Reading mode: Light Dark

What do you think is the best camera for JPEG fine tuning on the spot?

Go to last post
Q

quintana

Leading Member
Messages
589
Reaction score
495
Location
Cologne, DE
So I am currently shooting with a Nikon Z7. The image quality of the camera and the glass is great - if I shoot RAW and edit the images afterwards.

But after 15 years of serious hobby photography (sounds contradictory but I think you know what I mean) and almost exclusively shooting RAW I am getting tired of editing my photos. Probably because smartphones show that it's possible to get decent results without editing.

I know there are lots of cameras that produce good looking JPEGs like the Fujifilm cameras but not all of them let you fine tune the JPEG settings according to the scene you are shooting. For example if there is a high dynamic range in the scene it would be cool if you could easily lift the shadows and directly see the result in the EVF and the histogram - before even taking the picture.

So in your opinion which camera is best suited for altering the settings for the resulting JPEG most easily to get the desired result on the spot instead of later after editing a RAW file at home? An accurate (in terms of colours, brightness etc) preview in the EVF would be a great plus and the ability to see the preview while changing the settings so that you don't have to dive into a menu, change the setting, go back to the preview only to see that it doesn't match your expectations and you have to go into the menu again. This is a big downside with my Z7 and from what I know it unfortunately hasn't changed with more recent Nikons like the Z6/7 II or Z8.
 
I am a 100% jpeg shooter, and think I understand your desire, but don't know enough about different brands to guess at an answer, but doubt that there is a one size fits all solution. But also for me personally, I don't even bother by reviewing images on the lcd much less in the viewfinder. I cannot tell enough about an image from the tiny little screens to even consider adjusting basic parameters from what I see on the evf. I spend a lot of time with any new to me camera testing and comparing different settings and arriving at what I feel is the best for me that gets me jpegs sooc that are close enough in most instances to allow me to reach what I want in post, but that maybe are not perfect for everything sooc. And I do have different settings saved as custom set ups for field use.
 
Oly always had great looking jpgs imo even w/o tweaking. Pentax has a lot of ability to modify the jpgs, and Pentax has added some special jpg "looks" over the last couple of years.

But I still think raw is the way to go. An afternoon's work (really only 20 minutes, but I give it an afternoon for lots of back and forth consideration) and you'll have your own preset for your own aesthetic. A simple matter to dump in the images and apply the preset and export them---and you've got the raws to boot.
 
Agree with you on Olympus. So much can be done in camera for the way I shoot which is strictly JPEG. I take a lot of time and experimentation with in camera adjustment and filtration primarily N.D. and polarizer. My idea of post, is in camera crop or saturation level adjust.

I’ve shot so many thousands of slides in my life that I guess, old habits are hard to break, and I’d rather be shooting than looking at a computer screen. I’ve experimented with
RAW, but find I can get pretty much what I’m looking for with JPEG.
This won’t work for many but it works for me.
 
I agree with Bob A.L. above. The view through a screen is fine for getting a rough idea of your exposure, but I wouldn't want to use it to tweak my deep settings. I do that during my early work with a new camera and then leave it alone unless I discover a problem.

What I do is make judicious use of my presets/scene modes/ film simulations when I need something specific. Ignore their names/symbols- just get to know them and what they do and use them when appropriate. Think of them as another layer of settings on top of the deep in cameras settings that apply to everything.

I shoot jpeg only on Fuji, Pentax and Oly. Fuji's film simulations need no introduction. Even the basic 3color/2mono set on the early cameras is super useful. Even when you have a larger set on a newer camera, you will probably find that you use only 3 or 4 of them regularly.Pentax is fun because you can do individual adjustments to each preset on top of the deep settings. I will admit that on my Oly I just use the Natural color preset 90% of the time.
 
Canon lets you edit raw files in camera and convert to jpegs. The edits are a bit limited compared to a full raw editor. But you can check which white balance and picture style works best, adjust clarity, etc, then save as a jpeg on camera. Adjust your jpeg settings to match and move forward.



They also have Picture Style Editor software that allows you to create a picture style on your computer and load it to your camera for future jpeg shooting.
 
quintana said:
So I am currently shooting with a Nikon Z7. The image quality of the camera and the glass is great - if I shoot RAW and edit the images afterwards.

But after 15 years of serious hobby photography (sounds contradictory but I think you know what I mean) and almost exclusively shooting RAW I am getting tired of editing my photos. Probably because smartphones show that it's possible to get decent results without editing.

I know there are lots of cameras that produce good looking JPEGs like the Fujifilm cameras but not all of them let you fine tune the JPEG settings according to the scene you are shooting. For example if there is a high dynamic range in the scene it would be cool if you could easily lift the shadows and directly see the result in the EVF and the histogram - before even taking the picture.

So in your opinion which camera is best suited for altering the settings for the resulting JPEG most easily to get the desired result on the spot instead of later after editing a RAW file at home? An accurate (in terms of colours, brightness etc) preview in the EVF would be a great plus and the ability to see the preview while changing the settings so that you don't have to dive into a menu, change the setting, go back to the preview only to see that it doesn't match your expectations and you have to go into the menu again. This is a big downside with my Z7 and from what I know it unfortunately hasn't changed with more recent Nikons like the Z6/7 II or Z8.
Click to expand...
........................................

For around 15 years I've used a D300 in the jungle.

Have always shot jpeg, the adverse conditions have

taught me to know the approximate settings I need.

Primates running, flying or fighting means the shot

must happen fast. Sometimes it works sometime not.

I see myself as a jungle journalist and go with the flow.

It's 10:30PM Friday the 18th of August.. Good Luck ;-)

.

.

.
 
One day many thousands of dollars of camera will be as good as a phone camera. With a phone camera I can shoot, stylize the image, crop it, use dynamic range, and further edit, then send the photo to where ever, often social media. There is no camera, mirrored or mirrorless, that can do this. There should be. Not all of use want to be sitting behind a desk or laptop working on images.

However, Fuji has kind of figured part of the problem out. Recent, at least ten years ago or longer, Fuji added film simulations to their JPEG options. First you can chose a sim, such as Velvia, then further modify that sim.

I have linked below a site that encourages and displays film sims that others have created that can be used freely by all. When you go to this page, you will see a choice of sensors to use simulations develop for certain series of cameras.

When I shoot with my Fuji equipment, I'm always in JPEG mode, when I shoot with Canon I'm almost always in RAW.

I suggest you open the "X-Trans V" page to see the most recent offerings:

https://fujixweekly.com/recipes/
 
Last edited:
The guts of your wish are exposure, white balance, and saturation. Plenty of cameras will reflect changes in these settings on the rear LCD. For example, on the Leica SL you add or subtract exposure compensation with the top dial. You can set up the controls to get to the WB menu quickly. And you can tweak saturation almost as easily.

You can do something similar with a Fuji X-Pro, plus you can create alternate JPGs in camera.
 
With my old Panasonic, the film modes, adjustments and quick menu, everything is visual. What I see in the EVF or LCD is nearly identical to what I capture. I see the effect before taking the shot. I don't have to use the main menu. I thought all micro four thirds worked that way.

I think the Olympus system is more elaborate, but Panasonic is more intuitive.

My interests are primarily landscape/nature and generally get what I want in-camera visually. I don't want to edit or I'd just use jpeg+raw.

I even fine tune a white balance preset based on the season. What I see is what I get. Nearly everything responds visually as I make the adjustment.
 
quintana said:
So I am currently shooting with a Nikon Z7. The image quality of the camera and the glass is great - if I shoot RAW and edit the images afterwards.

But after 15 years of serious hobby photography (sounds contradictory but I think you know what I mean) and almost exclusively shooting RAW I am getting tired of editing my photos. Probably because smartphones show that it's possible to get decent results without editing.

I know there are lots of cameras that produce good looking JPEGs like the Fujifilm cameras but not all of them let you fine tune the JPEG settings according to the scene you are shooting. For example if there is a high dynamic range in the scene it would be cool if you could easily lift the shadows and directly see the result in the EVF and the histogram - before even taking the picture.

So in your opinion which camera is best suited for altering the settings for the resulting JPEG most easily to get the desired result on the spot instead of later after editing a RAW file at home? An accurate (in terms of colours, brightness etc) preview in the EVF would be a great plus and the ability to see the preview while changing the settings so that you don't have to dive into a menu, change the setting, go back to the preview only to see that it doesn't match your expectations and you have to go into the menu again. This is a big downside with my Z7 and from what I know it unfortunately hasn't changed with more recent Nikons like the Z6/7 II or Z8.
Click to expand...
What don't you like about your camera produced JPEG's?

My camera allows me lots of options in controlling how the camera produces JPEGs from raw data. I can alter the high end of the tone curve so highlights (like a bride's dress) retain detail. I can alter the low end to retain shadow detail in the groom's tux. I can adjust saturation, white balance, color tone, etc. I can have it try to keep skin tones natural, or fine tune for landscapes. I would expect that your camera offers similar options.

An important question is whether adjusting camera settings would solve your problem? If so, a few adjustments might well save you the cost of a new camera.
 
You could at least, when using a fuji, create different presets with different film sims and your tweaks for the most common situations (lifting shadows or not etc.).

Many settings are directly available through the quick menue like choosing a preset or changing settings within a preset like the highlights and shadows tone. You can adapt the quick menue to your liking.





b9efba1ca9f74793b0eb78c0fc17e213.jpg
 
quintana said:
So I am currently shooting with a Nikon Z7. The image quality of the camera and the glass is great - if I shoot RAW and edit the images afterwards.

But after 15 years of serious hobby photography (sounds contradictory but I think you know what I mean) and almost exclusively shooting RAW I am getting tired of editing my photos. Probably because smartphones show that it's possible to get decent results without editing.
Click to expand...
I am on the same path... Too much digital manipulation and before becoming a digital image painter/creator, I took a U turn and move to JPG (best SOOC) as my personal challenge.
quintana said:
I know there are lots of cameras that produce good looking JPEGs like the Fujifilm cameras but not all of them let you fine tune the JPEG settings according to the scene you are shooting. For example if there is a high dynamic range in the scene it would be cool if you could easily lift the shadows and directly see the result in the EVF and the histogram - before even taking the picture.
Click to expand...
Z7 can't do it? 😮

The Live View in real time (the simulated image in evf/LCD changes in according to the setting changes automatically) of my Panasonic cameras can do it. FYI I am not using the flagship model. I hope M43 will not scare you. :-)

IMHO Live View should display simulated image in real time according to the changes in parameters, applying of filter and special effect etc allowing the shooter set for the best setting before taking a shot. Histogram plus highlight alert (zebra alert) on evf/LCD, both are in real time, are excellent tool for exposure setting too.

The benefit of Live View should be able to display the frame for composition, focusing condition, background blurry condition, the lightness distribution, WB and saturation etc are the reasons why I left ovf of DSLR.
quintana said:
So in your opinion which camera is best suited for altering the settings for the resulting JPEG most easily to get the desired result on the spot instead of later after editing a RAW file at home? An accurate (in terms of colours, brightness etc) preview in the EVF would be a great plus and the ability to see the preview while changing the settings so that you don't have to dive into a menu, change the setting, go back to the preview only to see that it doesn't match your expectations and you have to go into the menu again.
Click to expand...
Well, this is not real Live View IMHO, looking more like a feature called up to update the simulated image!! Not convenience (my entry class GX850 is doing similarly on certain feature), but better than nothing.

Please understand Live View is not the same on every model, every brand...
quintana said:
This is a big downside with my Z7 and from what I know it unfortunately hasn't changed with more recent Nikons like the Z6/7 II or Z8.
Click to expand...
 
quintana said:
So I am currently shooting with a Nikon Z7. The image quality of the camera and the glass is great - if I shoot RAW and edit the images afterwards.

...

So in your opinion which camera is best suited for altering the settings for the resulting JPEG most easily to get the desired result on the spot instead of later after editing a RAW file at home? An accurate (in terms of colours, brightness etc) preview in the EVF would be a great plus and the ability to see the preview while changing the settings so that you don't have to dive into a menu, change the setting, go back to the preview only to see that it doesn't match your expectations and you have to go into the menu again. This is a big downside with my Z7 and from what I know it unfortunately hasn't changed with more recent Nikons like the Z6/7 II or Z8.
Click to expand...
The Z-series has many options to tweak the JPEG conversion and the option to save the tweaked parameters as custom styles. They have also Nikon Picture Control. The EVF and Backside-LCD shows the SOOC-JPEG if configured. You can assign the Picture Control selection to a function button + dial, no need to enter menu. What do you miss?

About 'accurate preview': The only way for true accurate view is to have a controlled environment. No EVF or Backside-LCD can give you this controlled environment, because your view is always affected by the surrounding light, even with EVF.

It seems to me that you have unrealistic expectations and did not deep-dive in the options of your camera.
 
Sports/Action and some photojournalist shooters needs to to be able to send instantly-usable JPEGs in a very timely manner. The D5 and D6 cameras, intended for this market, have good reputations for being able to produce such usable OOC JPEGs. Have a look at the Nikon FX section of the DPR forum, for discussions about this. I had wanted to “peak” with the D5 and D850, as my last big cameras, but one member, in particular, a serious pro, has written that the D6 is noticeably better than the D5, for producing nicely usable OOC JPEGs.

With the Z9 being intended for this same market, that would be a place to start looking, if staying with the Z system is desirable.

I am typing this in the wee hours of the morning, after having had some chamomile tea to help me to get back to sleep. I might have more to say, when I am more alert.
 
quintana said:
But after 15 years of serious hobby photography (sounds contradictory but I think you know what I mean) and almost exclusively shooting RAW I am getting tired of editing my photos. Probably because smartphones show that it's possible to get decent results without editing.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that “smart phones” do, indeed, edit our images. Heavy editing, all too often. That is one thing that I especially HATE about iPhone still images. Yes, the images may indeed be “perfect,” but all too often the final image is NOT what I had seen, with my eyes, but what the algorithm thinks I should want to see.
 
I like Pentax for the RAW files and the options I get for post-processing from them.

However, I do believe that CANON has the best direct out of camera output.
 
quintana said:
So I am currently shooting with a Nikon Z7. The image quality of the camera and the glass is great - if I shoot RAW and edit the images afterwards.
Click to expand...
Getting slightly off subject, but I understand your feelings... I have little desire to mess around with post processing, the fun is getting the shot.

[unfortunately the best image cleanup is typically on a phone. I was reminded of this recently when I took a quick shot of an architecturally interesting door on a building. As soon as I took the shot I squared up the perspective and had my photo. ]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
JPEG or RAW, when/where/why
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
3K
ishwanu
I
M
  • Solved
Fine JPEG required for 100% zoom?
Replies
10
Views
11
John Bean (UK)
J
J
As a hobbyist what is important to you camera capabilities or workflow?
Replies
17
Views
318
Klaus dk
Klaus dk
JimKasson
Do Raw Developers Use the Embedded JPEG as a Color Reference?
Replies
7
Views
2K
JimKasson
JimKasson
Barleyman
A bit of caution - recipes
Replies
3
Views
3K
Hooligans Imagery
Hooligans Imagery

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