----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EOS list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 9:06 PM
Subject: EOS POLL - RAW or JPEG

> Right, time for a poll.
> Do you shoot RAW or jpeg, and why?
>
> I'll start. I shoot jpeg. The reason I shoot jpegs is simple. I shot the
> same scene RAW and large/fine jpeg. I put both through PS and printed
> each at A3. I compared the prints and there was not a damn bit of
> difference between them. My end result is printing, so that was that.
>
> I'm aware of the extra 'latitude' that RAW has to offer, but for the
> sort of stuff I shoot, I'm not fussed. I pay a bit more attention to
> exposure, and bracket where necessary. The 1DmII is spectacularly
> accurate a good 90% of the time. Speaking of which, I don't have buckets
> of time to sit processing image files and I don't do batch work. I zip
> through my 'contacts' in the PS file browser on a Mac and pick out the
> ones I want, apply some curves and save as PSD's. Resized and sharpened,
> a few pop out the S9000 and are mounted on friends walls.
> Flame away ;-)
> Cheers,
>   Cotty

Hi Cotty,

I guess I'm with you 100%.  I've had a 10D for nearly 3 years, and a 5D for
around 4-5 weeks.  I've been taking photos since 1954, so I think I've
learnt  a bit about how to deal with cameras not exposing correctly all the
time! (My EOS3 was one of those which under-exposed by default - it's now
OK. Since getting the 10D, I could afford the time to let Canon have it for
3 weeks and sort it out.)
I too print to A3, and the only print showing jaggies is one which I shot in
RAW!  But then jaggies aren't jpeg artefacts.  I think the main trick is not
to save to jpeg, open and modify and save again to jpeg etc.  I use Chris
Breeze's BreezeBrowser (latest version) and Downloader Pro - 2 great
applications with useful batch processing if needed.
I do shoot to RAW if I'm doing test shots or architecture, but certainly not
for my everyday usage.

[On the 5D my EF20f2.8 has serious vignetting at f2.8, acceptable at f4.
Strangely, my old Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 EX HSM is OK at 17 and f2.8. Other
Canon fixed WA primes seem OK at their full aperture of f2.8.]

Cheers.

Malcolm
Milton Keynes, UK
http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm


*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to