Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 06 Jul 2017 (Thursday) 21:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

S/M/L Raw quality

 
battletone
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:16 |  #1

Is there any difference in sharpness or perceived noise when shooting in Medium or Small Raw? Do the photo buckets basically sum together to generate the file acting like larger ones on lower MP sensors? Is it like downsampling in post? Whats the deal?


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2733
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:22 |  #2

I'll read along. I've never used any but full size raw and full size jpg.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
battletone
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:26 |  #3

I guess the most important thing, is there any drop in quality at all from full size downsampling instead. With the 30MP I would rather just shoot a lot of stuff at Medium if its all the same.


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2733
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:29 |  #4

Does that mean you are happy paying for 30MP and only using 18, or whatever? I don't understand. My thinking is capture all the data I can when I release the shutter. I can throw some away later, if I don't need it. Doing it your way, you can't go back and add data after the fact.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,590 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4996
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
Post edited over 1 year ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:35 |  #5

battletone wrote in post #18395839 (external link)
Is there any difference in sharpness or perceived noise when shooting in Medium or Small Raw? Do the photo buckets basically sum together to generate the file acting like larger ones on lower MP sensors? Is it like downsampling in post? Whats the deal?

The images are simply downsized using one of many downsizing algorithms. There is no binning of values, or anything like that. The only benefit you gain is smaller files and faster transfers, but a smaller version of the full-sized raw. You would get better results shooting large and downsizing it later. 3rd party tools are much better at downsizing than Canon software in-camera.

If you don't ever crop out parts of your images or generate large prints, then smaller raw file types might be useful. It is something I will never do personally.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
battletone
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 1 year ago by battletone. (3 edits in all)
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:38 |  #6

Bassat wrote in post #18395855 (external link)
Does that mean you are happy paying for 30MP and only using 18, or whatever? I don't understand. My thinking is capture all the data I can when I release the shutter. I can throw some away later, if I don't need it. Doing it your way, you can't go back and add data after the fact.

Sort of short sighted all or nothing, no? So a landscape or a model, yes, capture everything. A family outting for 4x6 or 8x10 prints.... why 30MP? I don't need it. Most family photo shoots I do I won't need 30 and would rather shoot at Medium if I can.

So yes, I am happy to pay for 30MP and use it when I want it.


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,590 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4996
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
Post edited over 1 year ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:42 |  #7

battletone wrote in post #18395865 (external link)
Sort of short sighted all or nothing, no? So a landscape or a model, yes, capture everything. A family outting for 4x6 prints.... why 30MP? I don't need it.

So yes, I am happy to pay for 30MP and use it when I want it.

I guess I wouldn't know why it matters to keep track of the file sizes? Why go through the hassle of changing sizes each time? Invariably you find yourself in a situation where you wish later you had checked settings, because you shot at small raw and wanted large raw. There are 3 main advantages and 1 minor advantage to shooting the full resolution the camera can offer.

- Easier to manage noise when using the full sensor results and downsizing later after post processing
- Easier to crop out small sections and still have enough resolution for a 4x6
- Easier to process out and print very large prints, especially if any cropping occurs
- There might be times that you wished you had the full resolution later due to family events like a death, it has happened to me.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
battletone
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 1 year ago by battletone. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 06, 2017 21:45 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #8

I appreciate the concern, could we keep this on the topic of quality of file format rather than two peoples value for the usefulness of a process.


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,590 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4996
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
Post edited over 1 year ago by TeamSpeed. (4 edits in all)
     
Jul 06, 2017 22:12 |  #9

battletone wrote in post #18395869 (external link)
I appreciate the concern, could we keep this on the topic of quality of file format rather than two peoples value for the usefulness of a process.

The answer has already been given, there is no advantage to IQ of the image if you downsize in the camera. If you downsize the large image down to the smaller size outside of the camera, your results could very well be better, so there are advantages to staying with the large file sizes.

Also, my answer before is very pertinent as well, and has nothing to do with process or workflow from a subjective nature. All of these answers address the impacts of IQ from 4 different perspectives.

- Easier to manage noise when using the full sensor results and downsizing later after post processing
- Easier to crop out small sections and still have enough resolution for a 4x6
- Easier to process out and print very large prints, especially if any cropping occurs
- There might be times that you wished you had the full resolution later due to family events like a death, it has happened to me.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
battletone
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 1 year ago by battletone. (4 edits in all)
     
Jul 06, 2017 22:22 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #10

Correct, but I never turn over even 20MP 6D files to clients. I turn over 2000/2400x3000. I rarely need more for most things and I rarely crop that much. It would work well for me if its 99%. I just don't want to work with 30MP for a lot of things.


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Monkey ­ moss
Senior Member
Avatar
983 posts
Likes: 580
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Bristol, England
     
Jul 07, 2017 01:23 |  #11

I used to use mraw partly for the reasons you say but mainly due to my computer not handling the larger files very well. Now I've got a decent machine and lots of memory cards etc I'll only use full res for the other reasons set out above.

I've also seen a few articles that show some nasty greens and noise coming in when you push the shadows of mraw files.

Unless your computer is slowing you down, i'd suggest using full res.


Jon :cool::oops::D:cry::confused::(:lol:
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mkkaczy
Senior Member
Avatar
321 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1331
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Poland/Ireland
     
Jul 07, 2017 02:58 |  #12

All my wildlife pictures because some of them are printed in larger formats I take only in full RAW.
Any events, sport pictures that will end up on Facebook in mRAW. Main reason is less space on disk and quicker import in LR.


http://500px.com/mkkac​zy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bildeb0rg
Goldmember
Avatar
2,776 posts
Gallery: 221 photos
Likes: 977
Joined Oct 2006
Location: north yorks
     
Jul 07, 2017 03:54 |  #13

I only ever tried this once when an event was oversubscribed and I was running out of card space. Results were awful, never again, but this was with a 10mp 1D mkIII. Newer bodies might fare better?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GammyKnee
Member
186 posts
Gallery: 53 photos
Likes: 736
Joined Feb 2015
Location: Irvine, Scotland
Post edited over 1 year ago by GammyKnee. (3 edits in all)
     
Jul 07, 2017 06:05 |  #14

There was a lot of interest in MRAW when the 5DS/R came out; people were looking for a way to get the enhanced features of the new bodies without having to deal with huge RAW files all the time.

All the various discussions usually arrived at the same place: you lose more than just pixels if you choose to shoot in MRAW or SRAW, especially if you're going to push the files in post processing. Color casts and general color inaccuracy are the usual complaints, e.g.

https://www.slrlounge.​com …dynamic-range-comparison/ (external link)

That's not a very scientific test and much depends on the processing software you use, but it's representative of the problems you'll see once you start searching in earnest.

Whether this still holds true for the newest sensors (5D4, 6DII) I don't know, but the bottom line is this: don't just assume that MRAW and SRAW are simply lower res versions of conventional RAW. Try them out on your bodies, using your processing software and style to make sure they really are good enough for your purposes.


Formerly Beanie's Dad (account lost in forum update)
Gear: 5D II & IV, assorted lenses, Canon & Yongnuo flash

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by mcoren.
     
Jul 07, 2017 07:17 |  #15

battletone wrote in post #18395869 (external link)
I appreciate the concern, could we keep this on the topic of quality of file format rather than two peoples value for the usefulness of a process.

The answer to your original question is inherently subjective. Any time you downsample, you are going to lose information. That *will* affect IQ in some way. Whether that is noticeable or significant depends on you.

The only way you are going to get an answer to your question that is meaningful to you is to try it yourself. Do some S/M/L tests in the types of situations where you typically shoot and examine the results to see if the difference is acceptable to you or not.

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,665 views & 4 likes for this thread
S/M/L Raw quality
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Empiricist
919 guests, 277 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.