D100 and NEF vs JPEG

[AntonioC]

Hi all,

 

excuse the redundant question, but it's something I'd like to have

clear.

I've been using both Jpeg and Nef format with my D100, and at 100%

magnification, on screen, I fail to see an inherent advantage in the

nef vs the jpg. I am lead to think that the real advantage of the nef

is the possibility to finely tune, off camera, parameters which are

embedded by the camera if you shoot jpeg. That's ok. I uploaded some

nefs in photoshop (using the plugin bundled with Nikon View), and I

can only work on the color balance, no sharpening. But the image I

get is fully editable in photoshop, as a 48 bit image. Is it so

different from getting Nikon Capture (or Bibble) or the Adobe plug-in

for photoshop, and working straight on the nef file?

 

ps: the noise advantage of the nef isn't very important for me, as I

never sharpen the image as a whole, just the edges with a mask.

 

Thanks.

[david_walker1]

There are two main benefits of using .nef files. 1) You can apply white balance and sharpening after download so you aren't stuck with one option you chose at exposure time. 2) Color balance, curves and levels can be done on the 12 bit per channel raw data (or 16 bit .tiff) before it's reduced to 8 bit jpeg. There is no resolution advantage if both images are sharpened appropriately.