MkIII and JPG quality...

Is there any real difference between the camera coming from the factory @ 8 and you setting it to 10? Aside from file size...?

i'm sure there is some sort of "real" difference, but I wouldn't notice it. The only reason I shoot with jpeg in addition to RAW is for thumbnails and for quick HDRs...because of that, I push the quality down to maybe 5.

If you're looking for quality, just stick with RAW.

Cathpah wrote in post #4054670
If you're looking for quality, just stick with RAW.

I agree, don't trust the jpeg engine in camera. RG (god) seems to back us up on this.

http://www.robgalbrait​h.com …_page.asp?cid=7​-8743-9103

"As per Canon's usual practice, the downloadable full-resolution JPEGs have been generated from CR2s converted in RAW Image Task, Canon's software that closely mimics the camera's internal processing. This means that the files almost certainly look less detailed and more smoothed than if they had been converted in Digital Photo Professional instead. As a result, they're probably not indicative of the level of image clarity the EOS-1Ds Mark III will be capable of. Unless you intend to shoot in-camera JPEGs mostly, in which case the files are likely a very good indicator of what you can expect."

Cheers