Exodies Posted October 14, 2016 Share #121 Posted October 14, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I disagree on the effort needed to process DNG. The results similar to out of the camera JPEG can be achieved by simply applying saved preset to all pictures in one go, leaving open the possibility of careful processing of selective few later on. I prefer not to process all pictures in one go; it's easier to see the potential in a picture which hasn't been sent in the wrong direction. But I would agree with you wrt batches of pictures shot under the same light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Hi Exodies, Take a look here New M262 disappointing - exposure problems. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pgk Posted October 14, 2016 Share #122 Posted October 14, 2016 I disagree on the effort needed to process DNG. The results similar to out of the camera JPEG can be achieved by simply applying saved preset to all pictures in one go, leaving open the possibility of careful processing of selective few later on. To a degree, as Exodies says, this is somewhat possible with a batch of images shot under the same conditions, but many will still require 'fine tuning'. It all depends on how and what you shoot. For 'straight' images an out of camera JPEG can be good, but I tend to be rather too eclectic in my shooting to accept out of camera results, I usually try to expose to ensure no highlight clipping where this is important. FWIW take a look at this shot: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265117-barnacks-monthly-for-october-2016-is-something-ending-in-ing/page-20 post 395. Out of camera the (quite severe) highlights were just blowing and the shadow detail was virtually non-existent giving a silhouette effect. You may or may not like the compromise I reached (which I think captures the moment reasonably well myself but shows some inevitable lack of highlight detail as I tried to avoid 'banding' or posterisation) but it would not have been possible to shoot this image in camera nor would a JPEG file have taken the substantial adjustments I applied - as it is the noise is controlled surprisingly well in the shadows. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted October 14, 2016 Share #123 Posted October 14, 2016 Trending back to the OP, getting to know your camera and lens combo is to my mind the first stage in getting satisfying results.. Obviously with digital, PP is a must (both learning and using)... from day one ALL M's took/take a certain amount of photographic knowledge.. maybe the OP would let us know how using the M is progressing... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted October 14, 2016 Share #124 Posted October 14, 2016 I prefer not to process all pictures in one go; it's easier to see the potential in a picture which hasn't been sent in the wrong direction. But I would agree with you wrt batches of pictures shot under the same light. That is what I meant. Indoors/outdoors/evening/night light require different presets. Still almost no extra effort compared to shooting JPEG, and all the gains of having extra bits in the files. I haven't spent $$$$$ on this camera to throw away image data. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblutter Posted October 14, 2016 Share #125 Posted October 14, 2016 1 at a time. How many 'keepers' are you going to get from 1 shooting session anyway - espec. if you plan on printing them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 14, 2016 Share #126 Posted October 14, 2016 I find that I shoot less with digital than with film. I don't need to bracket and I know immediately if I got the shot. In a normal outing I shoot between 30 to 100 photos max. Storage is less of a problem for me than most Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted October 14, 2016 Share #127 Posted October 14, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I find that I shoot less with digital than with film. I don't need to bracket and I know immediately if I got the shot. In a normal outing I shoot between 30 to 100 photos max. Storage is less of a problem for me than most I never thought of it that way....your right. I too shoot less because of no bracketing. ......I do "grab" additional shots sometimes because pixels are free. as for storage, the older I get the more I edit ......that philosophy works for the garage as well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted October 15, 2016 Share #128 Posted October 15, 2016 The results similar to out of the camera JPEG can be achieved by simply applying saved preset to all pictures in one go,So what's the point of shooting raw, if your aim in post processing is to achieve the same result as OOC jpgs ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted October 15, 2016 Share #129 Posted October 15, 2016 So what's the point of shooting raw, if your aim in post processing is to achieve the same result as OOC jpgs ??My aim is to get better results for the pictures which are shot in diffficult light, there are few in every batch. It also allows me to salvage some pictures with interesting content. Most of the time my presets work perfectly. The presets also have better control on color, noise and sharpness than OOC jpegs without much extra effort. I was trying to show that raw processing effort is minimal for batch processing (which is similar to OOC jpegs). Edit: shooting raw also frees me from taking few decisions while shooting, such as WB and to some extent "perfect exposure", allowing me to focus on the picture rather than fiddling with camera settings. I don't see any benefits of JPEG other than saving space and instant sharing (possible in iPhone but not in M). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted October 15, 2016 Share #130 Posted October 15, 2016 So what's the point of shooting raw... You never know, unless you try. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted October 15, 2016 Share #131 Posted October 15, 2016 I prefer not to process all pictures in one go; it's easier to see the potential in a picture which hasn't been sent in the wrong direction. But I would agree with you wrt batches of pictures shot under the same light. When you shoot JPEGs, you are post-processing all your pictures in one go: in-camera at the time you are taking the picture. If you are good at shooting JPEG, and you use the same discipline for color balance and exposure when you take the picture but shooting RAW, then you can batch-process without any problem, and you can get more out of your photographs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted October 15, 2016 Share #132 Posted October 15, 2016 My aim is to get better results for the pictures which are shot in diffficult light, there are few in every batch. It also allows me to salvage some pictures with interesting content. Most of the time my presets work perfectly. The presets also have better control on color, noise and sharpness than OOC jpegs without much extra effort. I was trying to show that raw processing effort is minimal for batch processing (which is similar to OOC jpegs). Edit: shooting raw also frees me from taking few decisions while shooting, such as WB and to some extent "perfect exposure", allowing me to focus on the picture rather than fiddling with camera settings. I don't see any benefits of JPEG other than saving space and instant sharing (possible in iPhone but not in M). I agree! DNG is just a better way to shoot digital .......you get more range. Because of that range there are many challenging exposure issues that are best handled in RAW And can adjust as you like ....of not Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted October 15, 2016 Share #133 Posted October 15, 2016 1 at a time. How many 'keepers' are you going to get from 1 shooting session anyway - espec. if you plan on printing them It depends on what I am shooting. Let me give you two extreme examples. I shot airshow for couple of hours. Shots/keepers ratio was 300/10. Then I shot family, friends social evening. Ratio was 10/5. And I don't plan to print many of my keepers. Wall space is limited and photo books are printed only once in a while (yearly). I will say that 80% of my keepers are shared online, 10% printed and 10% is only for my own viewing (mainly family pics). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted October 15, 2016 Share #134 Posted October 15, 2016 I was trying to show that raw processing effort is minimal for batch processing (which is similar to OOC jpegs). Ah right, I had understood by your previous post that your aim in PP was to get a similar jpegas the OOC. One more advantage - as if another one was needed - of shooting RAW is that in years to come, processing software will just get better and better and we will be able to revisit our DNG files and get even more out of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 16, 2016 Author Share #135 Posted October 16, 2016 What a difference a week makes! Been out and about with the M 262 just shooting DNG images this weekend I have not started working on them with Lightroom yet but have just checked the files using Fast Stone Image Viewer and these are so much better than my first attempts last weekend I am getting used to the metering as well and I am quite delighted at the quality. One slight niggle has surfaced though some dust spots have started to appear already! At present the dust check indicator shows several blotches, which correspond to the blotches I am seeing. Now when I bought the camera - it came straight out of the box, the lens was attached and have not taken it off. I have looked around on the web and have found a video on YouTube by Steve Huff showing him cleaning an M9 with one of those rocket type bulb blowers. I have one of these blowers - its it safe to use on an M262? Or should I get something else? My only previous encounter with sensor dust was on my X1. A few months after buying it I had to send it back for a sensor clean after a blob appeared, but being fixed lens not something one could do oneself. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted October 16, 2016 Share #136 Posted October 16, 2016 The rocket blower is perfect. The first ~1000 shutter releases cause dust on the sensor coming from that shutter, which is normal and explains the dust where you did not change lenses. Wet cleaning is only necessary if it is sticky dust, which you will notice when the rocket blower has no effect. I would let your dealer do the wet cleaning to be safe with warranties etc.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted October 16, 2016 Share #137 Posted October 16, 2016 What a difference a week makes! Been out and about with the M 262 just shooting DNG images this weekend I have not started working on them with Lightroom yet but have just checked the files using Fast Stone Image Viewer and these are so much better than my first attempts last weekend I am getting used to the metering as well and I am quite delighted at the quality. One slight niggle has surfaced though some dust spots have started to appear already! At present the dust check indicator shows several blotches, which correspond to the blotches I am seeing. Now when I bought the camera - it came straight out of the box, the lens was attached and have not taken it off. I have looked around on the web and have found a video on YouTube by Steve Huff showing him cleaning an M9 with one of those rocket type bulb blowers. I have one of these blowers - its it safe to use on an M262? Or should I get something else? My only previous encounter with sensor dust was on my X1. A few months after buying it I had to send it back for a sensor clean after a blob appeared, but being fixed lens not something one could do oneself. John Glad you are liking the results. As for dust there has been many threads in the past. You will find useful information. My experience was that in the beginning I needed to wet clean my sensor once (I guess after few months) and after that, last two years, I have simply using rocket blower once in a while. But then, dust doesn't bother me much because I hardly shoot narrower than f5.6 and the spots can be cloned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 16, 2016 Author Share #138 Posted October 16, 2016 Glad you are liking the results. As for dust there has been many threads in the past. You will find useful information. My experience was that in the beginning I needed to wet clean my sensor once (I guess after few months) and after that, last two years, I have simply using rocket blower once in a while. But then, dust doesn't bother me much because I hardly shoot narrower than f5.6 and the spots can be cloned. So I take it dust is something to live with for the minor blemish and just clone - something I am rather used to doing as I plough my way through a vast collection of transparencies and negs from 35mm days. This M262 is actually my first interchangeable lens digital camera if I discount the Digilux 3 which I never bought any additional lenses for and remained attached to the lens throughout my ownership. However, unlike the Digilux I would like to get another lens for this next spring thus anticipate changing lenses quite a bit. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhluxton Posted October 16, 2016 Author Share #139 Posted October 16, 2016 The rocket blower is perfect. The first ~1000 shutter releases cause dust on the sensor coming from that shutter, which is normal and explains the dust where you did not change lenses. Wet cleaning is only necessary if it is sticky dust, which you will notice when the rocket blower has no effect. I would let your dealer do the wet cleaning to be safe with warranties etc.. Thanks for the info on the shutter generating the initial dust. I have read up on wet cleaning and frankly the potential of doing damage scares me a bit. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted October 16, 2016 Share #140 Posted October 16, 2016 Thanks for the info on the shutter generating the initial dust. I have read up on wet cleaning and frankly the potential of doing damage scares me a bit. John Which is a healthy fear. Normally you won't need more than the rocket blower the first two years Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.