Small Digicams that shoot RAW: lowest prices and good quality?

My camera (a Canon Powershot G2) will not produce data suitable for RAW--or, at least, will not put it on my computer in other than jpeg form, AFAIK.

I've just this morning been to the Canon local dealer to get a new camera battery.

There, simply out of curiosity, I asked the price range on cameras that *are* RAW capable. Between 700 and 800 U.S. dollars was the answer.

Seriously considering a camera upgrade, so what cameras come to mnd?

Mary

Please try to avoid double posts

Bonsoir Mary
Try before you buy!
I've been quite dissapointed by the poor quality of the Canon G6.
But I'm sure that you'll find valuable comments and advices if you ask within OPF… as you have just did in "Digicams (and other homeless cameras)" other topic.
Please if you double post, always put a link to where you wish to get the answers otherwise we're going to a big mess with crossed unproductive responses... <he said with a smile>

I didn't know that I double-posted.
Please forgive me, Nicolas and everyone.
It's quite apparent that I'm still on my learning curve.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong2/


The G2 is indeed 16 BIT Raw capable.


So I'd go to a new store for help and to look at the latest models! The G2 has 4MP which is prpbably enough for your use. The F2.0 lens is excellent apart form some minor chromatic flaws which only the foolish might blame for lack of great images!

I think this is still one of the best Digicams every made and if it works, why change it?

However, there have been a rash of new cameras with surprisingly now RAW capability ans this is disappointing!

BTW, Mary, you didn't double post, I just moved it as it was a daughter thread!

No, you are not losing your marbles!

Asher

Whew!
Thanks a million! For telling me what happened and for moving the daughter thread. When I replied, I was just trying to reassure the poster to whom I was replying that I took the thread "New Editor, New Noun" seriously, also.

Then I started wandering and digressing--as usual. <rueful smile>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong2/
The G2 is indeed 16 BIT Raw capable.

Click to expand...

I had somehow gotten the idea that it was not. I argued with the store clerk--who thought it was--about it, actually.

So I'd go to a new store for help and to look at the latest models! The G2 has 4MP which is prpbably enough for your use. The F2.0 lens is excellent apart form some minor chromatic flaws which only the foolish might blame for lack of great images!

Click to expand...

Thanks for the timely counseling.

I think this is still one of the best Digicams every made and if it works, why change it?

Click to expand...

It works! There was enough charge on my new battery to check it out in the store. Tomorrow when it's fully charged, I plan to shoot a ton of frames. I'm going to shoot the stepladder and broom in my carport, for my new Vernacular Period!

Thanks a mil for setting me straight, Asher.

The G2 was my first digital camera. Definitely RAW capable, though neither myself nor one of the guys at work who has one have had much success improving on the in-camera JPEGs. It does take great pics. By modern standards the shutter lag isn't great, the write speed isn't great, and the low light capability isn't great. With those limitations it's does a great job, but it is hard going back to it from my 20D.

Aaron

Surprisingly some of the finest new small cameras have either no RAW capability or are so slow saving to RAW that they are impractical.

Asher

Yes, even some pretty advanced cameras like the S3 IS that you would expect to shoot RAW can't. They've created an artificial divide between consumer and pro. Does a tiny pocket digicam need RAW? Probably not. Should a super-zoom EVF like the S3 IS? I think so.

It's a purely software, artificial distinction.

Mary Bull said:

My camera (a Canon Powershot G2) will not produce data suitable for RAW--or, at least, will not put it on my computer in other than jpeg form, AFAIK.

...

Seriously considering a camera upgrade, so what cameras come to mnd?

Click to expand...

Mary,

Since the G1 had 12-bit RAW output which is16-bit color after processing as programs typically only support 8bit, 15-bit in earlier versions of PS or 16-bit. So your should be able to find it in a menu somewhere. What you will have to do to enable RAW shooting is to only use the Tv, Av, and M modes as Canon disabled RAW in the picture/icon modes.

So unless you have money burning a hole in your pocket, try RAW with what your have. I think you can still download RSE from http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.asp and it supports G2 RAW files which should give you an excellent tool for no money. The difference in image quality between RAW and JPEG is high in my opinion. Albeit, the difference was far more drastic at 3 MP than at 5 MP.

I would instead suggest a liesurely day in the countryside shooting and perhaps a new CF card for the larger files. )

enjoy,

Sean

Sean DeMerchant said:

Mary,
... should be able to find it in a menu somewhere. What you will have to do to enable RAW shooting is to only use the Tv, Av, and M modes as Canon disabled RAW in the picture/icon modes.

Click to expand...

Thanks a mil, Sean. This is exactly the info I need.

So unless you have money burning a hole in your pocket, try RAW with what your have.

Click to expand...

No money to burn. But, at this point, intensely interested in the quality of my photos--even more so than in acquiring new books and cds. <shaking my head at my spendthrift ways>

I think you can still download RSE from http://www.pixmantec.com/products/ra...essentials.asp and it supports G2 RAW files which should give you an excellent tool for no money. The difference in image quality between RAW and JPEG is high in my opinion. Albeit, the difference was far more drastic at 3 MP than at 5 MP.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link and the good advice.

I would instead suggest a liesurely day in the countryside shooting ...

Click to expand...

Here on the southern edge of Nashville I am already practically in the countryside. And the weather's turned cooler. So a good day for a walk when daylight arrives, and even though we are six to eight weeks off fall color time, there is much beauty all around, and much of interest. I might even get lucky and catch one of those scampering squirrels which haunt my yard.

...and perhaps a new CF card for the larger files. )

Click to expand...

Greedy packrat that I am, I have in my possesion a 250 MB, a 64 MB, and two 32 MB CF's. Don't ask why. Long story. <sheepish grin>

Mary Bull said:

Thanks a mil, Sean. This is exactly the info I need.
...
Thanks for the link and the good advice.

Click to expand...

You are welcome. )

Mary Bull said:

Here on the southern edge of Nashville I am already practically in the countryside. And the weather's turned cooler. So a good day for a walk when daylight arrives, and even though we are six to eight weeks off fall color time, there is much beauty all around, and much of interest. I might even get lucky and catch one of those scampering squirrels which haunt my yard.

Click to expand...

If you can handle some exertion, then I would suggest visiting Machine Falls in [FONT=Verdana,Arial]Short Springs State Natural Area[/FONT]outside Tullahoma which in summary could be written up as why I feel violated by (the verbose phrase for hate) the TVA as once upon a time before the TVA damns (intentional misspelling) TN was on par with Hawaii for spectacular lush georguous waterfalls. Just be cautions of thunderstorms with their associated flooding due to the clay soil and of the copperheads (venomous snakes). Next time I go there I intend to go in copperhead season with leather pants (have yet to buy them, but I would never wear chaps except in the bush), long sleaved shirt, and my lucky fishing hat (something I only wear in the woods and never fish in as I have always caught fish while wearing it [the one time I fished in it] <superstitious grin> and prefer to save the luck for when I want fresh fish for dinner).

I once upon a time lived in Tullahoma when I attended UTSI. One of my return visit goals is to shoot Machine Falls and the creek in through the natural area (plus hauling out some trash). I intend to schedule 3 days for the shoot to catch the right light. This locale is about 60 miles down I-24 and 10-15 miles away from the interstate from Nashville. I find the Short Springs Natural Area far more special than the Smokies which look like the foothills of the Cascade Mountains.

But then, just getting off the interstate and heading 20-30 miles out of Nashville will yield spectacular pastorals in the right light.

My other goal beyond visiting friends on that trip is to visit Knoxville and the UTK campus as I got my M.S. from UTK and have never been to Knoxville. Beyond that, I know a beekeeper (a friend too) who will hook me up with gear (spare suit) and let me get shots of of the males and queens in her apiaries which is another thing on primary my list of things to get shots of. And of course, there are the chigger bites/clogged pores and insect shots I expect to get. I am just unsure of how to get a shot of one of the 10 cm long roaches without killing them as I only saw two of those monsters in 2 years there (and one was the dead [or soon to be] toy of a cat).

Mary Bull said:

Greedy packrat that I am, I have in my possesion a 250 MB, a 64 MB, and two 32 MB CF's. Don't ask why. Long story. <sheepish grin>

Click to expand...

No worries there. <warm and indulgent grin> I have a 4 GB, 2 1 GB, and a 256 MB card and want 4 or 5 more 4 GB cards. <just smiling>

enjoy your day y'all,

Sean <still grinning with warmth and knowing how to bloody well talk southern*>

* Tullahoma is pronounced /Tell-a-ho-ma/ and the word "y'all" no longer sends nasty grammatical shivers up my spine as it did in my early 20s.

Sean DeMerchant said:

No worries there. <warm and indulgent grin> I have a 4 GB, 2 1 GB, and a 256 MB card and want 4 or 5 more 4 GB cards. <just smiling>

Click to expand...

And that excludes the 256 MB, 192 MB, 128 MB, and 32 MB cards I have given away while ignoring the 16 MB card I lost.

In general, unless I am shooting lots of a subject the 4 GB card is enough while each shutter click is roughly 8 MB. But I want enough to enable 8 hours of nonstop shooting.

enjoy,

Sean <still grinning as he nearly smiles too much ;o) >

p.s., I like your <sotto voce> notation. It is more expressive. <grinning wider yet>

Mary, you can also use Canon's software for RAW conversion. This page is for the G2
http://alpha02u.c-wss.com/inc/ApplServlet?SV=WWUCA900 I'm not sure if the better DPP works with the
G2s RAW format, but I know this one does. You might try the demo of Breezebrowser for the G2 also, though I suspect that RSE, which is free, as Sean noted, might be the better choice. http://www.breezesys.com/BreezeBrowser/features.htm

I had a G1 a number of years ago and shot completely in RAW---and its now used by my Mother, who is 90. She particularly likes the swivel LCD. She shoots in jpeg but it never left the RAW format as long as I shot with it.

You might find the free Picasa a good way to catalog your files and for emailing and printing http://picasa.google.com/ I installed it for my mother and my husband and it suits their needs with many less image files than I have (I use Imatch). As you take more photos, you will probably need to find a way to organize them, and Picasa is a reasonable way to get started unless you have a system of your own to organize and view them. For a free viewer that uses the 'tree' method (not database), try Irfanview http://irfanview.com/ also free.

Hey, I can 'speak' Southern too--not a 'native' but I have lived in North Carolina for a long time--and my husband is a born and bred Southerner LOL.

Diane

Sean, I want to go on conversing with you about Nashville and Tennessee, shooting opportunities, and southern dialect at as much length as you have the time for. So I'm beginning a new thread at the Layback Cafe, title of "Landscapes, politics, and grammar." See you there.
Enjoy.
Mary

Diane, I installed Picasa a few days ago, when Ray West mentioned it to me. I like it very much. But thanks for giving it a mention here again, as others might find the link helpful.

Also, have had Irfanview for a number of years. To date it's my main viewer/editor.
The moderator/owner of the mailing lists of The Bat! (my peerless e-mail program) is the one who pointed me to it.

Thank you for the counseling on a RAW converter, too. I have now installed a trial version of LightZone. Decided I could splurge a bit, since it turned out I didn't have to buy a new camera to use RAW. That's if I do like LightZone. The new battery in the G2 is still charging, so I may be shooting after awhile in full daylight rather than the long light of sunrise.

When I get some pics, I'm going to try them out on LightZone.

Hey, I can 'speak' Southern too--not a 'native' but I have lived in North Carolina for a long time--and my husband is a born and bred Southerner LOL.

Click to expand...

Have not a doubt you-uns kin speak hit lak a native. (NB: and are probably aware that "y'all" is plural, as Sean is also probably aware. <she said with a grin>)

Diane Fields said:

I'm not sure if the better DPP works with the
G2s RAW format, but I know this one does. You might try the demo of Breezebrowser for the G2 also, though I suspect that RSE, which is free, as Sean noted, might be the better choice. http://www.breezesys.com/BreezeBrowser/features.htm

Click to expand...

If your computer's CPU supports RSE (it requires the SSE instruction set IIRC), then it is the best RAW converter out there. I tried the RSP variant for a month and could not justify spending money on features I already payed for in PS (curves and such). Albeit, if RSP had included some default white balances like Daylight, Cloudy, Shade, Incandescant, and etcetera it would have been worth money. But having to waste 20 seconds per image with the wrong white balance without reasonable preset starting points struck me as a moronic design choice. Hence, I went back to RSE which had the same performance and use ACR when I need more.

Diane Fields said:

I had a G1 a number of years ago and shot completely in RAW---and its now used by my Mother, who is 90. She particularly likes the swivel LCD. She shoots in jpeg but it never left the RAW format as long as I shot with it.

Click to expand...

I love the swivel LCD. Have you seen any on newer small digicams? It is like using a waist level viewfinder and useful to place hands and camera above a crowd and still compose.

enjoy,

Sean

Mary Bull said:

I had somehow gotten the idea that it was not.

Click to expand...

To record the set straight: That goes back to my original recommendation to not bother. And before someone starts to find an inconsistency with my usual advocacy of RAW, when Mary started out, JPEG - which the G2 produces quite good ones - was the easiest solution for her.

Thank you, Dierk, and everyone here, for your help

Originally posted by Dierk Haasis

And before someone starts to find an inconsistency with my usual advocacy of RAW, when Mary started out, JPEG - which the G2 produces quite good ones - was the easiest solution for her.

Click to expand...

This is true. I didn't know a lot. Had been self-taught, by trial-and-error, using a Kodak DC210 for the previous five years, starting in 1998, IIRC. And I am very, very grateful for Dierk's help over the past four years.

But I am responsible for my own confusions. I could have googled and been straightened out, if it had occurred to me that I had the wrong idea in my head. But it was so firmly fixed that I didn't question my own perception, until I stated my wrongheaded view here on OPF, and then I promptly got a lot of help. So thanks a lot to everyone who has sent posts to help me. I appreciate them all, very, very much.

Mary,

A few people have recommended RSE, and it is indeed one of the most elegant pieces of software I've come across.

What you should be aware of, however, is that it's colours aren't good for some cameras. For the Canon G-series (certainly for my G5, and I assume your G2 as well) blue sky comes out with a "purple haze", which led us all into a rendition of Jimmi Hendrix.

It's possible to get the blue back, although it sometimes comes at the expense of other colours. I posted an article on the RS forums to illustrate this. It was specific to RSP which is no longer available, but apart from the Vibrance slider the priciples still apply. Have a look at How to get blue skies with Canon G-series using RSP

All the best with your RAW shooting.

Regards,

Stuart

edited because I keep missing the shift key!

Thanks a mil for the link, Stuart, for the advice, and for the general info.

It's regrettable that Canon throttle their compacts by not including Raw. I would probably have bought one but no Raw, so no sale. I bought a Panasonic LX1, now discontinued. It's a gem of a camera, feeling like the high precision instrument that it is. It has a full range of manual controls with low shutter lag when you pre-focus. The zoom is fairly sharp and colour fringing is low. The shake stabiliser is excellent. It's a tiny camera and very pocketable. Raw format can be processed in both RSE and ACR. I don't like RSE particularly due to the poor colour it gives with Canon SLRs like the 20D but the results from the LX1 have better colour.

The one drawback of the LX1 is noise which is clearly visible at 100% even on 100 ISO. Rather like a 20D at 800 or 1600 ISO. You can get rid of it in the raw processor and the results are still sharp. Use of Noise Ninja or Neat Image will help further. I've made some decent A4 size prints which, while not as clear as those from a 20D are still very creditable. I would not recommend using 200 ISO and 400 ISO is a joke.

Other downsides - the blue channel is particularly noisy so seascapes can be a problem. Also the lens is not critically sharp for subjects at infinity: not got to the bottom of this yet. Overall I think it's a lovely camera provided you are willing to work at the images in the raw converter and Photoshop. The results will be very close to those of a DSLR and in some respects such as depth of field, superior.

The whole area of compacts with Raw and decent manual controls is a major gap in the marketplace. Thanks goodness for companies like Panasonic.

Canon G2 will shoot RAW--I was mistaken in my original posting.

Kim, I was mistaken in what I posted, and the more knowledgeable people, including Asher, quickly corrected my misconception.

The Canon PowerShot G2 will indeed shoot RAW, and I have been using that mode over the past few weeks--have made hundreds of shots with it now.

To shoot in RAW with the Canon PowerShot series, you must set the dial to P and program your settings in P, and then take your shots with the dial set at P.

I'm glad you are enjoying your Panasonic. And I'm glad I didn't have to buy another camera in order to shoot RAW.

Mary

To shoot in RAW with the Canon PowerShot series, you must set the dial to P and program your settings in P, and then take your shots with the dial set at P.

Click to expand...

Mary,

I think you'll find that RAW is also available with the Tv (Shutter Priority), Av (Aperture Priority) amd M (Manual) settings.

One disadvantage of using the P (Program Auto Exposure) setting is that the camera refuses to go above f4 (or at least my G5 did).

Depends what you're shooting of course, but for landscape where you need a good depth of focus it's not good. I ended up using Av, setting the aperture at f8 and winding it back if the shutter speed was too slow.

Hope this helps.

Stuart

RAW shooting with the Canon G2

StuartRae said:

Mary,

I think you'll find that RAW is also available with the Tv (Shutter Priority), Av (Aperture Priority) amd M (Manual) settings.

Click to expand...

Thank you so much, Stuart, for this information. The clerk in the camera store is the one who told me to use P. I am still having trouble making sense of the G2 owner's manual.

One disadvantage of using the P (Program Auto Exposure) setting is that the camera refuses to go above f4 (or at least my G5 did).

Click to expand...

Ah. Would explain some of my troubles, if the same is true for my G2.

Depends what you're shooting of course, but for landscape where you need a good depth of focus it's not good. I ended up using Av, setting the aperture at f8 and winding it back if the shutter speed was too slow.

Click to expand...

I shall experiment with that today.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

It does. More than words can say.

Mary

None of the newer Canon compacts support raw.

"No Raw, No Sale"

Kim_F said:

None of the newer Canon compacts support raw.

"No Raw, No Sale"

Click to expand...

Kim, that's interesting. Of course, I haven't been shopping for a new Canon, since I learned that my G2 PowerShot does support RAW. I imagine the G3, which came out after the G2, also supports it, since I was told it was the same as the G2, with a few more features added.

So anyone wanting to stick with Canon, in small digicams, and also shoot RAW should try to purchase a G2 or a G3, then?

Mary

Mary Bull said:

So anyone wanting to stick with Canon, in small digicams, and also shoot RAW should try to purchase a G2 or a G3, then?

Mary

Click to expand...

Mary,

All the G-series Canons up to the G6 had a RAW option. That's only been removed in the just-announced G7. Also, their S-series up to the S70, but not the current S80, had RAW as an option.

...Mike

Thanks, Mike.

This further information may be useful to Kim.

I was very happy when I found out that my G2 does support RAW. I have shot hundreds and hundreds of frames in RAW since learning that it does. I am happy with my camera and don't expect to need a new one for a very long time to come.

Best wishes,

Mary

Hi Mary,

I've only read your first post so far but the G2 can indeed capture RAW files. It's very good little camera, more capable in several respects than many newer and more expensive small sensor cameras. I bought one for my daughter (10) and she uses it strictly in RAW, processing in C1 and getting excellent results. At less than $200 used, it's a wonderful bargain with a fast lens to boot. It also performs nearly a stop better than it's indicated ISO level so ISO 400 is really closer to ISO 800. Later cameras in the G series have their finders located in such a way that the lens obscures part of the finder view.

Cheers,

Sean