Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-30-2009, 06:26 PM   #16
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by Rmpjr7 Quote
I have to say that I was very impressed with the JPEG photos (unprocessed-right out of the camera) and I'm quite sure that my RAW photos(after processing), to my eye anyway were not noticeably better.
That might be true today, but what about the Photoshop/Lightroom of 2, 3, or 5 years from now? I'm sure the processing algorithms will be much more advanced than they are now. That's why I shoot RAW - to give the PP of the future as much data as I can to work with...

03-30-2009, 06:31 PM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 4,112
I shoot my K10D on maximum JPEGS and I have to say that I'm very pleased with the results. I never do any post processing for a couple of reasons...first I don't know how, secondly I've never learned as the pictures don't seem to need it.
03-31-2009, 04:08 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
The first year I shot only JPEG, Iíve got many keepers from that. Now I shoot RAW, but do little post processing. Mostly just adjust white balance, when needed. (So primarily just use a RAW converter for my images).

RAW is just an extra safety when I need it. Else JPEG could do for me. (I donít use RAW + JPEG).

Besides I canít afford those advanced programs where you can do special editing to only part of the image. In PP, it is mostly all or nothing for me.

If there is something with a particular image, then I go by a friend of mine, who knows a lot about Photoshop. He does a bunch of stuff, which I can't follow, but he can even improve JPEG files.


But generally regarding the JPEG K10 discussion, it all goes to show how much anxiety and how things are blown up in forums, (particularly DPr). This is a problem for us newcomers, as we donít know what is real, and what is just a storm in a glass of water.




QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
For example, in doing your taxe, you can't simply round all your entries off to the nearest 100 and expect your final answer to out correct to the nearest 100 as well.
I donít use my camera for taxes




QuoteOriginally posted by Robert S Donovan Quote
The other advantages I have found from shooting RAW are higher IQ, better lens corrections, better quality high ISO noise, and much more leeway with exposure (+2 stops IMO). Typically I run the histogram right up to the limit and then dial in a bit of recovery in Lightroom to recover any blown-out highlight detail. I'm always amazed at how much detail is hiding in a RAW highlight that looks blown-out...

All of that being said, I have 10 years worth of wonderful JPEG images from a number of cameras. The JPEG output from my K10D was only rivaled by a Canon 5D I had an affair with for a few months. Now, I get similar quality from my K10D's JPEGs (processed in Lightroom) as I got from my JPEGs right out of my 5D. I'd call that a better value
Thanks for your input, good to hear
03-31-2009, 06:00 AM   #19
Veteran Member
farfisa's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,274
I've been shooting RAW on my K10 and then my K20 until a recent vacation, when I only had 16GB worth of room and wanted to play it safe!

Very impressed with the JPEG output, and I haven't gone back yet. I did RAW+JPG a couple times and did notice blown highlights in the JPEGs, but the JPEG image was very pleasing.

Actually, I can now see the value of doing RAW+JPG--when I was just shooting RAW it seemed like a waste of space. The JPG conversion is very good in camera, so it saves a lot of work, but there are times when you wish you had that RAW file...

03-31-2009, 06:38 AM   #20
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
I liken this debate to that of negative vs slide film. If you have the balls and know the latitude of the film used, you shoot slides. If you want to have the margin of safety one gets with negative film i.e. -3/+3 ev go with RAW. I used to always shoot slide film because I knew my Fujichrome 50 like the back of my hand. However being that digital has less of a dynamic range than film, I always shoot RAW.
04-01-2009, 08:50 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Durban, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,051
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I liken this debate to that of negative vs slide film. If you have the balls and know the latitude of the film used, you shoot slides. If you want to have the margin of safety one gets with negative film i.e. -3/+3 ev go with RAW. I used to always shoot slide film because I knew my Fujichrome 50 like the back of my hand. However being that digital has less of a dynamic range than film, I always shoot RAW.
Back then - shooting with slide film was the only way if you wanted the ultimate in quality and was the only thing that mags accepted.

Having a well exposed slide and then printed out as a Cibachrome print was nirvana!

The main reason I chose Pentax over the "others" is that I can get an almost similar result - deep rich, sharp, punchy prints very comparable to Ciba Chrome.

Today the 20th century photography has unfortunately never shot with slide film.

Dylan
04-01-2009, 08:54 AM   #22
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
mmmmmm..... Cibachrome..... Wish I had a way-back machine!
04-01-2009, 08:57 AM   #23
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by dylansalt Quote
Today the 20th century photography has unfortunately never shot with slide film.

Dylan
BTW, it's the 21st century.

04-02-2009, 02:10 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Durban, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,051
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
BTW, it's the 21st century.
Damn - where does the time go

Typo error

Dylan
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, jpeg, k10d, photography, photos
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pleasantly Surprised Kenko 2X dg PZ-AF rkboid Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 12-05-2009 09:37 AM
Surprised! SCguy General Talk 2 01-27-2009 08:05 PM
why don't people like K10D JPEGs Lowell Goudge Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 01-13-2009 02:26 PM
I was pleasantly surprised....... Heinrich Lohmann Post Your Photos! 30 06-15-2008 10:22 PM
Good quality JPEGs from K10D-try this *isteve Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 04-18-2007 08:18 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:11 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