In Camera Processing

[baolong]

Hi All,
There are so many Digital Camera in the market, each got their pros & cons, I have used 2 to 3 brands of DSLR so far and none can give a very good jpeg output directly from the cameras...... I am wondering which DSLR gives the best jpeg?? Anyone?? :bsmilie:

 

[Rashkae]

Hi All,
There are so many Digital Camera in the market, each got their pros & cons, I have used 2 to 3 brands of DSLR so far and none can give a very good jpeg output directly from the cameras...... I am wondering which DSLR gives the best jpeg?? Anyone?? :bsmilie:

Read the reviews on dpreview.com.

There are too many opinions on what constitutes a "good" or "best" Jpeg.

You really want the best? NEVER shoot JPEG and learn to use RAW.

 

[Keenblade]

Agreed with Rash for the most bit... 99.99% of the time, JPEG is a no-no for serious shooters coz have alot of disadvantages when editing.

But.. for some events/competitions like Canon Photomarathon (ref: http://www.canon-asia.com/photomarathon2009/)

Submissions is straight from camera in jpeg, so that might be valid.

However I feel that quality is not really discernible as most of the differences between shots are due to camera settings.

 

[Snoweagle]

Hi All,
There are so many Digital Camera in the market, each got their pros & cons, I have used 2 to 3 brands of DSLR so far and none can give a very good jpeg output directly from the cameras...... I am wondering which DSLR gives the best jpeg?? Anyone?? :bsmilie:

I agree with Rashkae. In general, jpeg is compressed to around only 10% of the full quality as in RAW, that's why some prefer to shoot only in RAW, then convert and post-process it in Photoshop, etc.

I myself also like to shoot in jpeg but if one demands the full capability and quality, it has to be RAW. And do take note to get a larger capacity memory card too if u're planning to shoot in RAW all the time.

 

[baolong]

Yes totally agreed with you guys, RAW is the way to go if I require best output.... BUT sometimes, you just want to use jpeg and won't bother to waste too much time on the PC... :bsmilie: So I like to know which dslr gives the best or accurate colour jpeg....

 

[Snoweagle]

Yes totally agreed with you guys, RAW is the way to go if I require best output.... BUT sometimes, you just want to use jpeg and won't bother to waste too much time on the PC... :bsmilie: So I like to know which dslr gives the best or accurate colour jpeg....

For me i use jpeg just about all the time cos after transferring to computer, only do some light processing and that's it as i don't have so much time to do converting and then edit.

If i need to, i will choose RAW+jpeg L fine.

 

[Rashkae]

So I like to know which dslr gives the best or accurate colour jpeg....

As I said, you need to do some research on your own. Also, in-camera settings can totally negate any brand's "color advantage".

For example, some people say Fuji is good. Others say Canon. Others Nikon. Others Olympus. Others sony. The cycle never ends.

 

[baolong]

As I said, you need to do some research on your own. Also, in-camera settings can totally negate any brand's "color advantage".

For example, some people say Fuji is good. Others say Canon. Others Nikon. Others Olympus. Others sony. The cycle never ends.

:bsmilie:I think I will have to get all the brands together and do a comparison..:bsmilie:

 

[twisted illusion]

Read the reviews on dpreview.com.

There are too many opinions on what constitutes a "good" or "best" Jpeg.

You really want the best? NEVER shoot JPEG and learn to use RAW.

ya.. i was forced to learn how to use (or must use) raw... everything raw.. let pc run raw to jpeg batch conversion... while i go poo, done poo-ing... batch conversion also done.. at least those bad ones can be save...

 

[Rashkae]

:bsmilie:I think I will have to get all the brands together and do a comparison..:bsmilie:

That's what dpreview can help you with.

 

[Octarine]

ya.. i was forced to learn how to use (or must use) raw... everything raw.. let pc run raw to jpeg batch conversion... while i go poo, done poo-ing... batch conversion also done.. at least those bad ones can be save...

Sounds as if you convert all pictures from RAW to JPG and start editing then? Doesn't make any sense.
Review your images, criticize sharply, delete crap immediately (maybe make notes to re-shoot again), then start RAW workflow with post-processing. Last step is converting to jpg. Adobe Lightroom supports this workflow pretty nicely but other tools can do the same. Once your image in converted to jpg there's no way back, image information is lost. With RAW and the RAW workflow you can always go back, restart, re-edit ...

 

[catchlights]

you can always fine tune your camera to produce a jpg straight out from the camera and ready to use/print.

but there is a catch, you have to limit yourself to shoot only ONE type of subject under ONE type of condition.