[exwintech]

Ahab - If you meant, no point in processing a P&S RAW hoping it to look as good as a DSLR RAW - of course you're right - the detail information just isn't there, from, say, a 1/2.3 sensor.

But it can be worthwhile doing if the P&S does considerably better with its RAWs than with its JPEGs.

An example is Fuji's HS10. That's a 10Mpix long-zoom (30x) that has only Std and Fine as JPEG save options, and in Fine creates JPEGs in the 2.5-5MB range.

I can directly compare those with my Canon SX10's JPEGs - it has Std, Fine and SuperFine save options. In SuperFine (supposedly low-artifacting, low-compression) - it creates JPEGs up to 8-9MB. Those are rather better images than the HS10's Fine JPEGs.

I bought the HS10 to complement the SX10 - for the things it doesn't do - 10-7-5-3fps Continuous, barrel-twist zoom, far better MF, HD Video, 30x over 20x zoom, most adjustments are DSLR-type buttons and command-dial, etc.

While the HS10 does quite "adequate" walk-around JPEG shots - the SX10 beats it quite handily. So for casual use - the SX10 lives in the end pocket of my carry-bag - and the HS10 is taken along when I have something specific in mind to shoot. Along with a Slik F740 light tripod, that also fits in the carry-bag.

The HS10 is an "interesting" device to use - so often ends up on the tripod - while the SX10 stays around my neck. Long zoom shots with the HS10 are often in one of the "Priorities", or frequently in Manual mode and MF. It works rather better when "told firmly" what to do...!

As I'm no expert - I tend to shoot the HS10, when set up, as RAW or RAW + JPEG - and on the "longer shots" - also use Continuous with Timer. At times all this coincides to obtain some Keepers - and those "sort out" rather better from the RAWs.... Whatever the sensor size - a 15MB+ RAF RAW does give rather more "leeway" in PP than trying to mess about with 2.5-5MB JPEGs....

As it's my first camera that does RAW, I'm having a lot of fun learning into that - it's all good experience for when the savings-jar allows me to get a beautiful K-R...!

As for the K-R - while I'll likely get a kit-option Sigma 17-70mm instead of the 18-55mm as walk-around - I already have a few other interesting lenses to learn into - including an immaculate Takumar SMC 55mm f/1.8, other M42s, and some K-Mounts - including "the worst Sigma lens ever made" - or so I'm told - their 100-300mm f/4.5-6.7 DL...!

Still - for an over-60 hobbyist on disability, not into photography very long - it should all make an entertaining bunch of experiments - and plenty of fun...

But I'm sure you're right - the K-R RAWs are going to be much more worthwhile!

Regards, Dave.

[Ahab]

Have you ever tried? I have compared the in camera jpeg results versus the raw results I get after 30-45 seconds of PP in LR and the results are exceptional from my LX3.

Jason

I shoot RAW with my K7 and K20. My W90 does just fine with JPEGS and I can get a lot more images on the card.

[Parallax]

I don't see any advantage to shooting RAW with a P&S.

It's has exactly the same advantage as it does with any other format. More information to work with.

[eddie1960]

and the LX series are great little cameras (essentially the same camera as the leica versions at lower prices so unless you are fashion conscious and need a leica badge on it the Panasonic models offer great value.
If you really want the best image with close to PS size though a m4/3 with a Panasonic 20mm is a great start and you can get adapters that allow use of just about any lens made
Raw will give more info to work with and allow changes the jpeg wont so though you won't get dslr (or EVIL) quality in a PS one that allows raw will let you maximize the quality to your preferences rather than the preference of an engineer in japan deciding on the jpeg look

[SOldBear]

My Ricoh GX200 is outdated. But I still like it because the ease of control. DSLR users feel right at home.

Heck, it even has two control wheels, better than many DSLRs. Besides 2 "MY MODE" settings, it has two buttons that can be programmed to have any control function.

Of course it shoots RAW.

[ismaelg]

My old 8MP Olympus SP-350 shoots in raw. That's my go anywhere, give it to the kids and wife camera. I tried the raw once but most of the time I use it in jpg for more capacity as it is mostly for candids that will never be printed, and if so, no bigger than 4x6.

Thanks,

[BillM]

Have Olympus SP-320 does same. Explained to wife that RAW was acronym
for "really aint wet" type camera, enabling my purchase of K20d.
Can you guys tone it down a little bit?

[Abstract]

I don't see any advantage to shooting RAW with a P&S.

I agree with the other poster, my LX3 also begs to differ, Raw is just as useful as it is in a Dlsr.

[mtroute]

It's has exactly the same advantage as it does with any other format. More information to work with.

++++++++1

[r00t_b33r]

if you're looking around for a camera with raw, canon's s series p&s cameras are in my opinion great. i have the s90 and it's the camera that got me hooked into photography as well as shooting in raw and touching up pictures. it's a fun little camera with a bunch of neat features in it.

[tibbitts]

There are a lot of options for raw with giant p&s models, but the giant size defeats one of the main purpose of a p&s for a dslr owner. The s95 is interesting, but the 3x zoom is very limiting on the long end, when the p&s is all you have. While not dslr-like, the G series probably still fits into the giant p&s category.

Paul

[Blue]

There are a lot of options for raw with giant p&s models, but the giant size defeats one of the main purpose of a p&s for a dslr owner. The s95 is interesting, but the 3x zoom is very limiting on the long end, when the p&s is all you have. While not dslr-like, the G series probably still fits into the giant p&s category.

Paul

The LX3 and LX5 aren't very large at all and have a larger sensor than the average P&S as well. The body itself has similar dimensions as the WP90 but the W90 has the lens internal to the body.