Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-24-2012, 04:34 AM   #16
Site Supporter
Stone G.'s Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Zealand, Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,516
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
eh??? My computer's a single core 2002 laptop and it wizzes along OK.
.......... I'm using Pentax DCU - what's everyone else using that's so slow?
Well, first of all batch-conversion of RAW files is one thing (and it actually does take more time with K-5 than K200D RAW files).

But the question was about JPEG file quality and -sizes. And as soon as you try more "advanced" image processing where the (JPEG) image is re-calculated pixel-by-pixel so to speak you may notice a slow-down. You have more calculations and more requirements on virtual memory. (This could be for example HDR-processing, Stacking, even WB-correction....).

02-24-2012, 05:08 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
Original Poster
Interesting comments, everyone, thanks. I had never heard that reducing the quality was better than reducing the MP, I may try that out and see what results I get. Ad I did get a new computer as well, that should be able to handle just about anything I throw at it. BUT I don't want to go to processing every picture again. Maybe RAW + JPEG is the answer, for a trial anyway.
02-24-2012, 05:35 AM - 1 Like   #18
Pentaxian
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,590
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
So I started shooting JPEGs, and as I had never needed a larger print from the K100d, I set the K20d to 6MP. I would try to remember to use the RAW button when I saw something really good, and would switch to RAW for special projects; but honestly as the noise seemed so much more pronounced I always went back. I really like not having to process every shot, and feel I can do a fair bit of work on JPEGs with FastStone, GIMP, etc. if I have to.

Still, now I have upgraded both my PC and my camera again, this time to a K5. As I went through and adjusted my settings, I again went to 6MP JPEGs. But I have been thinking perhaps I am giving up some of the good for which I bought the K5 in the first place. Any body-specific thoughts on the trade-offs involved?

Thanks, Nick
If you really "never need a larger print" why did you upgrade from the K100D in the first place? I owned it and it was one of the best cameras I ever owned (although I tend to say that of all of my past Pentax bodies ). Its sensor was something else, especially in those days.

Honestly, the megapixel count is not only about printing size, it is also about better color gradations, more accomplished sharpening, better color fidelity especially in monotonous areas like skies etc.

If you did see "more pronounced noise" when working with raw it simply means you didn't wrap your arms around raw processing enough to get the most out of it.

All of the above and more would already be enough reason to match your processing power to the camera and not vice-versa but more important is the issue of your own future development. Every single 6Mp shot you take today irreversibly means you will never be able to go back to it with improved and more user-friendly software years from now. Every time you fire your K-5 at less than the quality it is capable of you preclude the option that some day, some shots might be so important to you that you actually want them printed large or processed in a competent way.

You might develop yourself into picking up some new hobbies in the future, who knows you might become an image-processing junkie () and you will not have that wonderful archive of images to draw upon. Photo's of loved ones, of specific places or events may take on a whole new importance as years go by and you are not able to assess that at this moment in time.

Do yourself a favor: shoot at top-quality and max-Mp, store your images, then resize them in batch to 6Mp for your current use. Faststone will do that for you, Irfanview will do it as well as a bucketload of other batch applications. You'll have the benefit of working with the smaller files but the warm fuzzy feeling of having full-size backups.
02-24-2012, 06:26 AM   #19
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
If you really "never need a larger print" why did you upgrade from the K100D in the first place?
YES, this! Loved my K100d. I used the desire for weather sealing as an excuse to upgrade, and then enjoyed the battery situation with the K20d so much more I couldn't go back. And live view (limited though it is), and AF adjust. But that sensor gave lovely colors. If the K5 doesn't do it for me I might go back to a k10, or a k200 with a battery grip. I don't know...

I do understand the idea of archiving top quality RAW "negatives" for future work. And I admit that noise reduction is not my forte, that may be something on which to work. But I take a lot of middling shots, not so bad as to immediately throw out but not so good as to become art under any likely processing scenario. That's probably something to work on, too. I definitely don't want to lose DR, color gradations, sharpening, etc.

02-24-2012, 11:43 AM   #20
Veteran Member
sameagle's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 323
Part of me likes the suggestion to shoot raw + jpeg. There's a lot of crap that's good enough to keep but is never going to be worth processing a lot and printing large. For these photos the smaller jpeg is probably fine. Mixed in are the few photos that I love or would love to process a bunch. For these it would be nice to have the raw file.

The other part of me freaking hates raw files. They are big and slow to open and work on, etc.

- Sam
02-24-2012, 12:10 PM   #21
Veteran Member
sameagle's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 323
By the way, does anyone have a link to comparisons of these settings online?

Thanks from the Lazy,

- Sam
02-24-2012, 03:51 PM   #22
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,901
I'll try to be brief :-)

I always shoot RAW. It is easy enough, as mentioned, to batch process or extract the images for a closer look, while you do something else, if needed. But, I do them individually in Elements, after chimping in PDCU.

It is actually more hassle for me keeping track of the original jpg so it does not get overwritten, whereas a PEF never gets overwritten.

There are typically more adjustments possible with raw software than jpg software and particularly the camera itself, such as "blacks".

Never saw the advantage of raw+ for reasons above.

I do use some dinosaur editor to resize to 2000px to post on Photobucket, and the filesize is about 600k or so. I used to have a space limit on PB, so I got in the habit of using that editor, which compressed the image. No real reason to change as I link to images there, rather than attaching.

As was mentioned, space is cheap. Neutering the camera seems the backassward way to go - unless it fits your needs :-) But then, I cheaper P&S may do it, too.

Please level your horizon, even if you don't PP ... :-)
02-25-2012, 04:46 AM   #23
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 52
The K5 has one unique feature for people like you. You take a pic using 6mpx and then realize (on review) that it's a one in a million. No problem - just hit the AE-L button and the camera records a full quality RAW image file of the picture.

Sheer genius...

02-27-2012, 12:41 PM   #24
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by Geoff H Quote
The K5 has one unique feature for people like you. You take a pic using 6mpx and then realize (on review) that it's a one in a million. No problem - just hit the AE-L button and the camera records a full quality RAW image file of the picture.

Sheer genius...
Yup, it is a neat feature, but it should be reinforced that this is only possible with the last photo taken
02-27-2012, 02:58 PM   #25
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
Original Poster
Well, I tried RAW+, and there were a lot of images with which to deal. I may just rely on the RAW button and the AE-L rescue. Heresy I know, but I am not shooting fine art or pro gigs, mostly snaps of my kids. With that said, a 16 MP one or two star JPEG looks way worse to me than a 6MP four star shot. Does anyone have the reference saying the opposite is true?

Thanks again, Nick
02-28-2012, 12:13 PM   #26
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 40
Ladies and gentlemen, RAM is the answer! Photo apps use a surprising amount, especially if you are multitasking at the same time. If you start using virtual memory, then even a new computer slows to a crawl. Memory is so dirt cheap at the moment that if you can add more, its the best value upgrade for any computer. A minimum of 4Gb should be enough to deal with RAW files from the K-5.

David
02-28-2012, 02:33 PM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 144
Nought but RAW. Alas, the 'puter necessary for processing has to be fairly new. A 2005-era "Centrino" (using a 1.6 GHz Pentium M) is rather slo-o-o-o-w when using LR, even with it's RAM capacity upgraded to the max (2 GB that is with that machine).
But on a three-year old Core 2 Duo machine (2.66 GHz) with 8 GB LR is still quite useable. Well, 30MB RAW files are biggish, when I remember my first digital camera, an Olympus C2020 that used SmartMedia cards, my largest card was 32 MB ... just one K-5 raw file would fit.

Yep. That's progress.

Another reason for RAW: Should you forget to set the correct white balance preset, JPGs lose much when attempting to correct it. RAW gives you the power to choose afterwards. And again, differently, any yet again, differently, and with a hand-made white balance ...

Did I already say it? Nought but RAW.
02-28-2012, 02:48 PM   #28
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
Well, I tried RAW+, and there were a lot of images with which to deal. I may just rely on the RAW button and the AE-L rescue. Heresy I know, but I am not shooting fine art or pro gigs, mostly snaps of my kids. With that said, a 16 MP one or two star JPEG looks way worse to me than a 6MP four star shot. Does anyone have the reference saying the opposite is true?

Thanks again, Nick
How are you comparing fully zoomed in or both at the same size so for example screen filled?
If you don't understand what i mean down size the 16mp photo to the same size as the 6mp and then compare.




Around the middle there is a photo of a roof top, that one is comparing the details jog vs raw.
Pentax K-5 Camera Imaging - Full Review
02-28-2012, 03:16 PM   #29
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3
Shoot me now i have a K-5 and i actually set it to 2mpix and one star for regular family photos.
the quality is very good for web usage and home use.

However when I'm out and taking pictures of "stuff" i always shoot RAW.
02-28-2012, 03:20 PM   #30
Veteran Member
rfortson's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,129
Memory (including hard drives) is very cheap. I always shoot raw+jpeg. I mainly use the raw files for adjustments, include latitude in exposure. If the shot is good from the start, then the jpeg is usually enough.

However, when you see Elvis and Bigfoot getting ready to board that UFO, you'll want to have all the resolution and dynamic range your camera can give.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, jpegs, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k100d, k20d, k5, pentax k-5
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K5 small jpegs degrade MikeD Pentax K-5 16 11-10-2011 03:32 AM
Happy Thanks Giving to all Clicker General Talk 18 10-12-2011 06:33 PM
300dpi jpegs!! sany Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 37 07-30-2011 08:34 AM
What custom image setting you used for shooting Jpegs on your K5? aaronius Pentax K-5 7 11-21-2010 09:00 PM
Playback other Jpegs on a K10 stjohndunn Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 5 09-11-2010 12:15 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:50 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top