Re: Canon 7D S-RAW/M-RAW Question

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Paul Furman, Sep 13, 2009.

  1. Paul Furman

    Paul Furman Guest

    Tyler wrote:
    > S-RAW/M-RAW


    What's the difference between these two?
    Paul Furman, Sep 13, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Furman

    OldBoy Guest

    "Paul Furman" <> wrote in message
    news:h8hvta$f16$-september.org...
    > 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, Sep 13, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Furman

    BF Guest

    OldBoy wrote:
    > "Paul Furman" <> wrote in message
    > news:h8hvta$f16$-september.org...
    >> 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, Sep 14, 2009
    #3
  4. Paul Furman

    Ray Fischer Guest

    BF <> wrote:
    >OldBoy wrote:
    >> "Paul Furman" <> wrote in message
    >> news:h8hvta$f16$-september.org...
    >>> 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
    Ray Fischer, Sep 14, 2009
    #4
  5. 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 15, 2009
    #5
    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. Editor  www.nutritionsoftware.org

    How raw is RAW format?

    Editor www.nutritionsoftware.org, Dec 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    549
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Dec 22, 2003
  2. Al Dykes

    Canon G9 RAW, same as Canon 300d RAW?

    Al Dykes, Nov 11, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    470
    John Bean
    Nov 12, 2007
  3. sobriquet

    canon ps sx1 raw -> adobe camera raw

    sobriquet, Apr 25, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    2,189
    jimbok
    May 10, 2009
  4. John McWilliams

    Re: Canon 7D S-RAW/M-RAW Question

    John McWilliams, Sep 2, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,162
    John A.
    Sep 4, 2009
  5. Arun

    Re: Canon 7D S-RAW/M-RAW Question

    Arun, Sep 3, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    385
Loading...

Share This Page