bob_h Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Can the K10d be set to shoot both a raw and jpeg image at the same time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a few images Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Yes - RAW + JPG setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morgan lee Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Yes. Press Menu (upper left hand corner on the back) With your directional pad, go to the Rec. Mode tab. Scroll down to File Format. To the right you will have three choices: JPEG, RAW, and RAW+ Select RAW+ and your camera will produce both a RAW file and a JPEG file with each exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william-porter Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 You can do it, but I have never figured out why you would want to. Why DO you want to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainvisions Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markus maurer Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Could come handy to quickly print out some JPG's on location without the need for manual in camera conversion from raw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spider71ko Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I like the JPEG + RAW setting because I take a lot of pics and it is quicker to view JPEG to view good and bad ones. The bad ones I can immediately discard. The good ones I can open in RAW and work with. If I shot only RAW, it would take much longer to view the photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a few images Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I can see the value to RAW + JPG as I sometimes shoot JPG mode then press the RAW, especially if I've changed the processing settings from default, I find it nice to have a RAW capture and to also see what the over-saturated, over-sharpened version looks like too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william-porter Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 <p>Quoth "spider seventy one": </p> <blockquote><em>"I like the JPEG + RAW setting because I take a lot of pics and it is quicker to view JPEG to view good and bad ones. The bad ones I can immediately discard. The good ones I can open in RAW and work with. If I shot only RAW, it would take much longer to view the photos.</em></blockquote> <p>Hmmm. Not my experience. I'm an event photographer and I too take lots of photos. Using Lightroom, I can make my first pass through the photos very quickly, in order to identify the ones I want to mark for deletion in particular. I can't imagine it being any faster with jpegs. I'm willing to concede that there might be some slight savings in time -- a jpeg might load half a second more quickly than the raw image (although actually I think Lightroom is actually displaying its own jpeg preview). But then I have the problem of dealing with all those jpegs, not to mention the fact that I'll get about 30% fewer photos on an SD card than I do now. </p> <p>Not knocking the idea. Just don't have a personal need for this feature.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mc2imaging Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I used to use RAW+ when I started shooting RAW, but after we started using Aperture, I quit. Now, If I need to make a quick print of something I just shot while out and about (very rare), I do the in camera development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainvisions Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 This is one of those things where i say, if you know your equipment or software you can make it work faster/better. With faststone image viewer the K1OD DNG used to take forever to load even though the ist D images loaded almost instantly but i changed some settings and WHAM BAM instant gratification. I'd recommend playing with the settings of your image viewer, RAW+JPEG with Pentax in camera convert option is redundant, and just means you have 2X as many files to manage. As far as the difference in quality, the JPEGs converted in camera from several reports I've seen are on par with original hi qual 10MP JPEGS straight from the camera. So for that instant gratification print you shouldn't be in too much of a bind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santalum1 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 When RAW+ you can set jpeg to lowest quality. When doing preliminary estimation on average computer it saves more than half a sec. difference. And dont forget that lot of people dont change their PC or Mac every year. On my home PC XP I can view files rather quickly in any browser, but on my 3 years old Mac G4 it becomes too irritating to run through newly taken shots in RAW. Another reason to have RAW+ is when you shoot some event and want quickly share pics by mail - it takes time to convert it from RAW. With low quality jpeg you just send it as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morgan lee Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 To add to Justin's point: If you do not have FastStone Image Viewer, <a href="http://www.faststone.org/">get it.</a> At least, I highly recommend it. It's free and it is an excellent "light table" to look at your RAW files and convert them as you please. I found that getting this program early on in my use of the K10D eliminated the need to photograph in RAW and JPEG and just use RAW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spider71ko Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 William Porter, I'll give it a try. I have a lot to learn. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a few images Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Matthew, I'm not convinced that a simple, +3 on the saturation in the K10D menu and corresponding JPG output is as easily duplicated in Aperture.. Check it out. It seems to me that the Saturation levels in Aperture are independent of the RAW file and don't follow the same lines as sharpen. Just my experience though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carol_hill Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 <p>Ok.. I've had a 10kD for about a year now. I was under the impresstion that the RAW files took up so much space that you'd need so many extra SD cards to handle your shots. Ex: Shooting a wedding.. So, I've just always used the JPEG 4 star setting.<br> Is there really any need to use RAW? I don't understand why you'd need it. Guess I don't really understand the difference. <br> I've always used film so this digital is all new ball game to me. Can anyone shed some light on the difference for me? I really don't seem to ever find any problems with download or ajustments to my prints.<br> Another thing I have not any real idea of is photo size. I know I can print 16x20... but, what happens with a print any bigger??? Some of the photos look soft as I enlarge them on my computer, yet I can print a perfectly fine 16x20... This is confusing for me. Can anyone explain this for me also?<br> Thanks<br> CHill</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now