Manoleica Posted March 23, 2015 Share #1 Posted March 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Going out for the day next Thursday- General photography. Setting the Safari up as follows:- 24mp, Advanced Metering, Auto WB, ISO & Shutter. JPEG Fine, vivid color. f2.. I will + or - EV as I see fit. So all I will need to do is Focus... - Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 23, 2015 Posted March 23, 2015 Hi Manoleica, Take a look here Experimental or Sacrilege?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted March 23, 2015 Share #2 Posted March 23, 2015 Jpg is a poor choice IMO . Should you happen to take a great shot you will want to process it properly. Why not DNG+JPG fine? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted March 23, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted March 23, 2015 Jpg is a poor choice IMO . Should you happen to take a great shot you will want to process it properly. Why not DNG+JPG fine? You are quite right, DNG+Jpg it is..Tx Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted March 23, 2015 Share #4 Posted March 23, 2015 I'm really curious, just what specifically do you find deficient in the M240's jpg algorithms? I'll agree the M8 and M9 jpegs (I've never used an MM but I suppose the same holds true?) were noticeably sub-par compared to every other brand but I'm not seeing that in the M240. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
571514M3 Posted March 23, 2015 Share #5 Posted March 23, 2015 +1 bocaburger. The M240's jpg algorithms are brilliant. Try to prove it wrong by printing some 10"x15" enlargements, any shop that prints for weddings is a good bet. With the M240 you simply WILL fail trying to fault off-the-card jpg. Settings such as 'vivid/fine/etc' are a matter of taste and personal creativity. But then we are talking about drawing with light, using tools of our choice. There is nothing wrong with that. Over-thinking while looking at monitors is no fun, better to look at real things and put prints on the wall! 10"x15" enlargements are cheaper than at any time in history and the M240 deserves them. Try a few prints on your wall, it really will blow your mind and be lots of fun to boot! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 23, 2015 Share #6 Posted March 23, 2015 I'm really curious, just what specifically do you find deficient in the M240's jpg algorithms? I'll agree the M8 and M9 jpegs (I've never used an MM but I suppose the same holds true?) were noticeably sub-par compared to every other brand but I'm not seeing that in the M240. I simply find I can consistently better them shooting DNG. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted March 23, 2015 Share #7 Posted March 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Noise reduction is better in PP as well compared to what you get in jpeg at high ISO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 23, 2015 Share #8 Posted March 23, 2015 I'm really curious, just what specifically do you find deficient in the M240's jpg algorithms? I'll agree the M8 and M9 jpegs (I've never used an MM but I suppose the same holds true?) were noticeably sub-par compared to every other brand but I'm not seeing that in the M240. Raw gives you a lot more control over colour, contrast, dynamic range and white balance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted March 24, 2015 Share #9 Posted March 24, 2015 Raw gives you a lot more control over colour, contrast, dynamic range and white balance. True. The way I shoot is RAW, match white balance to the light source and avoid auto WB. If I have mixed lighting, I will use the gray card WB mode and calibrate using the white side of one of these: Lastolite EzyBalance Gray Card LL LR1250 B&H Photo Video Everyone has their own way of shooting; this is what I have found to be very effective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffry Abt Posted March 24, 2015 Share #10 Posted March 24, 2015 Jpg is a poor choice IMO . Should you happen to take a great shot you will want to process it properly. Why not DNG+JPG fine? I have a colleague that has worked as a pro newspaper journalist for years...decades before the digital age. He is very comfortable with film but now uses Nikon DSLRs exclusively in his work. I cannot for the life of me talk him into using NEF files. JPGs are enough for him. His work does not seem to suffer in the least. JPGs are not a poor choice for some. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piblondin Posted March 24, 2015 Share #11 Posted March 24, 2015 I have a colleague that has worked as a pro newspaper journalist for years...decades before the digital age. He is very comfortable with film but now uses Nikon DSLRs exclusively in his work. I cannot for the life of me talk him into using NEF files. JPGs are enough for him. His work does not seem to suffer in the least. JPGs are not a poor choice for some. Many people who shoot professionally, particularly journalists, don't have time to edit and transfer RAW files. If you're happy with the results, I don't see what the problem is. Shooting JPEG is justifiable on many grounds: You don't want to spend time processing RAW files. You like the look that a certain JPEG setting has. Or you simply want to limit yourself when you're out shooting. I get that RAW files allow you to preserve options to process files in other ways, but I don't see what's wrong with choosing to not have those options. Photography involves making all sorts of choices: what film to use, what lens to use, what aperture and shutter speed settings, what framing, where to focus, tack sharp or motion blur, etc. This is simply another choice that one needs to make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted March 24, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted March 24, 2015 Between you me & the gatepost, I mostly shoot JpgFine. There is enough power in most PP to allow a wide degree of adjustment. DNG/RAW is a must for certain work but to me it is not a panacea. Shoot whatever settings you feel happy with. Results are all that count.. Some criticism is based on "I have that camera, but can't get results like that" -- some is "he's an amateur" Who really knows why some like a shot and others don't!! - Go shoot, be confident & be happy.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 24, 2015 Share #13 Posted March 24, 2015 I have a colleague that has worked as a pro newspaper journalist for years...decades before the digital age. He is very comfortable with film but now uses Nikon DSLRs exclusively in his work. I cannot for the life of me talk him into using NEF files. JPGs are enough for him. His work does not seem to suffer in the least. JPGs are not a poor choice for some. Which is exactly why I advised to use DNG+jpg fine. It keeps all options open. What is your colleague going to do should one of his images win a major prize? I'm sure he would be sorry that he cannot show it at its best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffry Abt Posted March 24, 2015 Share #14 Posted March 24, 2015 What is your colleague going to do should one of his images win a major prize? He has won many jounalism contest and printed for exhibition repeatedly using humble JPGS. He says be careful about exposure and JPGs will work. When he taught me the ropes on the old Nikon D1. He said "Think about it, as if you were using slides." In all actuality, I'm with you on the usefulness of raw files! Both the NEF and DNG. By the way, my buddy in crime is Andrew D. Brosig. He has not come right out and said as much. But I'm sure he thinks I'm crazy when it comes to Leicas. So he is not always right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 24, 2015 Share #15 Posted March 24, 2015 I have a colleague that has worked as a pro newspaper journalist for years...decades before the digital age. He is very comfortable with film but now uses Nikon DSLRs exclusively in his work. I cannot for the life of me talk him into using NEF files. JPGs are enough for him. His work does not seem to suffer in the least. JPGs are not a poor choice for some. I go back a few years, too. A friend who continued in daily news photography after I left worked for over fifty years, earned three Pulitzers, and neither he nor his fellow staff members were the least troubled when they all went to little Canon digital cameras, JPEG or not. Remember, the 35mm film cameras were considered by some to be radically miniature during part of his career (and mine). Print quality was far from paramount. When invited to be part of an annual national showing, we were required to make prints on 16"x20". Standing close to one of those was almost creepy. (They were large for the sake of viewing by many from a proper distance.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 24, 2015 Share #16 Posted March 24, 2015 The point I was trying to make is that major competitions nowadays often require the raw file to ensure they are honouring a photograph taken by the camera, not created in the computer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted March 24, 2015 Share #17 Posted March 24, 2015 Regarding vivid color mode, you may want to do some test shooting before you use it extensively or use it to create images that cannot be re-shot (wedding, overseas trip, etc.). I have found the smooth color mode will produce files that with a minimum of fine tuning produce well saturated, visually pleasing, vibrant colors. Vivid color mode may have its applications for some very pale subjects or scenes but for all around shooting, the colors are over-saturated and garish. To my eye, that is. YMMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted March 24, 2015 Share #18 Posted March 24, 2015 I have a colleague that has worked as a pro newspaper journalist for years...decades before the digital age. He is very comfortable with film but now uses Nikon DSLRs exclusively in his work. I cannot for the life of me talk him into using NEF files. JPGs are enough for him. His work does not seem to suffer in the least. JPGs are not a poor choice for some. Someone with decades of experience as a pro newspaper journalist is going to be able to shoot JPGs much better than someone asking for basic advice on a camera forum about settings for general photography — such as someone who is going to set their camera to vivid color and f/2. JPGs are indeed like slides, and slides can be very unforgiving of errors. On the other hand, I recognize that many photographers don't want to process photos in any way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 24, 2015 Share #19 Posted March 24, 2015 And will be in a position to let an expert do his editing for him - it is not that one cannot postprocess JPGs, the problem is more that due to the smaller amount of data it is more difficult to get it just right without destroying the file. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 24, 2015 Share #20 Posted March 24, 2015 The point I was trying to make is that major competitions nowadays often require the raw file to ensure they are honouring a photograph taken by the camera, not created in the computer. The photograph is taken by the photographer, the computer is half of the camera... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.