nikon d200 vs d70 and photoshop vs nikon capture

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Larry, Jun 22, 2006.

  1. Larry

    Larry Guest

    I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?
    Aside from the obvious hardware benefits offered by the D200 vs the
    D70, this alleged issue between the camera and photoshop re Nikon raw
    being resolved in the D200 would be very compelling. I would
    appreciate any clarification on this issue. Thanks.
     
    Larry, Jun 22, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On 21 Jun 2006 18:34:59 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "Larry"
    <> wrote:

    >I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    >RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    >photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    >recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    >the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    >camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?


    Having both I don't know wtf he's talking about.
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Jun 22, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Larry

    tomm42 Guest

    Larry wrote:
    > I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    > RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    > photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    > recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    > the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    > camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?
    > Aside from the obvious hardware benefits offered by the D200 vs the
    > D70, this alleged issue between the camera and photoshop re Nikon raw
    > being resolved in the D200 would be very compelling. I would
    > appreciate any clarification on this issue. Thanks.


    No free lunch, you still have to process RAW files out of a D200. RAW
    files by definition are image files that save space by leaving out the
    instruction set for making the image (like undeveloped film) so you
    need the software to bring the pixels together.
    I don't have Nikon Capture so I use Photoshop CS2, I'm liking the pics
    I get from this combination, but I'll probably buy the new Nik Nikon
    Capture when it comes out. RAW files in a D200 are quite a bit larger
    than from a D70 15.6mb uncompressed, 7-12mb compressed.
    I can't stand the viewfinder in the D70, just that sold me on the D200,
    it is the difference from overcast to a sunny day.

    Tom
     
    tomm42, Jun 22, 2006
    #3
  4. Larry

    jom Guest

    use jpeg

    for the 1 percent better quality, RAW is too much hassle
     
    jom, Jun 22, 2006
    #4
  5. Larry

    Bigguy Guest

    Utter nonsense ;-)

    Some shots can be 'rescued' if shot in RAW.
    Many shots can be greatly improved due to RAWs larger exposure latitude.

    It's not purely about 'quality' it's also about flexibility in the digital
    'darkroom'.

    Also once an image is .jpeg encoded there is no going back - it has .jpeg
    artifacts encoded in it. Any editing or resaving will cause further
    artifacts...
    Using RAW and a lossless format (.tiff etc.) maintains maximum possible
    image quality.
    RAW is your 'negative' and offers the maximum available latitude for
    adjustment.

    If all your shots are perfect and beyond improvement then stick to .jpeg...
    if you want to tweak use RAW + .tiff / .psd.

    RAW can be seen as a hassle but I prefer it to leaving everything to a
    camera's automatics... YMMV

    If you are shooting 'snaps' and only need small .jpegs then avoid RAW ;-)

    Guy

    "jom" <> wrote in message
    news:-sjc.supernews.net...
    > use jpeg
    >
    > for the 1 percent better quality, RAW is too much hassle
     
    Bigguy, Jun 22, 2006
    #5
  6. "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    > RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    > photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    > recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    > the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    > camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?


    It sounds like that retailer hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking
    about. Obviously the whole purpose of shooting in RAW (with any camera) is
    to get the original raw image data out of the camera so you can do with it
    what you will, not image data that's already been converted to something
    else.
     
    Neil Harrington, Jun 22, 2006
    #6
  7. Larry

    Roy G Guest

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    > RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    > photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    > recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    > the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    > camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?
    > Aside from the obvious hardware benefits offered by the D200 vs the
    > D70, this alleged issue between the camera and photoshop re Nikon raw
    > being resolved in the D200 would be very compelling. I would
    > appreciate any clarification on this issue. Thanks.


    Hi.

    There does seem to be a certain amount of confusion inside this salesman's
    head, and a lot of it seems to have exited via his mouth.

    Any camera which can output in any format other than RAW, (and that is every
    camera I have ever come across), must be capabable of "In Camera"
    processing of RAW. That is hardly new, and it is certainly not an
    advantage.

    You do not have any control over that "In Camera" processing.

    Working in RAW means that you will be able to control the way the RAWs are
    converted to other formats, and that is where the benefit of using RAW lies.
    These user controllable conversions will be done in some sort of Editing
    Software after the image has been downloaded.

    I also do not quite understand your remark about working in RAW and
    Printing.

    Surely you only start your workflow with a RAW File. It needs to have been
    converted to a Tif, Psd or even Jpeg, before you can Print it. So you are
    not really printing from a RAW file, but you are printing from a file which
    was a RAW.

    Roy G
     
    Roy G, Jun 22, 2006
    #7
  8. Larry

    cjcampbell Guest

    Larry wrote:
    > I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    > RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    > photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    > recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    > the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    > camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?
    > Aside from the obvious hardware benefits offered by the D200 vs the
    > D70, this alleged issue between the camera and photoshop re Nikon raw
    > being resolved in the D200 would be very compelling. I would
    > appreciate any clarification on this issue. Thanks.


    All cameras have to process raw files in order to display them. That
    does not mean they make permanent changes to the files in the camera.
    Nikon raw files are not truly raw; they are processed to some extent
    and compressed. But they do store more information than jpeg files.

    All external editors also have to process raw files in order to work
    with them. No surprise there; they have to process a jpeg or tiff, too.
    Most editors have some differences how they process raw files.
    Photoshop gives you a lot more creative control, but Capture probably
    comes closer to processing the files the way Nikon thinks they should
    be processed.

    Neither D200 nor the D70 would have an advantage in this area.
     
    cjcampbell, Jun 23, 2006
    #8
  9. Larry

    k-man Guest

    The RAW conversion? I don't understand. RAW conversion to WHAT? RAW
    to JPG? Or else maybe the guy was just saying that the D200 processes
    colors and such differently than does the D70. Both cameras offer
    options that allow you to fine-tune the output you get from the camera.
    If you find your pics are all coming out under sat'd, then you can
    bump up the sat., for example. Those are just options that help save
    you time from doing post-processing (out-of-camera) work.


    Larry wrote:
    > I currently use the Nikon D70 and have generally found when working in
    > RAW that printing from nikon capture produces better results than from
    > photoshop in the absense of exposure or color correction work. I was
    > recently told by a photo retailer that this would not be an issue with
    > the D200 as the RAW conversion in the D200 now takes place in the
    > camera as opposed to the external software product. Is this true?
    > Aside from the obvious hardware benefits offered by the D200 vs the
    > D70, this alleged issue between the camera and photoshop re Nikon raw
    > being resolved in the D200 would be very compelling. I would
    > appreciate any clarification on this issue. Thanks.
     
    k-man, Jun 23, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    392
  2. ThomasH
    Replies:
    33
    Views:
    851
    Philip Homburg
    Nov 2, 2005
  3. Replies:
    14
    Views:
    873
    Todd Gibbs
    Jan 10, 2006
  4. George Dingwall

    Nikon D200 and Photoshop CS2 / Bridge

    George Dingwall, Jan 21, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    921
    LuvLatins
    Nov 30, 2006
  5. hely0123
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,156
    hely0123
    Oct 30, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page