Ruchai,
The purpose behind this thread was not to say how members should be working, but to try and put forward unbiased information. I have seen a lot on the net that RAW is the only way to go. Generally these views are not supported with pictures to demonstrate the reasoning, rather authors use the fall back position that JPG is for amateurs and if you care about photography RAW is the only way to go.
While I do not deny that RAW allows you to manipulate the image for exposure and white balance the question here is. Is RAW the magic bullet it is porported to be as far as pure image quality is concerned.
A lot of people getting their first camera may not have the latest ALL POWERFULL pc and may be like me on 800hz. 128mb ram. Under those circumstances RAW can be a positive pain in the neck !!
We know that different camera's have different processing algoithms and some may well produce better files from RAW whilest others are cabable of excellent JPG's. These test have shown that with a D100 and well exposed image there is NO benefit to RAW. On the other hand I have read that the D200 does not process JPG's as well in camera, but with no pictures to support that statement. The D50 on the other hand is reckoned to produce superb JPG's straight from the camera.
So if we can get rid of the hype and show with images, readers of the thread can make a better judgement as to which method would best suit them.
Don
|