Shooting RAW without a strobe

[craracer]

I may be mistaken, but with the "wrong" SD card, couldn't write times be even slower?

 

[flareside]

If this review is just measuring continuous raw without flash (1.9 fps) and if the previous review is just measuring continuous jpg without flash (.9 fps) then it kind of appears that raw write time of the S95 is more than twice as long as jpg write time (in continuous without flash).

2.6 seconds shot to shot for raw without flash (non sequential) and with jpg the flash added a second so I'm interpolating 3.6 seconds shot to shot, raw + flash.

But the jpg time is only .3 sec slower (with no flash) so no significant difference, except from half a second for both.

I can't verify how fast an S90 is with flash but I tested one a while back, shooting continuously without flash, set to JPG+RAW and it packed down 47 shots in a 60 second interval. At 11.4MB per shot (J+R), that's packing down around 9MB per second which was less than half of what the card was capable of. At 1.28 seconds per shot (.78 fps), shooting in RAW is not going to slow any dive down appreciably. On a DSLR with higher pixel count and potentially greater color depth however, is could make a difference. If you are using the flash and having to wait for it, including RAW will have no impact on dive time at all

 

[Fota]

I don't get it. What's the problem?

I was under the impression we were discussing that using RAW on "cameras" made them terribly slow. I wrote that this is mostly not a problem anymore. On a D-SLR there is no difference in speed and never has been. Even some newer compacts, e.g. S95, are as fast even in jpg+raw as they are in jpg. But, hey, if you measure 1/10 of a second, maybe there is a difference, but I thought we were discussing shooting underwater. Most strobes takes longer to recharge, than an S95 takes to write a jpg+raw to file. So, at least to me, this is not a problem. Who uses continous shooting mode underwater (with strobe ;-))? I certainly don't!

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

I use to shoot w/o RAW, and in photoshop, convert the jpeg image into CMYK. From there, even with the absolute lack of red in the picture, you can manipulate the colors in CMYK colorspace so the color looks natural.

I used this technique:

Getting Rid of the Underwater Blues :: Wetpixel.com

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Shooting RAW without a strobe

Hi all,
I currently own a Sealife DC800 with a strobe. I enjoy fine tuning my pictures with Lightroom but I am far from being a pro. I am looking to buy a DSLR camera mainly because my camera shoots only in jpeg and I would like to explore the RAW format.

A potential seller tells me that I dont need a strobe if I shoot in RAW because, according to him, I will be able to regain all the colors by adjusting the white balance and the color temperature with Lightroom. I know that a RAW file is much more versatile compared to a jpeg but if I follow his advice, what kind of result should I expect?

Since I caused the old p&s sidetrack, perhaps I should try to get one line of thought in this thread back to the OP's topic. Perhaps some of the dSLR shooters could actually show some examples of "what kind of result should I expect?"

It is my fault we are off topic; I do not take my SLR's and dSLR underwater, so I don't think about the fact that even if there is a pop-up flash on the camera the housing is not designed to use it.

All my digital underwater cameras have been p&s's and have had on-board flash and raw capabilities (Oly 5050, Canon s70 & s95), so shooting raw "without strobe" does not always mean shooting raw "without flash."

When I am shooting raw ambient with any of those cameras, it is typically not a situation where I am in M or Av and spending some time thinking about exposure; it is Full Auto point and shoot. The Oly 5050 takes many great ambient light pictures when used on Full Auto and recording in raw. The Canon's have not given me the same warm fuzzy feeling with regards to Full Auto ambient, but I only have a few dives on the s95 and hopefully I will get better with familiarity.

Currently, I feel like the s95 is slower to use than the 5050 was. I was probably wrong to blame raw file format for the slowness. In the past I have always used Oly or Canon housings, which allow all the focusing tools of the camera to be utilized. The 5050 has a Beam Assist and a Passive Assist as well; it's reputation is that it is one of the best low light focus and ttl flash exposure systems from just a stock housed p&s perspective.

Now I have a Recsea housing for the s95. In order to compare to a 5050 I would need some experience with the Tetra 5050 housing I think. The Recsea s95 housing does not allow the Beam Assist to operate. In order to speed up my s95's shooting I will probably have to get out of auto focus.

To the OP; I think "wanting to explore the raw format" is not enough reason to buy a dSLR for underwater photography.

 

[Blackwood]

Which brings up what to me has always been an interesting "ethical" question -- should photographic images show what we saw or what we wanted to see?

IF there is very little red, undetectable red let's say, is it "right" .

An image is what you want it to be.

Discussions about taking an image of exactly what the photographer's eyes saw have always struck me as rather silly.

My eyes perceive differently than yours, and MUCH differently than digital camera sensors (which merely measure light intensities, not color). I can resolve far more dynamic range than either of my digital cameras or any of the film I shoot, and my eyes genetally see a wider depth of field.

I enjoy reading people rave about their "as I saw it" photography and viewing all the extremely-wide-open-sliver-dof frames and 10 second exposures of waterfalls. I don't know about you, but don't see bokeh or blurred water.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

I don't get it. What's the problem?

I was under the impression we were discussing that using RAW on "cameras" made them terribly slow. I wrote that this is mostly not a problem anymore. On a D-SLR there is no difference in speed and never has been. Even some newer compacts, e.g. S95, are as fast even in jpg+raw as they are in jpg. But, hey, if you measure 1/10 of a second, maybe there is a difference, but I thought we were discussing shooting underwater. Most strobes takes longer to recharge, than an S95 takes to write a jpg+raw to file. So, at least to me, this is not a problem. Who uses continous shooting mode underwater (with strobe ;-))? I certainly don't!

There is no problem, AFAIS. This is perhaps an evolving ScubaBoard discussion where many of the participants may be learning something, or at least expanding their perspective. (me in particular)

Since at least two of the participants in this discussion are shooting s95's, some of the discussion has migrated there. We are really only talking about underwater photography, so the on-line "dry" camera reviews are of little use to this discussion.

There are many variables to a "speed" discussion, even to just an s95 "speed" discussion.

In "full auto" the clear housings may be "faster" because the Beam Assist may actually assist. I bought my memory cards at Costco so my options were limited to 8 or 16 GB. It is a good 8GB memory card but perhaps not the absolute fastest (SanDisk Ultra, 15MB/s SDhc).

In M or Av, "speeds" might not be the same. With a fixed focus distance, "speeds" might not be the same. From my experience with at least 4 5050's, between two s95 cameras, with everything else equal, "speeds" might not be the same. Then there would be different "speeds" for each of the above categories with flash on and with flash off. There might also be stock camera battery "speed" vs aftermarket battery "speed" &/or "speeds" during first 30 shots vs "speeds" during shots 70-100.

In this post I am not talking "write speed" but instead I have progressed to "focus speed" and "shot-to-shot speed." When you are trying to get faces and not tails, "focus speed" and "shot-to-shot speed" are often the make or breaks.

With regards to your "strobe recycle speed" comment, in a thread titled "Shooting RAW without a strobe" - I am as usual the "bell curve buster."

I started as a free dive photographer. I quickly gravitated to one of the fastest recycle strobes. With the 5050, I have often shot "continuous raw" and even "continuous raw" w/strobe.

The ambient gallery linked just below starts with three 4-shot continuous sets. At that depth the color difference between jpg and raw might not be noticeable, but I think there is noticeable sharpness difference when making 12x18 prints.

Turtle Town - halemano's Photos | SmugMug

The mostly strobe gallery linked just below includes two 3-shot sequences (puffer, turtle) and a 4-shot sequence (eel), with the strobe firing each shot.

5 Graves (Makena Landing) - halemano's Photos | SmugMug

Below is a 3 or 4-shot strobe series, followed by 1 or 2 single strobe shots.

​

 

[Fota]

Cool pictures!

But hey, I started out with a 7070 and AFAIK it's the successor of the (10? year old compact) 5050. The 7070 was dead slow when shooting RAW. It took close to 10 seconds to write a RAW file to the card. The resolution was slightly higher on the 7070, but it was not that much.

The AF speed of the 7070 was far from impressive either. Well, maybe in AF-C mode as that was instant (but not very good on the other hand) but in normal AF mode, it was slow (especially in low light and on bad contrasts).

The S95 is so much faster on both of these things (especially saving a raw file). But I can agree on that it's far from fast enough. I bought it for my kid to play around with when snorkeling.

I use D-SLR for uw-photo and video. I have tested the S95 some underwater though (only when snorkeling) and I use it alot topside (which it is great for).

 

[Puffer Fish]

Lwang, that only works for some types of images. Not having any red information and putting it back in some images would take huge amounts of time (assuming one knows where it should go. That example is typical, I don't think the fish is actually black and white, it made a nicer looking image, but it did not recover the lost color.

 

[Puffer Fish]

The S95 can be a bit slow to lock focus in low light, but once it has it, it is much faster than the 5050. It sort of cries out for prefocus or manual focus some of the time. In class, I let people test out the shooting speed of several generations of cameras from different mfg's...in both bright and low light. The overall shot time has not changed that much, but the time once focus is on, has dropped to almost dlsr time.

Since I caused the old p&s sidetrack, perhaps I should try to get one line of thought in this thread back to the OP's topic. Perhaps some of the dSLR shooters could actually show some examples of "what kind of result should I expect?"

It is my fault we are off topic; I do not take my SLR's and dSLR underwater, so I don't think about the fact that even if there is a pop-up flash on the camera the housing is not designed to use it.

All my digital underwater cameras have been p&s's and have had on-board flash and raw capabilities (Oly 5050, Canon s70 & s95), so shooting raw "without strobe" does not always mean shooting raw "without flash."

When I am shooting raw ambient with any of those cameras, it is typically not a situation where I am in M or Av and spending some time thinking about exposure; it is Full Auto point and shoot. The Oly 5050 takes many great ambient light pictures when used on Full Auto and recording in raw. The Canon's have not given me the same warm fuzzy feeling with regards to Full Auto ambient, but I only have a few dives on the s95 and hopefully I will get better with familiarity.

Currently, I feel like the s95 is slower to use than the 5050 was. I was probably wrong to blame raw file format for the slowness. In the past I have always used Oly or Canon housings, which allow all the focusing tools of the camera to be utilized. The 5050 has a Beam Assist and a Passive Assist as well; it's reputation is that it is one of the best low light focus and ttl flash exposure systems from just a stock housed p&s perspective.

Now I have a Recsea housing for the s95. In order to compare to a 5050 I would need some experience with the Tetra 5050 housing I think. The Recsea s95 housing does not allow the Beam Assist to operate. In order to speed up my s95's shooting I will probably have to get out of auto focus.

To the OP; I think "wanting to explore the raw format" is not enough reason to buy a dSLR for underwater photography.