Reading mode: Light Dark

RAW or not to RAW

Go to last post
Good point Hans,

I've been using the slow SanDisk CF cards up till now and it wasn't too much of an issue. However, I missed some shots of the changing of the guard at the Pink Palace in Buenos Aires recently that I was not too happy about (my wife with her S230 got 3 shots to my 1 - OK the file size is smaller but still). There's not much I can do about the speed of the xD card, but I'm looking for a quicker CF - maybe the Ridata 512 (I can't really spring for the 1GB).

Paul
Hans E. Strak said:
Hans E. Strak said:
I'm not too worried about the memory as I'm just upgrading to a
512CF and 256xD on the C5050. I am really tempted to take some RAW
shots on a dive trip at the end of the month.

Paul
Click to expand...
Paul, make sure you buy a fast CF card. They are available up to
40X, nowadays. A bit more expensive, but sooo fast. And as they
say: time is money.

Hans
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Bill,

Maybe I'll finally get around to buying the plug-in (I use PS2 + Powertools) and give it a go.

Paul
Bill Huber said:
I am using the PhotoShop plugin and it takes me less time per
picture then I normaly do, and I have no noise to clean up with
neatimage.

--
No, I'm not a Pro, but I did read the Olympus Talk Forum last night.
Bill Huber, Fort Worth, Tx
UZI, E-10 http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber
Click to expand...
 
Bernie,

I make a habit of backing everything up on CD at least once a month (I've a DVD writer too, but have stuck with CD's out of lazyness and cost), which generally means 2/3 CD's. I have to say I'd be devastated if we lost the pictures of our son.

Paul
berni29 said:
I find that the Adobe Camera RAW speeds processing up a lot. I have
set the defaults where I like them, and a spot of adjustment and I
am done. I do mostly portraits and have done side by side
comparisons RAW vs SHQ. I find that the RAW images have better
tonal range and look more real. Being able to adjust the white
balance is a major plus as well.

There is no argument about what is best.

There is no way that I would shoot a JPEG unless I needed to reel
off a set of shots at once.

I am pleased that disk space is cheap though. You need to be able
to back it all up though. A DVD writer (I use a 12/24GB DAT tape
drive) is looking like a must.
Click to expand...
 
My question is how fast of a card will the E-10 handle. I have a SanDisk 512 and if I can use a faster card I will get one.

--
No, I'm not a Pro, but I did read the Olympus Talk Forum last night.
Bill Huber, Fort Worth, Tx
UZI, E-10 http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber
 
When you are working with raws, the only way to save to jpeg and keep the exif data is to do a "save as" and choose jpeg as the output and then choose the quality on the 1-12 scale (in photoshop 7.0). For as long as I have used PS7 I always did the "save for web" option to save to jpg and it always would lose the exif data.

--
Mason Trullinger
http://www.defymagazine.com
http://www.pbase.com/masont/
Oly 5o5o groupie
'You've got to lose yourself before you can find anything.'
 
Bill, the E-10 writes so slow, that a faster Card makes no difference.

Might though be faster if you have a fast USB-cardreader to transfer them to the computer.

But the most people in the Oly-DSLR forum agree, that you can get the cheapest card (read slower) with no difference but the price.
 
thanks for the tip but you gotta tell me the settings you use cause i still cant save the exif data . and i was wondering if the jpeg 2000 format is web compatible.
Mason Trullinger said:
When you are working with raws, the only way to save to jpeg and
keep the exif data is to do a "save as" and choose jpeg as the
output and then choose the quality on the 1-12 scale (in photoshop
7.0). For as long as I have used PS7 I always did the "save for
web" option to save to jpg and it always would lose the exif data.

--
Mason Trullinger
http://www.defymagazine.com
http://www.pbase.com/masont/
Oly 5o5o groupie
'You've got to lose yourself before you can find anything.'
Click to expand...
 
Doehns said:
Bill, the E-10 writes so slow, that a faster Card makes no difference.
Might though be faster if you have a fast USB-cardreader to
transfer them to the computer.
But the most people in the Oly-DSLR forum agree, that you can get
the cheapest card (read slower) with no difference but the price.
Click to expand...
--
No, I'm not a Pro, but I did read the Olympus Talk Forum last night.
Bill Huber, Fort Worth, Tx
UZI, E-10 http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber
 
If you've got sights on upgrading in the next year or so, it might make sense to buy faster cards to they could be used with your "next" model.

Then again, by that time even faster cards will be available, so it may be a wash.
Doehns said:
Bill, the E-10 writes so slow, that a faster Card makes no difference.
Might though be faster if you have a fast USB-cardreader to
transfer them to the computer.
But the most people in the Oly-DSLR forum agree, that you can get
the cheapest card (read slower) with no difference but the price.
Click to expand...
 
That is a point that I hadn't thought about.
I got this 512 cheap, $90 so I may just keep it.

--
No, I'm not a Pro, but I did read the Olympus Talk Forum last night.
Bill Huber, Fort Worth, Tx
UZI, E-10 http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber
 
It is not really that bad for normal shots, but at a soccer game you are right it is just to slow, it is even to slow in SHQ.

--
No, I'm not a Pro, but I did read the Olympus Talk Forum last night.
Bill Huber, Fort Worth, Tx
UZI, E-10 http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top