RAW format for ultracompacts?

[sbtott]

Why don't any of the hi-end ultracompacts offer the RAW format?---Are there technical limits re the small physical size of the ultracompacts that will always (or for the forseeable future) restrict this feature?

[Rhys]

Why don't any of the hi-end ultracompacts offer the RAW format?---Are there technical limits re the small physical size of the ultracompacts that will always (or for the forseeable future) restrict this feature?

No. It's a software thing. It's easy to reprogram cameras. The manufacturers restrict this kind of thing in order to justify the tremendous prices they charge for their DSLRs which have it. Personally, I don't want to have to muck about with a photo when I've taken it. I'm from the slide school of photography which says get it right before you press the button so it's no big thing for me and RAW isn't something I'd use anyway. That's one reason I'm against the overpriced Sigma SD10 as it saves only in RAW format.

[Ant]

Why don't any of the hi-end ultracompacts offer the RAW format?---Are there technical limits re the small physical size of the ultracompacts that will always (or for the forseeable future) restrict this feature?

On the contrary, many of them do offer RAW format.

The Nikon Coolpix 8800, Coolpix 8400, Canon Powershot G6 and Pro1, and Fuji S5100 cameras all offer a RAW option. In fact as far as the high end all-in-ones go I'd say that more offer RAW than don't.

[sbtott]

Thank you, Ant, but I meant "ultracompact" as in the size of Canon's SD300 (about 1/2 the sz of a deck of cards)...

[speaklightly]

Ant-

Yes, many digital cameras such as the Canon G-6 and the Fuji E-550, which I own do offer raw format. However, if you look more closely you will find that the number of variable options that make raw format such a powerful tool, arfe very limited indeed.

Speaklightly

[Ant]

Thank you, Ant, but I meant "ultracompact" as in the size of Canon's SD300 (about 1/2 the sz of a deck of cards)...

Sorry. I get confused with all of the descriptive camera jargon these days :)

The manufacturers probably think that the people buying these type of cameras won't want to mess about in post processing but just want a pretty picture straight out of the camera. For the most part I think they're probably right.


Yes, many digital cameras such as the Canon G-6 and the Fuji E-550, which I own do offer raw format. However, if you look more closely you will find that the number of variable options that make raw format such a powerful tool, arfe very limited indeed.

I don't understand what you mean, surely a RAW file is a RAW file, or are you referring to a lack of adequate RAW processing software supplied with the camera?

[speaklightly]

Ant-
Yes, I agree, a raw image is a raw image, that is indeed true. However the number of items that you can change in the post processing cycle gets very limited when you look at digital cameras such as the Canon G-6 and the Fuji E-550.

For example, in a dSLR raw format you can essentially retake the digital photo by making precise white balance, ISO, sharpness, and contrast etc changes to the raw image. That is not true at all in digital cameras such as the Canon G-6 and the Fuji E-550. I mention those particular digital cameras because I own them and have hands on experience with them.

Speaklightly

[EAP]

Hmmmm, raw sounds like too much trouble to me, unless you are a professional or very serious photographer. :o

[Rex914]

It's just an option rather than an obligation. It's the difference between a messed up photo that can be turned into a keeper versus one that's unsalvageable.

Of course, nothing beats "getting it right the first time," but there are situations where this isn't possible (i.e. fast action, on the spur of the moment).

[gary_hendricks]

Why don't any of the hi-end ultracompacts offer the RAW format?---Are there technical limits re the small physical size of the ultracompacts that will always (or for the forseeable future) restrict this feature?

Depends on what 'ultracompact' means. Some of them, like the Canon PowerShot G6, do offer RAW.

[diverdown]

I agree that there is not enough support for RAW in general. I was very dissapointed to see that none of the newly anounced compact, or ultracompact cameras I looked at in the NEWS page offered RAW. I dont expect to use it on every shot, but I dont want to put out the money for a camera that does'nt offer me this flexibility either.

[Rex914]

It wouldn't be terribly hard from a technical perspective to add RAW support to ultracompacts like the new SD's with DIGIC II would it?

[ReF]

Hmmmm, raw sounds like too much trouble to me, unless you are a professional or very serious photographer. :o

not neccessarily. i agree with rex regarding how salvageable/polish-able a RAW photo can be. for example, i goofed the other day and took a bunch of photo in a high contrast situation (cloudy day at the beach with dark, backlit foreground subjects) with the in-camera contrast set at +1. thankfully i shot everything in RAW so i simply made a few adjustments (especially with contrast) and ended up with some beautiful pictures. i even blew some of the highlights in 5 of the shots and fully recovered the highlight details in RAW processing! :D it's also a lot more convenient when you are out or in a hurry to leave your camera at a neutral setting and shoot everything in RAW, instead of adjusting your settings for each shot if you are constantly changing shooting conditions or unsure of which settings to use. i'm all in favor of RAW and would like to see it on more cameras, but with the amount of memory it takes, it sure makes my 512mb cards look wimpy.

BTW, i alway though of ultra-compacts to be cameras like the SD300, T1, stylus verve, etc. and "regular" compacts to be like the s500, W1, p-150, nikon 5200, and even the new A520 - this thing is small! it looks and feels just like the size of the W1 but with full manual controls and it's cheap!