Rob,
You're in cases 2 and 3 I just described.
Rob Brigham wrote:
You show me a K mount digital (or any digital for that matter) which gives the exposure lattutude of RAW (never mind negative film) in jpg mode and I will get one. Digital doesn't do contrast at all well in my experience, and to not use RAW just makes no sense unless you are constrained to jpg for some reason. The main reason I didn't use some of the cheaper slide films (sensia etc) is because I felt they had little or no exposure lattitude, and digital is not as good as the slide films I tended to use even in RAW mode.
The other reason I use RAW is that I find auto-white-balance is rubbish and like being able to set this up at a later date. Before I started using RAW I did get quite happy using manual white balance calibration, but now this is just not necessary. Arguably this is just laziness though.
-----Original Message-----
From: Caveman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 September 2004 16:57
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RAW vs. JPG and CF size
Here's my take:
CF - get the largest you can afford, unless you actually enjoy changing them every so often
RAW - there are three main reasons you may want to chose it:
1. you have to shoot so fast that you have no time to fiddle with the camera settings. "shoot first ask questions later".
2. your in-camera processing is of poor quality
3. you're trying to squeeze out the last bits from your camera for some extremely large prints or whatever.
While 1 is understandable, if you're in situation 2 or 3 then the real solution would be to get a better camera.
