'Premium' vs. 'Best'

*MidwestMax* · 08-01-2009, 08:38 AM

I just got my K20d and I was wondering if anyone notices a real difference between images taken with the 'best' three-star JPEG format and the 'premium' four-star one? Thanks.

wll · 08-01-2009, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by MidwestMax

I just got my K20d and I was wondering if anyone notices a real difference between images taken with the 'best' three-star JPEG format and the 'premium' four-star one? Thanks.

I use **** star format, just because there is less compression, so I figure it is better. Takes up more room on SD card, but who cares.

wll

*Das Boot* · 08-01-2009, 09:07 AM

It's for people that want the universally accepted JPEG format but of a high quality. DPR had said the compression is less than the highest quality PS saves it as (quality 12). It's size is almost as big as a RAW file though.

Mikeru · 08-01-2009, 09:22 AM

I did a rough comparison back when I first got the camera. In the examples I tried at least, I couldn't see any sign of compression artifacts in the 3 star versus the 4 star jpeg. So I have it set to 3 star for it's near 50% file size. That said, I use raw almost all the time anyway.

I'd be interested to hear others findings though.

*MidwestMax* · 08-01-2009, 09:23 AM

Yeah, I noticed how large the **** JPEG files are even when shooting at 10 megapixels. I was hoping to save memory while shooting everyday type stuff, but maybe RAW is the way to go for everything.

*Das Boot* · 08-01-2009, 10:33 AM

Though there may be no visible difference between the two, but after doing some simple editing you will see the differences. There is less banding in premium and more room for editing while preserving more detail (ie rounding errors).

ftpaddict · 08-01-2009, 11:22 AM

I can't understand why everybody doesn't just shoot RAW all the time.

kerrowdown · 08-01-2009, 11:34 AM

Most press / sport pros shoot jpegs all the time for instant transfer / download and use.

ftpaddict · 08-01-2009, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by kerrowdown

Most press / sport pros shoot jpegs all the time for instant transfer / download and use.

Oh snap. Hadn't thought of that one.

Dom · 08-01-2009, 11:55 AM

I personally shoot RAW all the time. Is using **** instead of *** like turning your camera up to 11?.

snostorm · 08-01-2009, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by MidwestMax

I just got my K20d and I was wondering if anyone notices a real difference between images taken with the 'best' three-star JPEG format and the 'premium' four-star one? Thanks.

Hi Max,

I shoot jpegs almost exclusively for my birds. I've found no significant difference between *** and ****, so I shoot *** with both the K20 and now with the K7. I'd say the real difference in file size, write speed, and overall camera performance outweighs the mostly theoretical advantage of the lower compression of the **** between these two choices.

Pentax uses *** as the default. I think that if it the engineers felt that there was a noticeable difference in actual IQ, they would have defaulted to ****.

I think that you should test this for yourself and believe what your eyes tell you. If your perception is that **** looks better, then use it. The same goes for RAW vs Jpg, and DNG vs PEF.

Scott

kunik · 08-01-2009, 07:05 PM

FWIW when I shoot for some of the really big sports companies I shoot 2megapixel jpgs at ** and they produce excellent 8x10 images.

I try not to provide too much opinion around here 'cause some folk like to jump all over me when I say something that goes against the grain ... so let me just say that those settings are chosen by the photo company, not me. My opinion on the matter is irrelevant except for the fact that it appears to work acceptably.

Of course when I use jpg (which is not all the time) for my own vacation photos etc I shoot at ***... because "why not?"