Canon 7D S-RAW/M-RAW Question

"Tyler" wrote in message
...
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...

Alternatively, any links to some good info would also be appreciated.

(BTW, it's not so much the RAW file sizes I'm concerned about, it's
mainly the size of the TIFF working files).

If you're converting to TIFF, you can downsize there.

But are you considering a camera with this feature, or do you have one
where you might be able to see the results?


No, I am considering a new body ATM.

You made a good point about resizing the TIFF. Although, once it's there,
it'll be hard to throw away data. Yeah, I know, it's a psychological
thing.

The why are you considering throwing away data at the time you take the pic?

Ron

"Ron Recer" wrote in message
...

Alternatively, any links to some good info would also be appreciated.

(BTW, it's not so much the RAW file sizes I'm concerned about, it's
mainly the size of the TIFF working files).

If you're converting to TIFF, you can downsize there.

But are you considering a camera with this feature, or do you have one
where you might be able to see the results?


No, I am considering a new body ATM.

You made a good point about resizing the TIFF. Although, once it's
there, it'll be hard to throw away data. Yeah, I know, it's a
psychological thing.


The why are you considering throwing away data at the time you take the
pic?

Ron


I seldom have any need for 18MP images and therefore is a waste of space for
me when summing up the original RAW image size, the TIFF working file (incl
layers) and output file. Of course, I understand that some people do need
18MP.

So, this is why I'm currently looking into the advantages/disadvantages of
shooting M-RAW. By shooting in full RAW, once working on the full res image
and getting the image exactly how you want it, it will then be difficult to
downsize it and throw away data. As I said, it's technically a
psychological thing, but also not a smooth workflow scenario for those who
don't need the resolution.

I'm just thinking ahead. I'm not ruling out just shooting full RAW, just
exploring the possibilities of M-RAW. In fact, looking at the button layout
or the 7D, instead of the dedicated RAW/RAW + JPEG button, I wonder if a
toggle between RAW/M-RAW would be more useful. In real life, I think the
photographer would know in advance whether he/she wanted to shoot RAW, or
RAW + JPEG, so seems a strange choice of button, especially as Canon are
usually quite conservative with adding buttons to the body.

frank wrote:
On Sep 2, 5:20 pm, Me wrote:

Learn how to hold a camera and you don't need to rely on VR.

Thank you for that. I've been practising for 40 years now, and I don't
think I'm going to get better at it, unfortunately, the reverse is
probably going to be true from now on.
One or two stops better is always going to be an advantage, except when
using a tripod. "Rely on" is perhaps wrong. I /want/ a 300mm VR lens.

And if you really need a 300mm lens, don't buy a 70-300.

I've already said that.

Ask your mum for a bar of soap and don't use the word **** until
you're 16.

Why not? It's in the bible - though perhaps not in sanitised American
editions.

Tyler wrote:
S-RAW/M-RAW

What's the difference between these two?

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
...
Tyler wrote:
S-RAW/M-RAW

What's the difference between these two?


M-RAW: approx. 10.10 megapixels (3888 x 2592)
S-RAW : approx. 4.50 megapixels (2592 x 1728)

OldBoy wrote:
"Paul Furman" wrote in message
...
Tyler wrote:
S-RAW/M-RAW

What's the difference between these two?


M-RAW: approx. 10.10 megapixels (3888 x 2592)
S-RAW : approx. 4.50 megapixels (2592 x 1728)
What is the point of having a 18MP camera and not use all 18 MP? I don't
get it. Why not just buy a 6 or 10 that would be much cheaper?

BF wrote:
OldBoy wrote:
"Paul Furman" wrote in message
...
Tyler wrote:
S-RAW/M-RAW

What's the difference between these two?


M-RAW: approx. 10.10 megapixels (3888 x 2592)
S-RAW : approx. 4.50 megapixels (2592 x 1728)
What is the point of having a 18MP camera and not use all 18 MP? I don't
get it. Why not just buy a 6 or 10 that would be much cheaper?

What's the point of having an f2.8 lens if you're just going to stop
it down to f11?

M-RAW is faster and uses less memory. That's why.

--
Ray Fischer

"BF" wrote in message ...

S-RAW/M-RAW

What's the difference between these two?


M-RAW: approx. 10.10 megapixels (3888 x 2592)
S-RAW : approx. 4.50 megapixels (2592 x 1728)


What is the point of having a 18MP camera and not use all 18 MP? I don't
get it. Why not just buy a 6 or 10 that would be much cheaper?


Because Canon don't make a 6 or 10MP 7D. Sure there's a 1D-II and 1D-III if
you like carrying a breeze block around with you.

BF wrote:
OldBoy wrote:

M-RAW: approx. 10.10 megapixels (3888 x 2592)
S-RAW : approx. 4.50 megapixels (2592 x 1728)

What is the point of having a 18MP camera and not use all 18 MP? I don't
get it. Why not just buy a 6 or 10 that would be much cheaper?

The same point as setting a camera producing JPEGs to lower
resolutions, except you still have the full versability of RAW.

If you always have enough storage (mobile and backup and archival)
and computing power and memory (larger images need more of both)
and your lenses actually resolve more than the 10.1 or 4.5 MPix
and you cannot be sure you won't need some image at 18 MPix,
there is no reason at all for M-RAW or S-RAW.

Fortunately, the consumer gets the choice, since not all consumers
have the same needs.

-Wolfgang