Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3428 times:
I believe that the raw and the large-fine jpeg have the same number of effective pixels, and therefore are equally "sharp". I understand that the major differences between raw and jpeg out of the D60 are:
1. The raw includes an embedded jpeg which can be extracted and used as with a normal jpeg using the Canon supplied software
2. The raw file includes no compression (i.e. loss-less) whereas jpeg files always include some degree of compression (i.e. lossy) and will degrade further with every subsequent save. Even if the camera output for jpeg and raw look the same, it therefore makes sense to start with the raw file if any manipulation (even just sharpening) is likely to be needed - which it will.
2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8 Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3420 times:
I have experimented with both RAW and fine jpeg settings and can see no difference in the final print, even after sharpening etc and resizing. I jsut had some 8x12 prints made from jpegs and they are, if I do say so myself, STUNNING. (Sized and set to 300 DPI. Printed at a local photo shop) They are as good, if not better than prints I have had made from slides/negatives.
I think the biggest advantage of RAW is the amount of post processing work that you can do with the image.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3397 times:
Out of the camera, I can't detect any visible difference between large fine jpg and RAW extracted in 8 bit format. However, depending on the extraction software used, it is possible to acheive greater highlight detail using 16 bit extraction from the RAW file. Further more, RAW allows exposure and colour adjustments to be applied after the picture has been taken - likewise sharpening allowing scope for experimentation without image degradation.
Finally, with people like Chris Breeze and Fred Miranda dedicating vast effort into extracting the ultimate image from the Canon output, it is not inconceivable that a method of getting even higher quality images from the RAW file will become available in the future - so archiving shots in RAW has some merit.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3390 times:
Sorry - haven't come across any yet, but there is a fair bit of material on the 'net - I'd start with Fred Miranda's site (www.fredmiranda.com). There's a lot of info buried in the forums plus a number of articles as well as pointers to other sites.
2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3319 times:
I just took a shot set at RAW and then another at fine jpeg. The RAW was 6.3MB. The JPEg was 1.6MB. On a 1 GB microdrive card it will take about 140 shots at RAW setting. ABout 400 on the JPEG. I just came home from a Europe trip where I used the camera constantly. Took about 2,000 photos with it. (GULP!!!!!!) I used the battery up totally on one day, (left the wife and kid to themselves and hit Heathrow and RAF Hendon. Took about 320 shots, several with flash in the museum before the battery decided to go. But the day was pretty much done.)
737heavy From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 601 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3309 times:
I find I can get around 170+ shots on my microdrives. Depends on ISO. I got an Image Tank for downloading them in order to use the cards again which is great cos you can shoot all day. I got 4 batteries too which helps.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3316 times:
I'd second the Breezebrowser suggestion.
2912n - sounds like you should consider investing in the battery grip and an extra battery - I found I could get upwards of 800 shots (using AF and image stabilisation) on a single charge of two batteries.
Shawn - due to the clever buffering system, you can shoot (up to 8 frames) in RAW just as fast as jpg - however, when it comes time to flush the buffer to the card this will take longer than jpg. This can be a pain, and a little thinking ahead is required if you don't want to be caught out with a fast approaching subject and a set of pics writing to the card! In practice, no worse than coming to the end of a roll of film and waiting to rewind and reload.
I've learned not to try and fill a CF card, but change cards at any convenient break in the action once past half full - this does assume you have something to download the cards to.