A700 jpg vrs RAW

Barry Fitzgerald said:

paulobro said:

... that stupendous image Mr. Garrard captured in JPEG from
a Cayman's Islands' five dollars bill, or did he perform a miracle.

Click to expand...

Well if we saw a RAW shot of it, would likely look lots better no ? ;-)

Click to expand...

There IS a RAW image of the same take in that same hyperdirectory. As you have eyes, you can see for yourself.

Member said:

I have eyes..so do most here. I spotted a jpeg problem last
night..its very obvious. Judging by the response here..I am not alone
in that thinking!

Click to expand...

Should company make it right guess nothing would beat Hell's righteousness.

Member said:

Lets not just "beat the drum" for the sake of it..or engage in a
"dont say a bad word" style of talking.

Click to expand...

Sure.

Only, let's try to keep bias to a minimum. And gather a larger, better informed database prior to passing judgement.

--
Paulo Brochado

paulobro said:

Barry Fitzgerald said:

paulobro said:

... that stupendous image Mr. Garrard captured in JPEG from
a Cayman's Islands' five dollars bill, or did he perform a miracle.

Click to expand...

Well if we saw a RAW shot of it, would likely look lots better no ? ;-)

Click to expand...

There IS a RAW image of the same take in that same hyperdirectory. As
you have eyes, you can see for yourself.

paulobro said:

I have eyes..so do most here. I spotted a jpeg problem last
night..its very obvious. Judging by the response here..I am not alone
in that thinking!

Click to expand...

Should company make it right guess nothing would beat Hell's
righteousness.

paulobro said:

Lets not just "beat the drum" for the sake of it..or engage in a
"dont say a bad word" style of talking.

Click to expand...

Sure.
Only, let's try to keep bias to a minimum. And gather a larger,
better informed database prior to passing judgement.

--
Paulo Brochado

Click to expand...

Well "close your eyes and ignore reality" has always been an option...

However for what I imagine will cost near to £1000 (the camera), I would really expect something a tad better. The issue is most def there, it cannot be denied.

I have seen plenty as it is..go check out the samples..xfine jpeg is utterly outclassed pp doenst save it.
--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

mobydick said:

that we will see many reviews pointing out the weak jpeg quality and
giving low image quality scores for this reason.

I still hope that it is possible to improve the jpeg quality by the
creative style settings.

Or maybe Dennis has an A700 unit with a misaligned Bionz processor...
...just joking.

Cheers, Wolfram

Click to expand...

Its going to get mentioned..you can bank on it. Phil will have a go at it likely.

But it may not mean an overall bad mark for the camera..

As with everything there will be good and bad points to make.
--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

...

IMO, both shots look a bit poor, the jpeg the worse. However, I don,t think a camera can be judged by one shot, done in one environment at one condition. Both shots could be very much enhanced in pp - colors, sharpness, contrast, etc. - that would certainly also bring the details. I only shoot RAW with both my 7D and A100 and do a lot of pp to get the shots as Ilike them.

... Lucas
--
You're welcome to: http://www.pbase.com/lucaspix
Always having fun with photography ...

of plastic. The IQ of our lives.

Oh well, people can notice the difference will shoot RAW.

--
http://srpluta.zenfolio.com/

The truth is rarely black and white.

QiTung said:

Are you sure? Have you seen some of the "water color paintings"
produced by a Sony H9, the (in)famous water-color machine of all
times?

Here is the link to phil's conclusion of the Sony H9. Read the 4th &
5th cons therein.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyh9/page19.asp

Click to expand...

Sony has problem dealing noise in-camera JPG. however, minolta proved nothing better, because the old 6MP ccd is a noise-low sensor, and KM had no chance to produce cameras on such high-density sensors. My statement is base old fashion KM cameras and the sony camera at same era. with those not-so-high-noise sensor, the weakness of NR of sony engine is not so distinct. but the ability to dealing more details and less artifacts outshine KM's engine. KM might have advantage of dealing high noise, however, at KM's era, not much noise to deal with

Legacy, no need for the confrontational tone.

The gist of my statement was that the jpeg processing engine determines how closely the finished in cam result compares to a well processed RAW. He corrected my belief his camera was a Canon 5D when he was referring to the Minolta...but that is irrelevant to the point I was making namely, how well the in cam jpeg compares to RAW depends on the processing horsepower available in cam. period. If you read my post again, you'll see I never contested any other statements (re: detail) he may have made.

Regards,

Legacys_Quest7 said:

David SL said:

dennismullen said:

Sorry, I have a Minolta 5D.

Click to expand...

the conclusion is still valid, your 5D does good enough processing to
the jpeg in camera to approach the quality of what you'd get out of
RAW.

Regards,

Legacys_Quest7 said:

--
See my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dennismullen
“Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither liberty
nor safety.” - Ben Franklin.

Click to expand...

--

Click to expand...

--
http://www.legacys-photo.com

Click to expand...

--