Canon 300D (Digital Rebel) Incomplete manual??

[TechKnowBabble]

I've had my DRebel for not quite a week yet, and I couldn't figure out why the raw setting wasn't listed in my choices. I didn't realize until today that the camera has to be set to P and then you can select RAW from the list. I thought I was seriously losing it. Since I haven't looked at any photos yet taken with RAW setting, will I notice a large difference from the large setting? I am hoping it eliminates some noise / artifacts.

Nikki

[Tom W]

I've had my DRebel for not quite a week yet, and I couldn't figure out why the raw setting wasn't listed in my choices. I didn't realize until today that the camera has to be set to P and then you can select RAW from the list. I thought I was seriously losing it. Since I haven't looked at any photos yet taken with RAW setting, will I notice a large difference from the large setting? I am hoping it eliminates some noise / artifacts.

Nikki

Actually, I think you are also able to select RAW mode in Av, Tv, and Manual modes.

If I'm not mistaken, which happens often enough.

[dn7elson]

I couldn't figure out why the raw setting wasn't listed in my choices.

Take a look at the Table on page 122 of the Rebel manual. It shows where RAW is a setting option and where it isn't. Essentially Auto and Basic Zone do not have RAW as an option. All of the Creative Zone choices do.

[Jim_T]

Actually, if you look...... Aside from the ability to choose RAW, there are a bunch of other options you have in the creative modes that you don't have in the fully auto modes... You can't choose exposure compensation, bracketing, fill flash, white balance, ISO etc etc..

When you shoot in the auto modes, you're handing pretty well all control over to the camera.

As far as shooting RAW.. There won't be a big visual difference between find JPEG and RAW.. But.. You'll have FAR more flexibility when editing your shots..

You can do things like change white balance after the fact and you can convert to 16 bit TIFF for editing in 16 bit mode to name a few..

[theoldmoose]

To say nothing of the fact that the RAW file captures 12-bit pixels, instead of the 8-bit ones in the JPEGs. Gives you an extra 4 stops of exposure range, right out of the gate.

I use RAW all the time, since I'm not an accomplished enough photographer to nail exposure right on the barrel every time (and frequently don't get the chance to review the histogram and retake a 'one in a lifetime' snapshot). RAW has let me salvage some otherwise badly exposed (especially with Canon's much-vaunted ETTL flash 'guessing') shots.

[ron chappel]

"Four stops extra exposure range"
That can't be right.Everything i've ever heard or read refers to one stop extra with raw.I wish it WAS 4 stops! :)

[theoldmoose]

Why do you think that you can 'push' or 'pull' an exposure when developing a RAW image by plus or minus two stops (for a total of four stops)?

You don't think those extra bits just come out of thin air do you?

For every bit you add to an A/D conversion, you add a binary decade of values. Also, an F-stop corresponds (conveniently enough) to a doubling or halving in luminance value. If you go from 8-bits to 12-bits you gain 4-bits, or 4 binary decades of range, or 4 f-stops.

[PacAce]

Why do you think that you can 'push' or 'pull' an exposure when developing a RAW image by plus or minus two stops (for a total of four stops)?

You don't think those extra bits just come out of thin air do you?

For every bit you add to an A/D conversion, you add a binary decade of values. Also, an F-stop corresponds (conveniently enough) to a doubling or halving in luminance value. If you go from 8-bits to 12-bits you gain 4-bits, or 4 binary decades of range, or 4 f-stops.

I think you are mistaken about this. Using 12 bits instead of 8 just gives you more granularity in defining the levels between black and white. It doesn't extend the black or the white ends.

[theoldmoose]

That depends on what the relationship is to the saturation points of the sensor. I've oversimplified, I suppose, but the idea still remains that if you want to express a range of 2**n values, doing it with 12 bits vs 8 bits gives you much more latitude to express those values.

Now, whether or not a given sensor is capable of being 'swung' over a 10-stop (or more) range is another matter entirely. It would appear, though, from experience with RAW captures, that there is more top/bottom range in a RAW file containing 12-bit data, than an 8-bit JPEG from the same sensor.

I'd really like to just exactly how far a given sensor can be pushed before it saturates or degrades into the noise floor. Unfortunately, even RAW files in Canon cameras have been massaged somewhat, with some noise reduction and in-camera sharpening, that you don't really get a true reading of the sensor's capabilities. Some of the 1-series DSLRS, though, can output 16-bit TIFF files, and I've been told that they are truly raw, with no in-camera processing whatever, except de-Bayerization.