3 completely random questions

[clkgtr37]

I have three questions pertaining to Canon digitals that are completely random in nature so here they are.

1. With the D30, I am shooting a wedding and was wondering how much difference there would be if I shot Large Jpeg pictures rather than RAW. If prints are going to be no larger than 8x10, will it matter?

2. I have a 70-200 2.8 IS with a Hoya filter and it won't fit well in it's carrying case the way that it came, however it fit great if I put it in with the lens facing downward (with cap on of course). Is this ok, or am I harming the lens.

3. What is the difference between the Hoya Super HMC Pro 1 UV filters and the Hoya HMC UV filter. I own the second one and haven't seen much difference between having it on the lens and not having it on at all. However if anyone thinks that this is not nearly as good as the Pro HMC, please do tell.


Thank you for your help on these three random questions,
Blair

[jdavis]

Answer to Q. 3:

Super HMC is a 7-layer (both sides) coating, whereas the regular HMC is 2 or 3 layers. The Super HMC is more transmissive (less reflective) and as such less prone to flare.

Super HMC Pro1 is a special version w/ 1mm thick glass. Thinner glass is better.

John

[jadams]

I have the 1D and I've just received a 16" x 20" that I had made from a "Large JPEG". It looks great.

I've printed 8" x 10" off of my S900 photo printer using "Large JPEG" and they look wonderful.

I can't compare them to what using RAW would result in since I haven't had time to print out some new stuff since I've discovered "RAW".

But, as long as your colors are coming out good a "Large JPEG" should be plenty for printing 8" x 10".

According to my 1D manual, the "Large JPEG" is half the size of the RAW. Consider that the compression has to come from someplace, so you are loosing something. Though I honestly don't think you could tell the difference at only an 8" x10".

If you want to be certain, you might want to consider borrowing a laptop if you don't have one. You could keep in in your car or a room somewhere, shoot RAW, and just dump to the laptop a few times when your card gets full. That way at least you won't be second guessing yourself about shooting in JPEG.

I just got my 1D, so I haven't done too many projects in digital. But for the ones I have done, I kept my laptop in my car in "hibernation". Because I hibernated it, it starts up in only a few seconds, I used downloader (will use PCMCIA reader in the future) to copy the files in only a minute or so, and then hibernated again. Formated the card and shot some more. It only took a short time, barely enough for anyone to notice I was gone.

Jasper

[chris maddock]

clkgtr37 wrote:
I have three questions pertaining to Canon digitals that are completely random in nature so here they are.

1. With the D30, I am shooting a wedding and was wondering how much difference there would be if I shot Large Jpeg pictures rather than RAW. If prints are going to be no larger than 8x10, will it matter?

2. I have a 70-200 2.8 IS with a Hoya filter and it won't fit well in it's carrying case the way that it came, however it fit great if I put it in with the lens facing downward (with cap on of course). Is this ok, or am I harming the lens.


1. Should be OK for 10x8, the files are the same pixel size, so there's no tradeoff there. I would caution you to make certain you have the whitebalance set correctly, since with JPEG what you use is what you get, whereas with RAW you can change it if need be when converting the images.
Also, as soon as you have the files on your PC I would recommend immediately converting them to TIFFs and only editing those - leave the JPEGs completely untouched as your "negatives".

2. Shouldn't be a problem - in fact that's the way I'd prefer to have a lens in a case, so that I can open the case, remove the rear cap and have the camera mount already pointing out ready to use.

3. Sorry, no idea on this one.

HTH
Chris

[mrbobco]

hi...

i'm hardly a pro but would really caution against shooting in jpeg...although it's nice to see the results immediately afterwards...you really can't correct image inconsistencies without affecting the quality (i.e. recompressing a jpeg is inevitable) unless you are going to print from photoshop directly...

plus you have to remember that no matter what...some of the information is lost in compression...you can never get that back...

in answer to your question, tho...it's all subjective (that is to say i can see a difference between 8 x 10 prints as jpeg and linear tiff...it's small but when you are preserving one of a kind images i think it's important)

just a thought...

bob

[Cal Maier]

mrbobco wrote:
recompressing a jpeg is inevitable) unless you are going to print from photoshop directly...



Bob,

Maybe I misread your post but I thought I'd put in my two cents worth anyway.
You don't have to save your P.S. files as jpegs, you can and should save them as .tif files. This way there is no more recompression or information loss. If you shoot the original photo as a large jpeg you can archive from P.S. as a .tif with no further loss of information.

Cal

[mrbobco]

i agree cal...

just an oversight...but regardless of what you save the file as...outside of using genuine fractals you can't expect it to be a smaller file and have no artifacts of compressing again...

ahhh...the minutia :)

you still can't dispute the fact that valuable dynamic and color information is tossed away instantly in a jpeg...

hey...we all want a free ride :) i'd like to know if there would someday be a way for that wonderfully compressed (and lossless) raw file information to be read (and processed) into our computers quicker...i.e. just as fast as a jpeg

(yeah i know i'm dreaming :)

bob

[mrdinh]

i'm awaiting for my D60, but is raw files really that slow compared to jpeg pics?...faster the computer the faster downloads..etc...right?