alexr Posted November 12, 2006 Share #1 Posted November 12, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) A member has written of a swiss dealer's preoccupation with the quality of M8 jpegs. We have heard very little of this and it would be interesting if current owners have anything to share. Whilst raw shooting is the ideal solution, many of us are forced to shoot jpegs. The m8 is primarily a photojournalist's tool, like all other Ms. If you need to give your publication a few hundred shots the day after you return from location (or even send the images directly from the field) jpegs are the only viable solution. Some information on jpeg quality would be welcome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Hi alexr, Take a look here M8 jpeg quality. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
atufte Posted November 12, 2006 Share #2 Posted November 12, 2006 I would also like to hear (see) about the quality from the best JPG setting, both B&W and color. Also, is there a filter option for "in camera b&w"...? Thanks... Best Regards Alexander Tufte http://www.alexandertufte.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted November 12, 2006 Share #3 Posted November 12, 2006 There are no B&W filters for jpeg on camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted November 12, 2006 Share #4 Posted November 12, 2006 No filters but a simple "B&W" mode in jpeg. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted November 12, 2006 Share #5 Posted November 12, 2006 Hi - Alex - one thought on the issue of Raw vs JPEG - I frequently have to produce hundreds of images as part of a days shoot and need to give them to the client quickly. However, I ALWAYS shoot RAW as I see no point in throwing away all the data I've been so careful to capture. The trick that always works for me is to have a laptop either with you or at the hotel / car and download the RAWs to process in C1 or Adobe ACR or whatever your preferred tool is. If you've got the worksflow sorted, you can then batch process the keepers in a very short time and send them over whatever media are available or required -- and you've still got your collection of digital negatives. If you don't work this way it's the same as leaving the negs or slides at the lab and only asking for the machine made prints that they offer you... Hope you find this comment helpful. Best Chris Christopher Tribble: documentary photography, training, education, linguistics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 12, 2006 Share #6 Posted November 12, 2006 There are lots of people who will not want to be bothered with raw processing and will buy on the assumption that the camera delivers top quality JPEGs ready for emailing or printing. At most, they will do a bit of cropping but they're not going to get involved in the geeky interests of colour profiles and the rest. Sadly, they will be disappointed because the JPEGs from the camera are nothing to get excited about, the white balance especially is poor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexr Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share #7 Posted November 12, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Chris, Thanks for your comment. I often shoot raw as well as jpegs. Depends on the situation. Even with batch processing, I find that after the conversion, i often need PP. More than i need from a (nailed) jpeg. But yes when i feel the situation is special, i do switch to raw. I understand your lab analogy, but I feel a little different. To me, raw is like neg (col or bw), jpg is like transparency. Much less manouvering space, you just have to nail it. Like Velvia, get it 1/2 a stop wrong, and you are in trouble. Why risk it if u can avoid it, you will ask. Maybe i just shot too much Velvia in the past... But thank-you for answering. all the best alex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexr Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share #8 Posted November 12, 2006 There are lots of people who will not want to be bothered with raw processing and will buy on the assumption that the camera delivers top quality JPEGs ready for emailing or printing. At most, they will do a bit of cropping but they're not going to get involved in the geeky interests of colour profiles and the rest. Sadly, they will be disappointed because the JPEGs from the camera are nothing to get excited about, the white balance especially is poor. Mark, thank-you for replying. Would you be able to point me towards any sites/threads where i can take a look at some examples of this poor quality? They might fix the poor wb whilst they look at the other issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Posted November 12, 2006 Share #9 Posted November 12, 2006 Does anyone know how fast the camera will save pics when you have it set to save as both Raw and JPEG. If it writes fast enough it would seem that this would best the best of both worlds. From the chart in the instruction manual you can save 93 RAW or 70 RAW+JPEG on a 1GB card. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petermcwerner Posted November 12, 2006 Share #10 Posted November 12, 2006 I was at a Leica dealer today in Geneva, Switzerland (the biggest in town), and he told me they were issued this morning the order by Leica not to sell their demo M8. Deliveries planned for next week will be rescheduled until a solution is found. He was very angry at Leica for reasons different than what we are discussing on this forum: 1. He insisted on the bad image quality of JPEG: under-exposures and WB. Any cheap P/S would do better than the M8. When he showed me his shots, I had to agree completely. This had never occurred to me, as I have been shooting RAW exclusively. 2. When I mentioned that there were very easy work-arounds for these problems in post-processing, he said most of his customers did not have the knowledge to shoot RAW and post-process and would not want to sit in front of a computer screen to do so. What they wanted (that is my interpretation of what he said) would amount to a P/S that would give the best results they could expect from the Leica glass in JPEG straight out of the box. He himself had made all his test shots in JPEG and rejected the camera on this issue alone. His customer base must be very different from the majority on this forum. While JPEG might not be interesting for the majority of us in this forum, I think it is essential that Leica gets this right. As Mark said, there are lots of people who would buy on the assumption that the camera delivers top quality JPEGs ready for emailing or printing.. After all, they are used to that from the film Ms. For this dealer, they seem to be the vast majority and I wonder how the situation looks in other markets. If Leica neglects to improve in this segment, they will lose a significant part of their possible income from the M8. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexr Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share #11 Posted November 12, 2006 Does anyone know how fast the camera will save pics when you have it set to save as both Raw and JPEG. If it writes fast enough it would seem that this would best the best of both worlds. From the chart in the instruction manual you can save 93 RAW or 70 RAW+JPEG on a 1GB card. i would expect the m8, like other cameras to produce raw-jpg combinations where the jpg is highly compressed. Not really usable... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted November 12, 2006 Share #12 Posted November 12, 2006 Alex - I see your point on the JPEG / transparency - hadn't seen it that way - andalso accept that the M8 is going to have to provide good, white balanced JPEGS if it's going to compete with the 1D series as a serious reportage camera... Best Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Posted November 12, 2006 Share #13 Posted November 12, 2006 The way I read the instruction book there are 5 ways to save your photos. RAW-DNG JPG - Fine JPG - Basic ( Normal Compression ) RAW-DNG + JPG - Fine RAW-DNG + JPG - Basic So if I am reading it right there is no difference in the quality of the JPG file between saving JPG alone or JPG+DNG. The only downside would be either the time it takes to save to card or that you get fewer photos per card. I am willing to live with fewer shots per card but not sure about the lag time ( if any ) of writing to card. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimF Posted November 12, 2006 Share #14 Posted November 12, 2006 Mark, Then, frankly, why would anybody spend £3,000 on a camera if they only want Jpegs? There are plenty of far cheaper options around. The only answer to the rhetorical question above is that such a person would buy an M8 for pose value alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 12, 2006 Share #15 Posted November 12, 2006 The way I read the instruction book there are 5 ways to save your photos. RAW-DNG JPG - Fine JPG - Basic ( Normal Compression ) RAW-DNG + JPG - Fine RAW-DNG + JPG - Basic So if I am reading it right there is no difference in the quality of the JPG file between saving JPG alone or JPG+DNG. The only downside would be either the time it takes to save to card or that you get fewer photos per card. I am willing to live with fewer shots per card but not sure about the lag time ( if any ) of writing to card. Don't quote me on this, but it did seem that the RAW+JPEG files di take longer to write to the card. That probably why my dealer "helpful" switched it back to JPEG only when my back was turned thus ruining my test shot sequence. Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterv Posted November 12, 2006 Share #16 Posted November 12, 2006 my dealer "helpful" switched it back to JPEG only when my back was turned thus ruining my test shot sequence. He did? That isn't very polite, to say the least... Anyway, I read in another tread you were going to do some tests today. How were your imprissions? What do you think? Will this hava a happy ending? Cheers, Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Posted November 12, 2006 Share #17 Posted November 12, 2006 Mark,Then, frankly, why would anybody spend £3,000 on a camera if they only want Jpegs? There are plenty of far cheaper options around. The only answer to the rhetorical question above is that such a person would buy an M8 for pose value alone. I plan on shooting RAW for myself !! However when I go to conventions/concerts I don't have time to process RAW files untill I get home. What I want is to be able to burn the JPGs to CDs or DVDs and give them away while still at the convention. Or pop them in an email. I am just trying to make things easier for myself thats all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexr Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share #18 Posted November 12, 2006 The way I read the instruction book there are 5 ways to save your photos. RAW-DNG JPG - Fine JPG - Basic ( Normal Compression ) RAW-DNG + JPG - Fine RAW-DNG + JPG - Basic So if I am reading it right there is no difference in the quality of the JPG file between saving JPG alone or JPG+DNG. The only downside would be either the time it takes to save to card or that you get fewer photos per card. I am willing to live with fewer shots per card but not sure about the lag time ( if any ) of writing to card. If this is so, it is good news indeed. Best of both worlds then! Very nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 12, 2006 Share #19 Posted November 12, 2006 He did? That isn't very polite, to say the least... Anyway, I read in another tread you were going to do some tests today. How were your imprissions? What do you think? Will this hava a happy ending? Cheers, Peter The point is JPEGS are useless for making the RAW color profiles that am trying to construct. So I am begging for DNG files that have a color chart and black problem materials in the picture. rvaubel@yahoo.com Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ross Posted November 12, 2006 Share #20 Posted November 12, 2006 Alex, In my getting to know the camera stuff, I have been shooting some JPEGs. Actually they are better than I expected and I have been having good results with AWB....go figure. Anyway, I did some color chart shots to see what the in-camera B&W gray scale response looked like. These are at ISO 320, -2/3 EV, outside-over cast sky (cloudy) AWB. I also tried a N0.2 yellow and No. 11 green filter and didn't care for the results. From PP on a color to mono conversion, a No. 61 green might be a good option. The color chart does not have a good light yellow gradient, so it all looks the same. A very rough test, but it will give you some idea. Bob Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/9070-m8-jpeg-quality/?do=findComment&comment=92036'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.