Basic Photoshop settings for RAW JPEG conversion.. EX2F?

frascati wrote:

Thank you very much for that. I went back and reshot the kitchen with better success. Wondering if indeed the ND filter had been on. Finished carefully shooting in Smart, Aperture priority RAW, and Shutter priority RAW. Forgot to switch to Jpeg for the S and A modes and neglected to zero the exp conpensation. But got informative results none the less. I'm getting a bit scatter shot here and ought to quit for the day, get some other things done, and get back to this tomorrow with a fresh mind.

First shot in Smart.

A bit dark but improving. 1/45.

RAW with minor noise, color, and white balance adjustments.

Best of four RAW shots. 2 each shutter and aperture priority.

Couple of questions direct to these shots now and I'll quit for the day.

Shutter priority would only get me to 1.6 @ 1/45. Faster and it rose to 1.4 and I was decided not to go there for these shots.

Aperture priority provided me 3.5 @ 1/45. All other settings equal. Sound right?

Not sure without the ISO numbers.

Why is this? Shouldn't either priority begin at the same baseline working up/down from there?

In aperture priority you pick an aperture and the camera figure out the shutter speed (and iso in the cause of auto iso).

In shutter priority you pick the shutter speed and the camera picks the aperture (and iso in the case of auto iso).

For both of these the camera may have it's own preference on whether to adjust the ISO or the other setting first.  For instance, if you choose an aperture of 2.2, the camera could equivalently choose 1/40 ISO 400 or 1/80 ISO 800 or 1/160 ISO 1600 depending on if the programming favours low ISO or a high shutter speed.  There is often a point at which the favouritism switches over, either because the programmers felt the noise was becoming too prevalent or because they thought the speed is getting too slow for handholding.  I'm personally a fan of manual, I know better than the camera and have a convenient screen on the back of the camera to help me see the exposure.  I know that's not what you're looking for though.

Whoa!! The ceiling edge behind the fan and the foreground floor in the RAW image above. Barreling in RAW was noted in reviews and supposed to be corrected in the last firmware revision. 305224. I've installed that. I just confirmed the EXIF data on a shot. It is clearly more evident in the converted RAW image than in the Jpeg above it so even with a slightly different aperture setting there is definitely something amiss in RAW here. No?

Not sure, I don't have this exact camera.

Dunno. I'm getting few pics out of this that I'm liking. I can't be that far from getting this right in the images above. White balance is still eluding me. But I'm just not crazy about either one. And they probably are far better than what was coming out of the SL420. Maybe my expectations are just wrong here. These look too artificial, noisy (even with correction), and missing for want of better photo vernacular... realistic vitality. And if the barreling ends up being one more thing that needs post process for every image that alone will be a non starter for me. The camera will be returned or sold on confirmation of this.

Did you take a look at the jpeg I posted, adjusted from the jpeg you posted earlier?  If you liked that result then maybe just some jpeg processing would get them mostly where you want rather than the hastle of raw?  The advantage of raw would be being able to pull back some more detail out of the highlights and shadows.

I thought I'd read everything there was to know about this camera before purchase. But here, and elsewhere, I'm beginning to have some genuine (rather than the initial hastiness) remorse. Revisiting all of the EX2F threads here I'm reading them with a better gist between the lines and wonder if I should have heeded more cautions. I may have been lured by bells and whistles. The wifi, the 'super fast lens', the swivel 'super bright' OLED screen, etc. I'd given some thought to a few similarly priced, larger sensor compacts without all these extras, among them a 4/3 Olympus and the Canon eos-m aps-c with 22mm lens if I recall and wonder if I'd have been more satisfied. I seldom ever use zoom after all, but went for the EX2F finally.

I'll give it a rest and pick up again tomorrow night. Thanks so much again for all.

If you end up looking to sell it I'm curious of the asking price, I might be interested.