As always, the unedited raw (below left) looks duller than the jpg (below right) because it's yet to be tweaked: Zooming in though, we can easily see the extra feather detail present in the unedited raw (below left) compared to the jpg (below right).
Let's work from the below set of seven different raw photos (I saved jpg versions also ranging from -3 stops underexposed (below left) through correct exposure (below middle) and 3 stops overexposed (below right).Resolution) is the same between a raw and jpg file, even before we start editing to try and lift out extra details, the effects of the automatically applied adjustments to the jpg, as well as the effects of file compression (even when the lowest compression.In fact I used it last week taking an image using a Lee Big Stopper, 10 stop.D.So there is a possibility that you may miss a great shot whilst taking a great shot.Have code promo adagio access a much higher colour 'bit-depth' recording at least 4,000 times more colour separation than a jpg file.Higher values protect thin, detailed color edges but can result in color specking.The reason is that after the image has been shot, the camera will analyse the image and look for any pixels that are incorrectly rendered.
Its a good idea to turn this on if you are shooting at a high ISO or doing long exposures.
This can be very useful when you want high quality files, but also need to get an image out quickly.You may also find that you can't take as many photos in quick succession (ie not as large a burst on 'continuous drive mode before the camera's internal buffer fills up and you have to wait for the huge raw files to be copied.This is to be expected though, because you've not post-processed your raw file yet the jpg only looks good because it's been automatically tweaked in the camera, adding brightness, blacks, saturation, sharpening, colour-adjusting, noise reduction and more!It's complex, but common dslrs use either 12, 14 or even 16 bits of data to save each colour channel (red, green and blue) in your raw file.As explained above, this doesn't matter much, until you start trying to post-process your images, then you'll find there's just less information there to work with.However, if you are planning to edit your images and want them to look their best, you will be remissed shooting strictly jpeg.Lets deal with how you can get less noise in your images first.Later you can see a fairly successful recovery of a 2 overexposed raw file though.The important things to know are; how to avoid getting too much noise in your image and, how to deal with it in your post-production.In Summary: You can get a lot more detail, and recover a poorly exposed raw file a lot more than you can a jpg, but to gain any of these advantages, you do need to put some work into post-processing, as well as cope with.
The metered exposure was 4 seconds, with a 6 stop soft.D graduated filter.
This was because the noise became difficult to remove, even in third party software, and if it was removed, the image looked like a watercolour painting as a result of over processing of the noise.