Sony Camera Forum:

Welcome to the Sony Camera Forum by PhotographyTalk, the place to discuss Sony cameras. Here you can question, comment, and talk about Sony cameras such as the Alpha, A55, and all things Sony. The following are reviews of some Sony cameras that we recommend:  Sony A35 | Sony A55 | Sony a580L | Sony A900 | Sony NEX C3 | Sony NEX 5 | Sony A77

SLT-A65 RAW vs JPEG 1 year 9 months ago #256417

I did a test looking at identical images, the first one recorded in RAW, entered into Photoshop CS5 and converted to a JPEG at highest (12) quality, the second one being a FINE JPEG from the camera, then both opened in Photoshop and enlarged to a size equivalent to 100% of the second JPEG. The image recorded in JPEG had much less noise and appeared to have better color than the one captured as RAW and converted. Is this because the JPEG has noise reduction already applied during the JPEG compression ? It suggests that unless you really know what you are doing, many people may end up with a better image by skipping RAW and just taking FINE quality JPEGs.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

SLT-A65 RAW vs JPEG 1 year 9 months ago #256480

wtchdrmd wrote:
I did a test looking at identical images, the first one recorded in RAW, entered into Photoshop CS5 and converted to a JPEG at highest (12) quality, the second one being a FINE JPEG from the camera, then both opened in Photoshop and enlarged to a size equivalent to 100% of the second JPEG. The image recorded in JPEG had much less noise and appeared to have better color than the one captured as RAW and converted. Is this because the JPEG has noise reduction already applied during the JPEG compression ? It suggests that unless you really know what you are doing, many people may end up with a better image by skipping RAW and just taking FINE quality JPEGs.

Yes, it's in camera NR.

RAW will nearly always give you better results, but as you said, you need to know what you're doing.

You can do better NR (and have more control over it) by doing it yourself in PP, but yeh it takes some skill. Thing is, if you shoot RAW you can always fix it later when you have the skills, if you shoot jpeg, you're stuck with jpeg for all time.

That said, people say the fuji jpegs (xpro1, x100, X-e1 etc.) are really good and better than RAW because of the film simulation that fuji can do so well in camera but other companies (adobe) haven't been able to replicate. So a lot of fuji users shoot jpeg (or RAW+jpeg).
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: wtchdrmd

SLT-A65 RAW vs JPEG 1 year 9 months ago #256548

I don't pixel peep that much, so my eye is not all that sensitive to noise in the first place. With my Canon, I use Canon's own editor, Digital Photo Professional, for RAW conversions. Even in that case I do not trust the conversion to JPG to be 100% faithful to the camera's JPG shot. When (rather rare?) JPG output is key I always set the camera to RAW+JPG to play safe.

Kelly Cook
Canon 50D, Olympus PL2
kellycook.zenfolio.com/
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: wtchdrmd