A couple months ago, I purchased a Nikon D800, before realizing I would like to get into time lapse photography. I'm used to shooting in RAW and would like to continue shooting time lapse sequences in this format, but I think I heard somewhere that the file size may be a problem when trying to shoot frames at close intervals. I've tried shooting a few time lapse sequences in JPEG already, but even after careful processing in LRT, I'm not happy with the results. This could have more to do with my camera settings while shooting than the file format, still, I would like to continue to shoot in RAW. Comments or suggestions?

Thanks!

I always shoot RAW, but let's not go there now. First, when you say you are not happy with the results, what does not mean? RAW may not be the solution.

Rich

I always shoot RAW, but let's not go there now. First, when you say you are not happy with the results, what does not mean? RAW may not be the solution.

Rich

There was a lot of flicker, but I think it had to do mostly with the aperture setting. I am just studying Gunther's tutorial now and learning more about that. The real issue is that I want to shoot in RAW, but am concerned about the camera processing speed being able to keep up with such large file sizes when shooting short intervals. I'm just wondering if anyone else has knowledge and experience with this. I can find very little about it in web searches.

When you say you are worried about the camera being able to process the RAW images I would not worry, the camera will take as long as it needs. It is true larger files take longer for the camera to store, but as an example instead of storing the image in 0.3 seconds, it might take 0.5 seconds. Just an example.

I can't imagine many reasons why you would be be concerned with shooting speed. There are some, but let's not confuse things.

If you want something to worry about, worry about having enough time in your life to learn to shoot and process RAW images. There is a learning curve. I am retired and spend all day at it. If I had a life with kids and wife and a job I wouldn't be able to keep up. That an exaggeration, but hope you get the idea.

I would first be happy with the JPEG images and flickering before jumping into RAW. It is unlikely that RAW will make the difference you are seeking. Then again, I haven't seen what you are seeing, so I could be wrong.

Rich

This post was last modified: 2012-12-30, 09:53 by imjjill.

Thanks Rich. I have been taking and processing RAW files for years, but switched to JPEG for my first time lapse sequence. I haven't tried time lapse in RAW on the D800 yet, but was just wondering if anyone else has run into problems with it. I guess I'll just go out and experiment...

I assumed you have not shot RAW, sorry.

On my Canon 5D Mark II I can shoot RAW at 2 second intervals, but not 1 second intervals. I don't think it would change if I shot JPEG.

All the best and Happy New Year,
Rich

No worries!

I remember hearing from someone else that they had problems taking RAW images with the D800 at 1 second intervals because of the time needed to process such large files. I haven't tried any interval photography in RAW yet, but will go see what it can handle.

Thanks for your response and Happy New Year to you as well!

Hi Imjill,
every camera has a lowest frame rate it allows for. The D800 is certainly not the fastest in that terms - but on the other hand, I never shoot time lapse in 1sec intervals. In the very most cases I shoot 4 or 5 secs intervals. Consider that you will have to deal with huge amount of data when shooting 36MP sequences with the D800 in such short intervals! Your card will fill up really fast as well.
I would recommend setting the D800 to DX mode and using DX lenses for shooting time lapse, for example the 10-24 Nikkor is a great lens I use all the time for time lapse. This will give you 16MP NEF, half the size of the full frame images and write them faster as well.

Enjoy the D800 it's an amazing camera - but for time lapse shooting in full frame it's just overkill...
Best
Gunther

This sounds like a great solution! Thank you.

I also noticed that the camera has an aperture lock. Do you think this might make it possible to shoot with smaller apertures than is usually recommended?

Hmm, what do you mean with "Aperture lock"?