I can't believe this, but JPG?

gava

Senior Member
Messages
1,032
Reaction score
4
Location
EH
I have been shooting RAW only with Canon 20D, 5D, 5DMkII for the last 7 years.

During that time I have never felt the need to use JPG at all, and have benefitted over the years with steadily improving RAW processing engines, so my 20D shots look 3 or 4 generations better now than they did when I first took them. Obviously that would not have been possible with JPGs.

However - I find myself reconsidering this strategy with the X100:

1.a. There is no clear current IQ benefit to using the RAW file v Fuji's JPG. The Fuji engine is excellent and I cannot improve upon it with ACR - indeed sometimes struggle to even match it, and certainly cannot get close with Silkypix.

1.b. Maybe there is more headroom for highlight recovery from a RAW file, but it's really not clear. I would expect this to be the case. But if I use Auto-DR mode with JPG then that's probably a solution that is just as good or even better.

1.c. Auto White balance on the Fuji is unbelievably good. If it's this good in camera then the safety net provided by RAW is much less useful.

2. Write times were never a problem with the Canon DSLRs; the buffer was large and the camera always responsive, and for my style of shooting I very seldom had to wait for the camera. However with the X100 simply writing a 5mb jpg file v a 20mb raw file makes the camera significantly more responsive in use.

So at the moment I would obtain a benefit by shooting JPG - a more responsive camera. The only negative is that possibly in the future the RAW processing engines will become better than the current Fuji engine. But the existing engine is so incredibly good that I cannot but see that the benefit must be very small.

So there is the trade-off a possible small future benefit against a very real current speed advantage.

AND OMG!! Maybe I see the point of the RAW button after all. They put it in because they knew their jpg engine was awesome. The RAW button is for those highly unusual situations where you think you might need to play with the WB or highlights, but for 99% of the time - just shoot jpg.
--
X100 blog -> http://peri.org.uk/wp/?tag=blog
 
Yes, the X100 does a very good job making jpeg's. So far i the only situations i would use RAW is when i want to isolate objects on white (blown white) background, or maybe if i want to get artistic with the white-balance.
 
years ago.

JPGs are so good these days, with nearly every camera. The need for RAW is a romantic idea. If you have ample time for PP, OK.

If you have an important shooting, shoot JPG + RAW.

Otherwise?

Even the iPhone 4's JPGs are usable these days.
 
I agree with all your observations

The fuji jpg, light meter, and white balance are amazing, and the jpgs respond better than any other camera I've used to post processing.

I'm still shooting RAW plus JPG but seldom use the RAW file unless there is an exposure or white balance issue.
 
ACR via CS5 is inadequate compared to Lightroom.

I can get a better RAW conversion using LR than fuji's engine especially in highlight recovery and noise control + colour
 
I haven't given up on raw - its still the way I go with all of my other cameras because I can almost always get a better result from a raw file than the jpeg, and this goes double when I need to pull some detail out of the shadows and/or highlights. And there's never been much of a performance hit, as you say, from shooting raw. But I can't match the X100 jpegs with my raw processing - I can occasionally come close, but at some effort - this is particularly true with regards to NR on high ISO shots. And MUCH to my surprise, there's a ton of latitude in the jpegs for pulling relatively noiseless detail out of the shadows. They also convert very well to B&W with Silver Efex Pro. And, also as you note, there IS a performance penalty associated with using raw on the X100. So, I've reached the same conclusion you have - I shoot in jpeg and very occasionally use the raw button to shoot a raw+jpeg in a really challenging situation. And I have yet to prefer the raw, even in those tough situations! So, if the new firmware allows us to reprogram the raw button, I probably will. I've been using it as a safety net, but it has yet to save me from a bad jpeg, so I may be ready to lose the net.

With my other cameras, I use raw because there's no downside to it and there's quite often a very real and discernable upside. And that's exactly my rationale for shooting jpegs on the X100. Its a real paradigm shift but I'm getting more and more comfortable with it every day.

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/
 
AND OMG!! Maybe I see the point of the RAW button after all. They put it in because they knew their jpg engine was awesome. The RAW button is for those highly unusual situations where you think you might need to play with the WB or highlights, but for 99% of the time - just shoot jpg.
--
X100 blog -> http://peri.org.uk/wp/?tag=blog
You give up the higher bit color depth.

--
Alan, in Montana
 
not sure the meter is amazing
Can only agree, there is nothing special with its light meter. It just do what it should, like 30 year old cameras, something that cheap modern camera meters don't do when some algorithm tries to be clever and causes underexposure when trying to not blow out highlights. So, well.. compared to cheap cameras this dumb meter that is not trying to be clever, can be seen as amazing, but i would not use that word, rather see it as predictable or consistent.
 
The two main reasons I bought the camera were the OVF/EVF so I didn't have to walk around wearing reading glasses when shooting, and this has worked out perfectly so far; it is wonderful to be able to see the settings through the VF with a naked eye. The second reason was the reported excellence of the JPEG engine and the great examples I saw and continue to see.

I've had the camera for only two days and it's a steep learning curve for me, having previously shot waist-level with Canon Flip out LCD cameras, and I have not yet taken an X100 JPEG I am really happy with, which I know is down to my inexperience.

Although there is another thread asking about X100 users' preferred settings; it would be interesting and informative to know what settings are being used by the JPEG 'converts' in this thread.

--
Stephen
 
I actually turned off the RAW + JPG setting the other day (ironically about when Apple released their RAW update).

I'm really quite happy with the JPGs from this camera.

--
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nikon D7000 / Panasonic GF1
 
AND OMG!! Maybe I see the point of the RAW button after all. They put it in because they knew their jpg engine was awesome. The RAW button is for those highly unusual situations where you think you might need to play with the WB or highlights, but for 99% of the time - just shoot jpg.
There is one other point to that RAW button, especially for new users. If you use it to take one of every set of photos in RAW, you can use the in camera RAW processor to see if you could have got any better jpegs than the ones you actually got by playing with different settings - eg, choose a different film simulation, or Shadow Tone setting.

In one sense it is a limitation of the in camera RAW processor that it can change only the things that could have been changed in a jpeg shot at the time, and in the same broad steps. But in another, that is an advantage, because it can help users find jpeg settings that will be the best for them the next time they are shooting in similar conditions. And of course for a straight "as shot" RAW conversion, it is the best available - it is the same one the camera uses when you shoot jpeg only.

--
Apteryx
 
Yeah, I agree with you gava. I've never seen such impressive jpeg rendering in a camera (and I don't think any camera - at least the ones I own (5DMkII, T2i, 30D, E-PL1, plus another half dozen Canon dSLRs in the past) can come close.

Add to this LR's problems underexposing a lot of RAW imports from the X100, and, well, I'm actually getting quite comfortable shooting jpg on this camera. Hell, I'm even comfortable shooting B&W jpgs on this camera (with Y filter), because to be honest, I can't make them look THAT much better with LR's desaturating trick. The only times I'll not use the B&W mode on the camera is if I want to **** around with the luminence sliders in LR, after desaturating all the main colours. That's just for artistic effect though.

Not to mention the jpeg engine's amazing NR control. Seriously, I have to really fine tune Lightroom's noise reduction + sharpness tools to even come close, and on an image per image basis. The X100's jpeg engine does it all in camera on the fly. Amazing.

Mark
--
Mark Prince, CoffeeGeek.com
Photos: flickr.com/coffeegeek
Twitter: twitter.com/coffeegeek
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top