[oldmower]

I am still learning my Pentax. I have had it for over a year now. I was wondering whether to shoot in raw or just jpeg. Also what software does everybody use to process raw and are there some tips on how to use it efficiently. And I am just looking for some tips and hints to better use my K200d.

Thanks

[grainbelt]

I am an amateur, and a K200D user, and went thru this decision process about a year ago.

I shoot in RAW (DNG) and process in Adobe Photoshop Elements 8. I find that I'm able to boost shadow detail with much less noise, and generally have more latitude over correcting both exposure and white balance after the fact. I can certainly do a better job of salvaging an image in RAW than in JPG.

That being said, two things I wish I had spent time on sooner:

1. Custom White Balance. It is really easy to do, and ensures much more accurate tones than the auto or preset modes.

2. Custom Image Settings. I have settled on the 'Natural' setting with contrast -3 and sharpness -1. A lot of the highlight and shadow detail was being thrown away by the camera during the jpg conversion due to the contrast setting, and sharpness can always be boosted after the fact. Making those changes, I can usually get about the same image as if I'd shot RAW, provided exposure and white balance were correct.

RAW conversion is another learning curve, and took me a while to sort out. Pictures got worse before they got better, as they really do require work in RAW to be ready for display.

Hope that helps! Feel free to ask specific questions, lots of folks here will help.

[oldmower]

How do you set the contrast and sharpness I have done manual white-balance by using shutter then clicking on something white in the pic. But sometimes I forget to set it and then when I get home the pics are messed up.

[Ash]

There are a multitude of threads discussing this issue. Have a look here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-beginners-corner-q/51110-raw-jpeg.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-processing-articles/40647-some-expla...-benifits.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/94443-what-do-you-...-raw-jpeg.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/digital-processing-software-printing/35441-raw-jpeg.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/38262-jpg-vs-raw.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography/91502-do-you-shoot-raw-vs-jpeg.html

[Stone G.]

HI oldmowe,

I am a happy K200D owner too. The answer(s) to your question depends quite a lot on how much "work" you are prepared to do in the post-processing of your images and whether you have or intend to get some digital imaging software? It also may depend to a certain degree upon what mode(s) you prefer to shoot in, (AutoPict, Scenes(s) or Program mode(s). And then of course, what kind of pictures do you currently want to take?

Anyway, here are a few suggestions:

1. You should have gotten the Pentax Digital Camera Utility together with you camera. With that comes Pentax Photolab which is well suited for K200D RAW conversion. So, before you do anything else, try to do some conversion with that software. Later, you may download 30-days trial versions of the more expensive software (Lightroom, Photoshop) and see whether that will be something for you.

2. Try with some shots in RAW+ (i.e.: you get both RAW and JPEG files) and see, if you can improve your pictures in the RAW conversion over what JPEG you get straigth out of the camera. As said above, in the start, you may find it a bit diffuclt, but keep on trying.....

3. And don't forget to try out the possibilities with the in-camera settings of saturation, hue, contrast, shatpness. (Press the fn-button and then the OK button to get into that menu). Many people find the standard settings - in particular of the K200D - a bit unnatural (too bright and vivid colors) and prefer a bit lower contrast and saturation - I am one of those!

4. There is no doubt that diffucult scenes (low light, high contrast and high dynamic range) can be better coped with in RAW, but one should not forget that there are many ways that not-so-perfect JPEG can be improved and even "rescued" provided that you have a decent imaging program. It does not have to be overly expensive (Photoshop Elements, Corel Paintshop Pro and similar will suffice for most amateurs).

Thus, you should make up, what your current needs are when it comes to YOUR pictures. You may always upgrade along the road and meanwhile, practise will make you better and better with whatever means you currently have.

Steen G. B.

[grainbelt]

How do you set the contrast and sharpness?

Press the fn-button and then the OK button to get into that menu.

Stone is correct. When you press Fn, you see a graphic of the four-way controller and ok button. There is a dialogue bubble coming out of the OK button that says 'Custom Image'.

Press OK. The preset currently selected will show in the top left (natural, bright, vivid, etc). Pressing left or right on the four-way controller changes presets. Pressing down scrolls thru the adjustment options.

Read up a bit more of it in the manual, then take some shots back-to-back with the different presets and any manual adjustments until you find one you like. It isn't recorded in the EXIF so take notes as to which file number are which style for your review.

[KxBlaze]

I am still learning my Pentax. I have had it for over a year now. I was wondering whether to shoot in raw or just jpeg. Also what software does everybody use to process raw and are there some tips on how to use it efficiently. And I am just looking for some tips and hints to better use my K200d.

Thanks

Just to add a bit to my post in the welcomes section.

Do you plan on doing a lot (or any) post processing (PP)? I'm assuming by the second part of your question that you at least want to give it a try. In that case definitely RAW. You can modify a RAW file much more than a jpeg but I suggest you shoot both for a while and do some PPing with both files types. This will give you the best idea of what suits you the most. Some feel like the PPing capabilities of a jpeg file are adequate. I personally feel like jpeg has no where near the leeway I need to PP. RAW files will take up much more space than a jpeg which will eat up your memory card a lot faster also your camera will add a bit of PPing itself to jpeg files (color, saturation, brightness etc...) and it does nothing to the RAW files so you might think that jpegs look better straight from your camera. They do but that will change when you put the RAW file through some PPing.
These are the things you need to consider and weigh the pros and cons to see what you need/want.

As for a PP program I swear by Photoshop (preferably CS5, the latest version). It is very expensive but can do so much. It can do more than any other program I have ever used. If this is out of your budget I hear GIMP is a good place to start. I have never used it but hear nothing but good things about it.

[Just1MoreDave]

I read a review of my first camera (*ist DS) that trashed its JPEG conversions but liked everything else. So I shot RAW from the start, except for some shots that showed the review was not wrong.

For software, I primarily used Adobe Photoshop Elements. If the shot is good, it's all you need. Its interface makes sense to me. It also gives you some background if you ever decide to move up to another Adobe product. They all use a version of the Adobe Camera RAW converter. It sounds clunky at first to open up a separate program first, but it works well in practice. Elements has limited features in its RAW converter version and editor but the limits don't get in the way, unless you are moving a tree from one photo to another, and coloring each leaf to simulate fall.

Pentax's software can do a lot but its interface is designed to hide all this from you. Maybe not on purpose but that's how it works. It's like reading your camera manual in a foreign language.

I have used Photoshop CS5 and it is about ten times more complex than I ever need. But I do like some things over Elements. The Organizer part of Elements is really inflexible for browsing through images. It can't be rearranged very much, and can't show as much information up front. It's geared more for face tagging than seeing which focal length I used. CS5 can also do much more with groups of photos, like applying the same white balance. It takes advantage of multiple monitors. There may be a button for adding fall foliage. Now, I don't care how good it is, I wouldn't pay its full retail price, because I'd feel like I wasn't getting my money's worth unless I spent hours processing each photo. My wife gets an academic discount and has a use for CS5, so we're going to buy it shortly.

I think I could get by with Lightroom. I borrowed this highly recommended book for CS5, "The Adobe Photoshop CS5 Book for Digital Photographers" by Scott Kelby. At least a third, maybe even half, is about using the upgraded version of Adobe Camera RAW that comes with CS5 and Lightroom. As I understand it, Lightroom has a great interface for organizing photos and uses Camera RAW for editing. It sounds like exactly what I'd do.

[tibbitts]

Unless you need transfer speed (jpg format make smaller images that transfer faster to the card) you should use raw, because it will record the most amount of information the sensor is capable of. I've found that as I've gradually learned (a little) more about PP I've been able to make better use of the raw data from my k200 (and k100.)

Obviously if you are just taking "commodity" pictures, such as for temporary use to advertise an item on ebay for example, you don't need raw. But for an application where you want to try to make the most of the image (or might want to in the future), raw is preferred.

Paul