Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/04/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Apr 5, 2007, at 5:47 PM, Lottermoser George wrote: > Thanks Will (and Henning). My Pleasure, George. > Will, Seeing as you find it functional when shooting RAW - I've > heard that the RAW write time is unacceptably slow. This has not yet bothered me when shooting, but my style tends to be pretty deliberative unless shooting an event, in which case I would definitely use a faster camera. For shooting lifting clouds over the Flatiron mountains last week, the camera seemed responsive for the 20-30 shots I took over about 5 minutes. The results are excellent with a little work in Lightroom. > I also wonder if it's reasonable for a "non-photographer" (my > partner) to shoot RAW. Will she be able to take the card with the > RAW files to the One Hour and have prints made? Not without working > the files - right? Right, unfortunately: At anything over ISO 200 the jpgs are not up to our standards. Having said hat, I believe that most people who shoot for 4 x 6 enlargements - er, prints - only would be hard pressed to see much of the artifacting that is very obvious at 100% on a monitor. And like you, I would be surprised if a Costco or Walgreens type printer would know what to do with any raw file. Canon is, in my experience anyway, probably the best overall at internal jpeg conversion in _consumer_ level cameras. The A620 and A640, IME, are quite good in not blowing out highlights while controlling noise. My 20D on the other hand, does an absolutely miserable job of in- camera jpeg conversion, and therefore languished until I tried it in raw. It became a "whole 'nuther camera" - and a far more useful one - with raw capture. Hope this helps, Will von Dauster