Just RAW 14 bit lossless and second card as overflow
D7200 review
- Thread starter mikew_RIP
- Start date
Just RAW 14 bit lossless and second card as overflow
It should do 6 fps and the buffer can store 18 of them. I'll do a test with mine and report back.
Edit:
With the temporary card (one slot) I'm using now I can shoot 12 until it quits and that takes some 2 seconds.
Last edited:
It's a strange problem you have. Did you try to reset to factory settings?
No but i may try that later today. I'll update if there are any changes.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Sorry if it's been asked (maybe I should have re-read the whole thread before asking) but...
Have you tried a *different* set of cards in your camera? I don't necessarily mean cards that are top-of-the-line, just at least one different card than you have now to rule out one of the card/s being the root of this issue.
....
Thank you for the suggestion, i tried it with another card and is the same.
Maybe it's just me and it is what it is with the larger file size and settings, Just seems weird to go from a mustang to a ford taurus.
I did the reset as j-see suggested and it was noticeably faster, but then went and set to RAW 14 bit lossless and is back to the same speed as before.
Maybe i'm off on my estimation of the frame rate by a second as well.
If it bothers me enough i'll do a video and get some feedback that way later.
Thanks, that's a lot easier than a video.
I just did it and will look at it tonight when i'm done shooting.
I checked the metadata by the second and the results were: first second (not knowing when on that second) was 4 shots, next second was 5 shots, next second was 5, next was 2, then 1.
Goes to show you what i know. It is quieter and smoother; maybe that's throwing me off.
I think i'll quit kicking the tires on this thing and just use it.
Makes specs dont take real life situations into account,a bit like how many miles you can get to a gallon of fuel,i still haven't had the 60mpg in town my car should do but it does sound as if your camera is not getting close to specification,i would run with it for a while until you get used to it and see how you feel then.
but it does sound as if your camera is not getting close to specification,i would run with it for a while until you get used to it and see how you feel then.I checked the metadata by the second and the results were: first second (not knowing when on that second) was 4 shots, next second was 5 shots, next second was 5, next was 2, then 1.
Goes to show you what i know. It is quieter and smoother; maybe that's throwing me off.
I think i'll quit kicking the tires on this thing and just use it.
Those results are pretty identical to mine. When it lags to 2 or 1 shot a second it means your buffer has filled and it now is taking shots only when there's room. The first three seconds fill most if not all of your buffer. In theory it could do 18, yours does around 14 which is probably within realistic expectations. Mine did 12 which was even less during that test.
I assume a faster card could speed up the fps since it'll have saved more during those three seconds.
Last edited:
D7100 outperms D7200 at capturing shadow detail at low ISO's!.................according to this video and sample shots.
Just came across this video and thought it might be of interest to some and this seems like a relevant thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9hSNNrNS7M
Of course you'd need to see these results replicated in order to draw firm conclusions but it seems that for the majority of shots that the majority of people take, the D7100 might well do a better job. Of course I want the D7100 to outperform the D7200 in at least some areas as I took the cheap option and got one after the D7200 was released.
Just came across this video and thought it might be of interest to some and this seems like a relevant thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9hSNNrNS7M
Of course you'd need to see these results replicated in order to draw firm conclusions but it seems that for the majority of shots that the majority of people take, the D7100 might well do a better job. Of course I want the D7100 to outperform the D7200 in at least some areas as I took the cheap option and got one after the D7200 was released.
The D7200 has zero shadow improvement when shooting ISO which might be different from the D7100. I never used the D7100 so I can't say much about that. It means that if you shoot at ISO 1000, you won't grab more shadow detail than you'd have gotten at ISO 100. You affect your levels but without any gain.
But the shadow detail being horrific sounds more like the complaint of someone that thinks pushing a button is all it takes to get a great shot. I shoot it at native ISO all the time which implies I always up the exposure in post. If it was horrible at shadows, I'd have sold it already since that would show in each of my shots.
But the shadow detail being horrific sounds more like the complaint of someone that thinks pushing a button is all it takes to get a great shot. I shoot it at native ISO all the time which implies I always up the exposure in post. If it was horrible at shadows, I'd have sold it already since that would show in each of my shots.
Last edited:
The incremental improvements of the 7xxx cameras is so small in terms of IQ that to be honest i have a hard time seeing any difference between my 7200 and 7000. A hundred or so images in post with the 7200 and i can't really say i've recovered much more with images in poor lighting than the 7000.
I can go out and shoot either camera in "X" lighting conditions and if i didn't already know what my camera and lens was capable of i would think that they were broken. Then go out and get it right and be blown away with the quality.
MUCH more important is the quality of light and how you shoot it.
I can go out and shoot either camera in "X" lighting conditions and if i didn't already know what my camera and lens was capable of i would think that they were broken. Then go out and get it right and be blown away with the quality.
MUCH more important is the quality of light and how you shoot it.
Can you explain what you mean by shadow improvement? Not quite sure what you mean there. FYI I'm not making any claims, just thought the video was interesting and would fuel some discussion.
For me the choice between the two cams was made on cost as the grey import D7100 was already above what I was comfortable spending at that time. I'd like the better buffer and high ISO performance but the D7100 is still more camera than I am photographer, might be my only body until the next big thing comes onto the scene.
None of my comment was directed at you.
When I increase ISO with my other cams I gain in the shadows (at the expense of the highlights). It'll show shadow detail which is not there when I take the shot (using the same A/S) at native ISO. It's hardly more than 2/3 stop dynamic range for the D750 but it's still gain. For my shooting style it always implied I have to accept a loss in the shadows.
The same is no longer true for the D7200 (although I still have to fully test it). When upping the ISO on the D7200, it amplifies the photon count but there is no gain in the shadows. It flatlines all through the ISO range. Which is a good thing.
It'll probably be different than the D7100 but every cam is different and they all require a different approach to processing. I process my D750 shots different than I process the D810 and again than the D7200. Although the basic approach is identical, if I want to get most out of my shot, I have to do it different for all. And usually that's the shadow or highlight region.
If he says the shadow detail of the D7200 is horrible, I assume its his processing skill that is horrible.
Here's a site where you find about everything important there is to know in regards to ISO, noise and DR and where you can compare about every cam.
Shadow Improvement of Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO
When you check the actual gain in the shadows of most cams, you realize how futile ISO is for RAW shooting.
Last edited: