared to what?

Don't get hung up on Internet jockeys who analyse the pleasure out of life, the 7d produces images I'll happily use across a double page album spread at ISO's I wouldn't print film over 6x4:shrug:

Let's be honest, the biggest limiting factor to the quality of my photos is me, next is the lens, then the camera body. I've got A3 prints from a 300d at 800 iso, I'd say if you can't get a decent image out of the 7d at 3200 iso, then your idea of reasonable is skewed or your technique is rubbish.

Some people aren't happy because iso 25600 looks worse than iso 100, which is a bit like saying your fiesta isn't economical at 110mph like it is at 55mph, what do people genuinely expect:thinking: sure it'd be nice to have clean high ISO's but we have to be realistic.
 
Bristolian said:
Nicely put, Phil :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Yes, if a bit Rodney but Lionel ;)

And another thing, if a camera doesn't have the frame rate, or can't focus fast and accurate, a bit of noise is irrelevant. There will be a 7D Mk2 along some time or other, and I suspect it will be fantastic - at twice the price. 7D is a bargain right now (and 5D2 for that matter).
 
HoppyUK said:
Yes, if a bit Rodney but Lionel ;)

And another thing, if a camera doesn't have the frame rate, or can't focus fast and accurate, a bit of noise is irrelevant. There will be a 7D Mk2 along some time or other, and I suspect it will be fantastic - at twice the price. 7D is a bargain right now (and 5D2 for that matter).
Click to expand...

Im feeling daft but I don't understand the Lionel and Rodney bit?

And if I had a capital boost at the moment I'd happily buy a couple more 7d's.
 
Phil V said:
Im feeling daft but I don't understand the Lionel and Rodney bit?

And if I had a capital boost at the moment I'd happily buy a couple more 7d's.
Click to expand...

Rodney Marsh, harsh. Lionel Blair, fair :D
 
Phil V said:
Ta - feel daft now, can I blame the headcold?:thinking:
Click to expand...

Don't. It's my favourite bit of rhyming slang, but nobody ever gets it!
 
Phil V said:
Compared to what?

Don't get hung up on Internet jockeys who analyse the pleasure out of life, the 7d produces images I'll happily use across a double page album spread at ISO's I wouldn't print film over 6x4:shrug:

Let's be honest, the biggest limiting factor to the quality of my photos is me, next is the lens, then the camera body. I've got A3 prints from a 300d at 800 iso, I'd say if you can't get a decent image out of the 7d at 3200 iso, then your idea of reasonable is skewed or your technique is rubbish.

Some people aren't happy because iso 25600 looks worse than iso 100, which is a bit like saying your fiesta isn't economical at 110mph like it is at 55mph, what do people genuinely expect:thinking: sure it'd be nice to have clean high ISO's but we have to be realistic.
Click to expand...

Hi Phil, thanks for the reponse.

When you say "compared to what?" im not 100% sure what you mean. Im not comparing the 550D with anything. Im saying that my results at higher ISOs (1600 and up) most have not been usuable due to the high level of noise. Having said that some were ok.

(if thats not what you were getting at then please accept my apologies!)

Im not debating the overall image quality of the 7D, I guess im just saying that its a shame there wont be much improvement in IQ or ISO performance when upgrading from my 550D. I know there are plenty of other good reasons to go to the 7D :D
 
My response was to the general Internet noise re noise on current Canon crops.

But what it that you find unacceptable? Have you printed the images, were they exposed correctly? Any noise is increased by under exposure and looks loads worse on screen than in print.

The comparison is open ended. As you've got a 560d then it's a choice of noisy image or no image. If getting the shot is important, then the noisy shot is massively better. I haven't rejected a shot because of noise since the 300d. And even then I didn't care because I was attempting a shot I couldn't have got on film. Which was the real alternative.

If your alternative to the 550d is a 5d II then the 550d becomes unacceptable early on. But if it's all you have it's perfectly acceptable if the shot is important.
 
Slightly OT but I was shooting a friends football game recently and normally use my 24-105 on 'H' mode for burst shooting on a 40d but I tried an old Sigma 70-300 lens f 4/5.6 and when I used the same settings the Sigma wouldn't shoot as quick.

The Sigma would probably only achieve half the number I shots as the Canon 24-105 lens. I thought you are limited to FPS due to the camera body and not the lens?
 
Last edited:
interesting
was that down to shutter speed though due to limitations of aperture

as for the 7D I like mine a lot
noise and ISO? well I'm a little disappointed but it's because my expectations were high. having said that, it's a step up from my 40D and not on a par with a FF 5Dii or similar. but it's limitations of budget etc.
overall the 7D is very capable I feel and I like the whole feel of the camera.
i'll happily shoot at 1600ISO with the 7D and not have a problem, at 3200ISO I'll be more concerned about noise, but if you can capture the moment...afterwards you can process and recover if you wish.
But you have to capture that moment first, and the 7D is a decent camera for the job at a decent price now...less than £800 I think on the net.
 
There are several factors to achieve decent burst images from a camera. As mentioned, a camera is limited by how many images it can write to the card just as well as the speed of the card to recieve the images, so you're wasting your money if you buy a card thats faster than your camera can write to it.

The Buffer size of the camera, but whats more important and why the pro pay the big $$$ for the 1D series camera's is the shutter lag. i.e the time it takes for the camera to refocus once a shot has been taken.

On the entry level camera's like your 550D the hit rate for achieving a burst of 5-7 images and having everyone in focus and sharp especially on a pan is limited because you camera's not quick enough to take the shot, refocus on the subject and take the shot, refocus etc etc, that's why some of the images are soft or out of focus.

As you move up the range paying the extra $$$ the Algorithms become more sophisticated, so the 7D would be better than your 550D, but you would still get soft or blurred images from your burst, even my 1D MKII has a better autofocus system than the 7D, although admittedly its showing its age in other area's, the top of the pile is the 1DX, but again mega $$$.

Another factor is the speed of your lens, the faster the glass f2.8 f2 etc the faster you camera will focus and those be able to take the next shot.

Don't get hung up on fps, its technique, the correct settings, good optics and timing that gets you the image.
 
Last edited:
jimmy83 said:
Slightly OT but I was shooting a friends football game recently and normally use my 24-105 on 'H' mode for burst shooting on a 40d but I tried an old Sigma 70-300 lens f 4/5.6 and when I used the same settings the Sigma wouldn't shoot as quick.

The Sigma would probably only achieve half the number I shots as the Canon 24-105 lens. I thought you are limited to FPS due to the camera body and not the lens?
Click to expand...

That would be dependant on the AF priority - If the lens is slow to focus, and the camera is set to prioritise focus, it'll slow down, if the camera is set to prioritise shooting speed, you'll get OoF shots (but more of them). You can't set this on the 40d, but my guess is that its set to prioritise AF.
 
Phil V said:
That would be dependant on the AF priority - If the lens is slow to focus, and the camera is set to prioritise focus, it'll slow down, if the camera is set to prioritise shooting speed, you'll get OoF shots (but more of them). You can't set this on the 40d, but my guess is that its set to prioritise AF.
Click to expand...

Cheers Phil, I had the focus setting on AI focus, is that the same as AF prioritise?
 
pete.rush said:
Another factor is the speed of your lens, the faster the glass f2.8 f2 etc the faster you camera will focus and those be able to take the next shot.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is correct. I don't own any of the really fast normal primes, but I seem to recall reading that at least one of them (50mm f1.2) is a contender for 'slowest focussing lens of the century'.
 
hollis_f said:
I don't think this is correct. I don't own any of the really fast normal primes, but I seem to recall reading that at least one of them (50mm f1.2) is a contender for 'slowest focussing lens of the century'.
Click to expand...

OK lets say 200mm f2, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500 and 600mm f4 then which are the general pro lenses I see at circuits
 
jimmy83 said:
Cheers Phil, I had the focus setting on AI focus, is that the same as AF prioritise?
Click to expand...

You should switch to AI Servo if you are shooting subject you know are moving.

AI Focus is canons attempt at a hybrid that in my experience has never worked properly. It initially attempts one shot focus, the switches to servo when it detects subject movement, apparently.
 
hollis_f said:
I don't think this is correct. I don't own any of the really fast normal primes, but I seem to recall reading that at least one of them (50mm f1.2) is a contender for 'slowest focussing lens of the century'.
Click to expand...

It's kind of true. Fast lenses should always allow the AF sytem to read quicker and more accurately (basic triangulation) but, depending where/how the AF elements are configured, big lumps of glass can be harder to move quickly.

Also, large aperture lenses take longer to stop down to high f/numbers, increasing lag and hurting frame rates.

Canon deliberately puts the AF and IS mechs for its big primes right at the back of the lens where everything is smaller/lighter/faster.
 
jimmy83 said:
Cheers Phil, I had the focus setting on AI focus, is that the same as AF prioritise?
Click to expand...

The 40d doesn't have a priority setting - I found half way through writing the post. I think the 40d is set to prioritise AF - the better cameras can be set to prioritise shooting speed - and will happily carry on shooting 8 or 10 fps whilst trying to get a shot in focus:shrug:.

But you should NEVER use AI Focus - like Richard said - it's just a cludge.

One shot for stationary - AI Servo for moving subjects. AI Focus - for people who rely on scene modes:gag:.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top