D7100 Total Continous Burst Count (specific settings)?

[dwswager]

For D7100 owners, can you report back the total continuous burst you can shoot with the camera set to

Image Quality: JPG Fine
Image Size: Large
JPG Compression: Quality (versus speed)
Active D Lighting: Normal (Med)

I'm coming from a D300 which the manual states that at JPG Fine, Large will do 43 frames in the buffer. However, under the current settings I use and mentioned above, the Viewfinder reports [ r06] 6 total frames. Hence, the processing of the Active D Lighting and Compression algorithms is slowing this down.

I keep reading that the buffer of the 7100 is a problem (33 frames at JPG Fine, Large), but wondering if in real life, with the faster processor would I get similar capability out of the D7100 as I do out of the D300.

Thanks in Advance.

UPDATE (5/8/2013)

Ok, Answering my own Question: It appears that the almost double size of the RAW file for the D7100 really hurts, but if shooting JPG and once you start pushing the Expeed processor in the D300, the D7100's Expeed 3 processor helps out some.

Continous Burst Total Frames Before Filling Buffer

	D300	D7100
File Size Raw 14 Bit Lossless Compressed	16.7 MB	28.5 MB
File Size JPG Fine, Large	5.8 MB	12.0 MB
Theoretical Maximum (RAW 14 Bit)	21	6
Theoretical Maximum (JPG Fine, Large)	43	33
Active D Lighting Off, JPG Compression Size	20	12
Active D Lighting Off, JPG Compression Quality	15	9
Active D Lighting Normal, JPG Compressions Size	Not tested	12
Active D Lighting Normal, JPG Compression Quality	6	9

 

[TheLost]

I shoot sports with the D7100 (before that with a D7000) and i have no issue at all with the D7100's buffer.

This is not my list... but i have verified its accurate using SanDisk Extreme Pro UHS-1 cards (2x 32gb is what i have)...

Keep in mind... 1.3x crop is a 13.5mp image (larger then the 12mp on the D300)

There are TONS of D300(s) shooters that are very happy with the D7100..

 

[nmoody]

Great info, thanks for posting

 

[Derrel]

The Active D-Lighting really does impact the JPEG buffer. I read a review oif the D7100 on SLR Lounge, and the author pointed out that if you put the JPEG Quality to SIZE-Priority (as opposed to the Quality Priority you specify), that the D7100's JPEG buffer is "unlimited". (That is without Active D-Lighting on, I assume.)

Maybe a workaround would be to use the most-approriate manual Tone Curve selection for the lighting conditions, and set the camera up manually a bit more, so that the SOOC JPEGs are pretty close to spot-on, as opposed to having active D-Lighting need to read and analyze the scene in each and every images and then tone-map and write the Maximum-sized, highest-quality, least-compressed JPEG possible.

The combination of Active D-Lighting AND Maximum Quality is probably a deal-breaker...looking at the JPEG buffer stats for the above cards, I can not imagine that you will be able to get more than 6 frames with both Active D-Lighting and Maxium Quality JPEG enabled...just..can..not..see...it.

It would be interesting to see which hurts buffer performance more...Max-Quality JPEG versus Size-priority, or Active D-Lighting versus Max-Quality JPEG sizing...

 

[dwswager]

Thanks all so far. I guess I could work the tone curve angle.

I plan to just go set up a D7100 and try it. I'm just wondering if the 2 generation newer processor will actually handle things quickly enough. I really only need comparable to what I have now at 6 total frames. It usually takes less than a second, for example, from the time I trigger the shutter on bat movement to the time the swing finishes.

 

[Derrel]

Would love to hear back what you find out!!! Active D-Lighting, especially at the higher values, seems to me to be a very evolved form of JPEG processing in the newer Nikons. When it first came out, it was kind of meh, but I have seen some VERY impressive Active D-Lighting SOOC files over the last year. Pretty amazing what d-slr's have evolved into. Honestly, I think that the buffer/throughput issues are the MAIN difference Nikon engineering and marketing pay attention to between their consumer and high-end consumer versus their "pro" bodies; hardcore shooters want more buffer depth, and more processing power and are willing to pay for it. The D7100 has however, set new benchmarks for a non-pro Nikon in terms of performance, so I think any D400 will have to be very well-spec'd buffer-wise and processing wise.

 

[TheLost]

I have been unimpressed with Active D-Lighting on both the D7000 and now the D7100. The noise it adds to the image has always been unacceptable... even at iso 100.

However... if i have time i'll run a test tonight and tell you how turning Active-D on affects the D7100's speed.

 

[Derrel]

Active D-Lighting is for people who actually print images...the noise is sublimated in printing...HUGE amounts of meaningless shadow noise 'disappears' when it's covered up by ink gain, OR when that huge 100% pixels view is shrunk down to a 4x6 or 5x7 or even an 8x12 inch print...but when zoomed in to 100% on a computer screen the "noise" from the D7000 or D7100 is probably notable to many people who obsess about noise. I don't mean that to sound flippant or disrespectful TheLost, but I come from a different era, and the "noise" from the D7000 or D7100's sensor is of utterly zero worry to me. I have seen hundreds on web-based people commenting on "the noise, the noise, the noise" for a decade now...even in really GOOD pictures, I often read a comment about "the noise".

Printed images, and especially when your images go to newsprint, makes noise a non-issue for many people. Size-reduced images from 24MP cameras and noise...is an issue that I just cannot get worked up about. I grew up on Tri-X Pan, pushed to 3,200...the noise from the chittiest new d-slr looks leagues better AND the images are in-color and have higher rez and are easier to work with and can have NR done on them, if desired. Again, not to sound disrespectful, but this obsession with noise from 16 and 24 MP captures just holds no water with me.

 

[dwswager]

Haven't got to the store to test the D7100 to test this yet, but last night I was shooting my D300 and here is how it works for JPG FINE, LARGE (12.3MP):

Active D-Lighting Off, JPG Compression Speed = 20 Frames Total Continous Burst
Active D-Lighting Off, JPG Compressions Quality = 15 Frames
Active D-Lighting On, JPG Compression Quality = 6 Frames

Forgot to test Active D-Lighting On, JPG Compression Speed. There are obvioulsy other factors involved that contribute to the speed achived as well. Hitting the AF Lock button allows faster releases than if it is focus tracking. Hence it is taking longer time to fill the buffer.

 

[KmH]

Active D-Lighting is software, and dramatically slows down the burst rate because the image file has to be run through the image processor.

What is "JPG Compression Speed"?
The D7100 offers 3 JPEG compression ratios - 1:4 (Fine), 1:8 (Normal), or 1:16 (Basic).
3 resolutions: L - 6000x4000, M - 4496x3000, and S- 2992x2000
You can also choose Size Priority (uniform file size), or Optimal quality (files size varies with the scene shot).

To maximize burst rate and burst duration select - JPEG Basic, Small, Size Priority.

 

[dwswager]

Active D-Lighting is software, and dramatically slows down the burst rate because the image file has to be run through the image processor.

What is "JPG Compression Speed"?
The D7100 offers 3 JPEG compression ratios - 1:4 (Fine), 1:8 (Normal), or 1:16 (Basic).
3 resolutions: L - 6000x4000, M - 4496x3000, and S- 2992x2000
You can also choose Size Priority (uniform file size), or Optimal quality (files size varies with the scene shot).

To maximize burst rate and burst duration select - JPEG Basic, Small, Size Priority.

The SPEED option is the Contant File Size versus Optimum Quality. It is a quicker compression algorithm. And yes, the point of this thread was what the D7100 could actually do with specific settings as far as number of frames in a continous burst. It is actually possible that a D7100 shooting JPGs might actually be able to capture more total frames in a burst than a D300 because of the better processor, even though the files are bigger. That is what I'm looking to have verified or disproved.

 

[dwswager]

UPDATE (5/8/2013)

Ok, Answering my own Question: It appears that the almost double size of the RAW file for the D7100 really hurts, but if shooting JPG and once you start pushing the Expeed processor in the D300, the D7100's Expeed 3 processor helps out some.

Continous Burst Total Frames Before Filling Buffer

	D300	D7100
File Size Raw 14 Bit Lossless Compressed	16.7 MB	28.5 MB
File Size JPG Fine, Large	5.8 MB	12.0 MB
Theoretical Maximum (RAW 14 Bit)	21	6
Theoretical Maximum (JPG Fine, Large)	43	33
Active D Lighting Off, JPG Compression Size	20	12
Active D Lighting Off, JPG Compression Quality	15	9
Active D Lighting Normal, JPG Compressions Size	Not tested	12
Active D Lighting Normal, JPG Compression Quality	6	9