Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 5, 2006, 7:36 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
ruchai's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 287
Default

It depends on what you want to do with your camera. If you just want to push the button and let the camera do the rest then 'point and shood' type of cameras are what you should use. There is nothing wrong with p&s. If you are serious and really want to get top quality pictures then you need a DSLR and an ability to master RAW.

Camera processing are designed for average photographer. If you are doing some thing like under water or birds photography then you have to do the processing yourself if you want consistency in qualities.

Attached picture was taken with a point & shoot, Sony V-1. Just want to show that point& shoot cameras are capable of making stunning pictures. If you do not plan to shoot RAW do not waste your time and hard earned money on DSLR.
Attached Images
 
ruchai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2006, 7:15 AM   #12
Moderator
 
Nagasaki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 897
Default

big_potato wrote:
Quote:
Will you always keep or backup those RAW files, after they have been edited/tuned and saved as JPEG???

I always keep the RAW files. The software for processing is getting better and I'm still learning. I found that I've reprocessed files taken last year and got better results. I couldn't do that if I deleted the RAW file after processing.



Ken
Nagasaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2006, 8:53 AM   #13
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I agree with Nagasaki

You may want to reprocess cherished images later using better tools.

I keep my raw files. My editing skills are not the best anyway, and we will continue to see improvements in software to convert raw files. I think the improvements will probably be quite dramatic in the future, reducing the need for you to use curves, etc. to get the look you want.

In the future, I can imagine that software will be able to do a lot of that automatically, based on preferences (or perhaps even automatic scene analysis, based on a database of similar images).

As for shooting in raw, I've been pleasantly surprised at how much more detail (especially in highlights) that can be recovered in raw. I often shoot raw + jpeg, and the raw files often contain highlight detail that is blown with the jpeg images.

Dave Etchells over at imaging resource performs dynamic range tests with Imatest using both jpeg and raw files now (converting the raw files using Adobe Camera Raw).

The difference in Dynamic Range can be substantial (especially if you lean towards overexposing some areas to pull out shadow detail).

I was surprised to see that my Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D outperforms the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II (Canon's most expensive DSLR, using a 35mm size sensor) for Dynamic Range when shooting in raw and converting with ACR.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...M5DIMATEST.HTM

With JPEG, the camera's image processing may lean towards more "punchy" images straight from the camera. So, depending on the way the images are processed, this will lead to clipping. My KM tends to do this using the default settings for things like contrast (but, it's a bit better for DR if you dial back some of the defaults). The D50's default JPEG settings allow a bit more DR.

Dave didn't test the D50 this way (DR converting with ACR). But, given that it's also using a Sony sensor, I wouldn't be surprised to see similar Dynamic Range shooting in raw (probably around a stop difference between the jpeg files with your D50 if you have overexposed areas of an image). There is an even greater difference with my KM 5D using it's default settings when shooting in jpeg.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2006, 6:00 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
tommysdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 714
Default

Quote:
As for shooting in raw, I've been pleasantly surprised at how much more detail (especially in highlights) that can be recovered in raw. I often shoot raw + jpeg, and the raw files often contain highlight detail that is blown with the jpeg images.

I find that I can really get more from the shadow areas,all that dataislost when shootin Jpeg.

TD

I`m still workin on my Raw workflow
tommysdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 1:53 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4
Default

You can also shoot in Raw+jpg and then delete the raw files you don't need later.
jniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 2:09 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I'm definitely in agreement about shooting in Raw. Once you get the workflow down, and do batch editing for similiar shots, it really does not add that much extra time to the editing process. If I was shooting anything critical, I wouldn't think twice about shooting in RAW. Also with storage so cheap, the extra space needed for files is not that big of a deal. I still occassionally shoot JPEG when I'm using one of my P&S cameras, but I never use Jpeg on my D70 or D50.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2006, 4:15 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14
Default

Oldtimer Kurt,

As an owner of the FZ20 for the past year, I know exactly what you mean about missing the lens range when switching to SLR. The FZ20 lens is actually effectively 430mm (12x). A recommendation: try the Nikon 70-300mm G. The 300mm times the 1.5 sensor factor gives you 450mm effective, and the price is around $130 on Beach Camera. Several pros including Ken Rockwell recommend it just as much as the 70-300 D - one piece of extra ED glass is just not worth another $300.

Of course if you really want to spend the money, go for the 200-400mm VR. Yikes!




nojustice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2006, 6:45 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
ruchai's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 287
Default

jniel wrote:
Quote:
You can also shoot in Raw+jpg and then delete the raw files you don't need later.
I shoot in raw+jpeg using jpeg for culling pictures because they are quicker to load, then delete the bad one. After that I deleted all jpeg. My skill with Capture4 is improving and I hope to come back to these raw files again and enjoy doinga better jobin the future.
ruchai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17, 2006, 5:11 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

I have never shot in RAW and don't know much about it. Can someone familiar with shooting RAW please explain to me what exactly are the variables that can be included in post processing? I mean, maybe give a listof a few steps after shooting RAW, whatto do, how to do it, stuff like that.

Thanks and I really appreciate it.
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17, 2006, 5:43 PM   #20
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Each raw converter is going to be different.

Most will let you change the white balance, and some will have more controls (noise reduction, exposure, sharpness, contrast, saturation, shadows and highlights, curves, etc.).

Your best bet is to just "dive in" and try out some of the trial or free converters until you find one that does what you want. Each one is going to be a bit different from a workflow and features perspective.




JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:55 PM.