[aerodave]

Hey, you're not supposed to use my logic against me!! But you make a good point...and I admitted it's not a good reason, in and of itself.

[eva2000]

Yup K-7 WB is nearly flawless, i rarely do any post-processing on images out the camera besides cropping/resizing photos = ALOT of time saved

[knoxploration]

Hey, you're not supposed to use my logic against me!! But you make a good point...and I admitted it's not a good reason, in and of itself.

Hah - sorry, I couldn't resist the car door analogy. T'was a thing of beauty!

To be honest though, I was in a similar situation to you recently, endeavouring to choose between JPEG and Raw with my new K-7 (and which filetype, if Raw). I ended up settling on DNG Raw for my potential keepers, and only use JPEG now when I want a quick non-keeper snapshot (say, shooting photos for an auction or similar).

[eva2000]

Hah - sorry, I couldn't resist the car door analogy. T'was a thing of beauty!

To be honest though, I was in a similar situation to you recently, endeavouring to choose between JPEG and Raw with my new K-7 (and which filetype, if Raw). I ended up settling on DNG Raw for my potential keepers, and only use JPEG now when I want a quick non-keeper snapshot (say, shooting photos for an auction or similar).

Exactly the same method I use - DNG for keepers and JPEG for quickies

[newmikey]

Exactly the same method I use - DNG for keepers and JPEG for quickies

Seconded, although I see no reason to use DNG. I am fine with PEF. The files are smaller and dcraw source code availability guarantees the files will remain accessible for as long as there is a C compiler or another computer language dcraw can be translated into which will most certainly be longer than either me, my kids and their kids will be around. DNG as Adobe's little creation seems like a safe bet, but might prove to be a quagmire in the long run.

[knoxploration]

Exactly the same method I use - DNG for keepers and JPEG for quickies

Cool... Works well for me! I've set my Raw button up to switch between Raw, then Raw+JPEG, then back again. Then I set my user mode up to shoot low-res JPEGs for auctions etc. Really couldn't be easier to remember. Want a full-res JPEG? Tap the Raw button. Want low-res JPEGs? User mode. Easy peasy!

[knoxploration]

Seconded, although I see no reason to use DNG. I am fine with PEF. The files are smaller and dcraw source code availability guarantees the files will remain accessible for as long as there is a C compiler or another computer language dcraw can be translated into which will most certainly be longer than either me, my kids and their kids will be around. DNG as Adobe's little creation seems like a safe bet, but might prove to be a quagmire in the long run.

Reason I went with DNG (which, with compression in the K-7, the filesize is almost identical to PEF) is twofold:

* Better support for DNG in the programs I use, versus PEF
* Not that I'm likely to use it much if at all, but DNG allows access to the masked pixels around the sensor area, which could potentially be useful in image corrections, especially in longer exposures

[kthung]

One thing keeping me from from shooting raw are the 14megapixel raw files.

[kittykat46]

One thing keeping me from from shooting raw are the 14megapixel raw files.

Memory costs - either SDHC or on the Hard Disk isn't such a big issue any more.
I may or may not keep the RAW files once developed.
I only keep the ones I really like, and may revisit to PP in another way later.
The rest, I just keep the developed JPEG - in terms of memory usage, it comes up to the same as shooting JPEG in the first place.

[cbaytan]

One thing keeping me from from shooting raw are the 14megapixel raw files.

Memory costs - either SDHC or on the Hard Disk isn't such a big issue any more.

I've purchased 1TB quality external USB hard disk for about less than 150USD and regularly backup image files with free software MS SyncToy. For your info, reliable harddisks are easy to spot in newegg, a lot of computer ppl writes reviews and votes for the HD's.

So... my point is storing images is not an issue.

[jsherman999]

.

Good points in the OP.

For a while now I've been saying that with every DSLR generation, the need to shoot raw-only lessens. Soon we'll see the time come when shooting raw is only necessary in extreme lighting situations like dim, multicolored-lighting concerts, that sort of thing.

In 2006 and 2007, it was a different story, and I think a lot of the resistance to trusting jpegs is a holdover from those times. In fact, even with the K20D, I see no need to shoot raw in every day shooting, in situations where the lighting is relatively stable.

In fact, I'd even go as far as to say that trusting the in-camera jpeg is no more risky at this point than completely trusting your raw workflow - many times I see situations where someone discovers (to their astonishment) that a jpeg their camera produces on some tweaked settings (like 'bright', +2 fine-sharpness, hint ) looks better than what they're used to seeing from their typical ACR workflow, for example.

As DSLR shooters, we need to retain the ability to shoot and process raw, but the necessity to shoot raw lessens with each body generation.

And that's a great thing - it means we are the beneficiaries of sensor R&D investments, systems programming advances, and speedier processing chains in-camera. Good to know our dollar is going further these days.



.

[jsherman999]

I've purchased 1TB quality external USB hard disk for about less than 150USD and regularly backup image files with free software MS SyncToy. For your info, reliable harddisks are easy to spot in newegg, a lot of computer ppl writes reviews and votes for the HD's.

So... my point is storing images is not an issue.

.

It's not as much of an issue as it once was when it comes to cost, but it's still an issue - for example, you'll eventually end up with GB's of raw images you have no intention of going through to work on.

If you're willing to put the time in to cull things regularly, that may not matter to you - but I personally hate my file servers being full of junk, and I hate cleanup tasks, and categorization tasks, etc. I wrote some perl scripts to help me with my raw workflow file management when I found LR and others didn't do exactly what I wanted, and I just started to ask myself, "why"? I decided that I don't need all these raw images, and from start (in-camera frame rate, card-write, card-read) to finish (disk mess, the 'need' to pp) they just slow things down.

I only shoot raw about 10% of the time now, and I'm much happier.


.

[jsherman999]

Reason I went with DNG (which, with compression in the K-7, the filesize is almost identical to PEF) is twofold:

* Better support for DNG in the programs I use, versus PEF
* Not that I'm likely to use it much if at all, but DNG allows access to the masked pixels around the sensor area, which could potentially be useful in image corrections, especially in longer exposures

.

Also, DNG can embed your in-camera profile, so if you want to re-create the image exactly how the in-camera jpeg would have looked, you can do that easier with programs that can read that profile.


.

[cbaytan]

It's not as much of an issue as it once was when it comes to cost, but it's still an issue - for example, you'll eventually end up with GB's of raw images you have no intention of going through to work on. .

A quick math : 1TB= 1024 x1024 = 1048576MB , Say 1 RAW file is 18 MB

1048576 / 18 = 58000 RAW files in a disk

Want more secure system? get a 160 USD RAID system with two disks.
150+150+160= 460 USD

If you're willing to put the time in to cull things regularly, that may not matter to you - but I personally hate my file servers being full of junk, and I hate cleanup tasks, and categorization tasks, etc.
.

No need to do that, SyncToy does all that for you for free, cleans up just directories in back up hard disk, as you whatever did in your computer. Just put the image files under one (or few) directories and back up them to your external hard disk with one click.

[aerodave]

.

Good points in the OP.

For a while now I've been saying that with every DSLR generation, the need to shoot raw-only lessens. Soon we'll see the time come when shooting raw is only necessary in extreme lighting situations like dim, multicolored-lighting concerts, that sort of thing.

In 2006 and 2007, it was a different story, and I think a lot of the resistance to trusting jpegs is a holdover from those times. In fact, even with the K20D, I see no need to shoot raw in every day shooting, in situations where the lighting is relatively stable.

In fact, I'd even go as far as to say that trusting the in-camera jpeg is no more risky at this point than completely trusting your raw workflow - many times I see situations where someone discovers (to their astonishment) that a jpeg their camera produces on some tweaked settings (like 'bright', +2 fine-sharpness, hint ) looks better than what they're used to seeing from their typical ACR workflow, for example.

As DSLR shooters, we need to retain the ability to shoot and process raw, but the necessity to shoot raw lessens with each body generation.

And that's a great thing - it means we are the beneficiaries of sensor R&D investments, systems programming advances, and speedier processing chains in-camera. Good to know our dollar is going further these days.

I wondered how long it would take for someone to come in and second my heresy. Two and a half days isn't too bad, I guess.

But thanks jsherman, I think you summed up my thoughts better than I did. I think people used to shoot RAW because they had to...now it's much more often a case of "can" than "have to".