Nikon buffer write speeds: This is a repost of a posting I made here over two years ago. It has been updated with some of the newer bodies. I hope some of you derive some benefit from...

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

This is a repost of a posting I made here over two years ago. It has been updated with some of the newer bodies. I hope some of you derive some benefit from this information, especially in choosing the best SD or CF cards for your application.

D40 (X) 9.5
D50 .... 3.5
D60 .... 9.5
D70 (S) 5.5
D80 .... 9.5
D90 .... 9.5
D100 ... 2.1
D200 ... 8.7
D300 (S) 35
D700 .... 35
D1X .... 0.95
D2X ....5.2
D2Xs ... 9.5
D3 (All) .. 35
D3000 .. 3.5
D3100 .. 9.5 *
D3200 .. 16
D5100 .. 9.5
D5200 .. 16
D7000 .. 15
D7100 .. 15
D4 ...... 125
D4s ..... 150
Df ........ 55
D800 (E) 125

I hope some find this info useful. I have tried hard to gather accurate buffer speeds for Canon cameras, but Canon does not release that information officially, and the speeds I found listed by several sites varied widely for all camera models.

*The D3100 I found rated one place at 9.5 (Same as D5100) and another place I found rated at 3.5 (Same as D3000), so I am not positive about the rating for this camera.

amehta Loc: Boston

MT Shooter wrote:

This is a repost of a posting I made here over two... (show quote)

Very interesting, especially the big jump for the big FX bodies compared to the D7x00.

And just another way the Df "slows you down". Yay! :evil:

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

amehta wrote:

Very interesting, especially the big jump for the big FX bodies compared to the D7x00.

And just another way the Df "slows you down". Yay! :evil:

I will note the Df is unusual as the speed rating is listed by Nikon in its pre-order announcement only as "at least 55MB/s" whereas all other Nikons are listed as having a specific write speed. I recently shot a fast sequence with my Df of an Osprey taking off from a nest with a fish in its talons. I shot 28 images in rapid fire RAW plus JPG and the shutter never slowed due to filling the buffer. That was a total of 56 images recorded in about 6 seconds so either the buffer capacity is huge, or the write speed is actually much faster than 55 MB/s as was listed in the pre-order announcement. If I were to make an educated guess I would say it is actually in the 80-120 MB/s range, but Nikon has never updated their listing. It has the D4 sensor with the D600 processor so its certainly capable of much higher write speeds.

Also, I just noticed I left the D600/610 off my list, its write speed is listed as 48 MB/s.

amehta Loc: Boston

MT Shooter wrote:

I will note the Df is unusual as the speed rating ... (show quote)

It seems like it has a bigger buffer, not a faster write speed, especially with the D600 processor. One indicator would be how long the "card in use" LED is on after the burst.

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

amehta wrote:

It seems like it has a bigger buffer, not a faster write speed, especially with the D600 processor. One indicator would be how long the "card in use" LED is on after the burst.

I may be unintentionally hijacking this thread and I don't mean to. I just need to see if I have something straight in my head. Hopefully I have this "sequence" correct.
Am I correctly understanding that the images go to the buffer and then from the buffer to the memory card? If the answer to that is "yes", then a number of things have just dropped into place in my brain.
Never had to think about things like this in film days.

amehta Loc: Boston

MadMikeOne wrote:

I may be unintentionally hijacking this thread and I don't mean to. I just need to see if I have something straight in my head. Hopefully I have this "sequence" correct.
Am I correctly understanding that the images go to the buffer and then from the buffer to the memory card? If the answer to that is "yes", then a number of things have just dropped into place in my brain.
Never had to think about things like this in film days.

Yes, the buffer is a memory space in the camera where the images are kept while they wait to get written to the card.

Now I'm not sure if images are also buffered before being processed into jpgs...

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

amehta wrote:

Yes, the buffer is a memory space in the camera where the images are kept while they wait to get written to the card.

Now I'm not sure if images are also buffered before being processed into jpgs...

Good question. In thinking this through, this is what I came up with. It may or may not make sense. Here goes:
1. If you have your camera set to shoot jpeg, the image is processed as jpeg in the camera. RAW just does not happen.
2. If what I think happens in 1 above is correct, it stands to reason that the image goes to the buffer as a jpeg and I am thinking that there is no additional buffering

Now this takes me to another question: If RAW files are larger than jpegs, and if RAW files take longer to write to the memory card from the buffer AND if images are processed as jpegs within the camera (if camera is set to shoot jpeg) before they get to the buffer, doesn't that add to image processing time for jpeg files? So why should it take longer to process and write RAW files to the memory card than for jpegs? How is the time needed to convert to jpeg within the camera accounted for in this process?

I am almost afraid to press the send button for fear of embarrassing my self - but what the heck. Nothing ventured, nothing learned!

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

MadMikeOne wrote:

Good question. In thinking this through, this is w... (show quote)

All JPG images are converted by the processor as soon as the image is take, based on the criteria selected in the cameras menu system, then that JPG image is downloaded to the buffer for transfer to the card. RAW images require no processing at all but are transferred directly to the buffer. The size of the RAW file is considerably larger depending upon the amount of JPG compression selected. The JPG processing time is in milli-seconds and does not significantly slow the transfer to buffer time, and it will still save to the buffer faster than the significantly larger RAW file.

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

MT Shooter wrote:

All JPG images are converted by the processor as s... (show quote)

Thanks, MT. I am just trying to better understand the processes involved so I am better able to make future decisions. The more pieces I have, the better my understanding.

UtahBob Loc: Southern NJ

Hi MT,

I recently acquired two sandisk extreme plus 16gb cards which show 80mb per second on their face.

For my D7000 if I high speed shoot and fill the buffer until the shooting speed slows down, my shooting speed averages around 0.93 seconds (30 shots/28 seconds for example). I'm creating jpg+raw images totaling 29.2mb in size so that would indicate that the D7000 is clearing the buffer at around 31mb per second which is almost double what you show in the table.

Have you specifically tested the D7000 to confirm the 15 in the table? Is there something strange in the way I am coming up with my data that would invalidate it? Just by the way it behaves the D7000 seems to be faster than 15 (especially when comparing it to the two D200 units I have that I seem to find top out at about 9.3 (1.97 seconds after buffer fill - 30 shots/59 seconds - 18.3mb files)).

Fun stuff :-D

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

UtahBob wrote:

Hi MT, br br I recently acquired two sandisk extr... (show quote)

I have no way to perform any lab standard test personally. The information I have compiled above all came directly from Nikon

amehta Loc: Boston

MadMikeOne wrote:

Good question. In thinking this through, this is w... (show quote)

With every image, both the raw sensor data and the jpeg data are produced. If you save only a jpeg, the raw data is discarded after the jpeg is produced. If you save the raw file, a jpeg is embedded in it. If you save raw+jpeg, a jpeg is embedded in the raw file and a separate jpeg is produced, and the two jpegs can be different resolutions or quality levels.

amehta Loc: Boston

MT Shooter wrote:

This is a repost of a posting I made here over two... (show quote)

What are the types of sources you found for the list?

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

amehta wrote:

Very interesting, especially the big jump for the big FX bodies compared to the D7x00.

And just another way the Df "slows you down". Yay! :evil:

Ametha, you are correct in the conclusion that the image is written to the buffer then downloaded to the card.. in the buffer, it is either written as raw, converted to jpg, or both. It never hurts to have a faster write speed than the camera can take advantage of, but always bad (well not bad but not helpful) to have a slower write speed than the camera can use.

Also, remember that part of the disparity in write speeds of the camera are the sizes of the photos, IF I am reading the graph correctly.. In other words, these are times for writing an image not megabits per second, So, if you were writing an image from a 40 mp camera to a card, it will of course, take longer than writing a 6 mp image to a card regardless of FX, DX or point and shoot. I am not saying that the cameras don't differ in write speeds too, just saying that isn't the entire story.

Coyote9269 Loc: USA

MT Shooter wrote:

This is a repost of a posting I made here over two... (show quote)

Do CF cards process slower ?