Mine neither,
I edit EVERY image i give a away or edit professionally, and of course i edit every JPEG that comes out from my D4.
If i put an edited JPEG from my D4 here and the edited RAW next to it … in most cases you would have a hard time seeingthe difference, believe me.
This is for true anoraks only!
In Android, there is a nasty bug/feature in the automatic photo upload via Dropbox. It possibly exists for the other services e.g. Onedrive.
If you use a 3rd party camera app which has a facility for a custom filename format (the stock camera app has no config for the filename format, or anything much else) the uploaded file is named as if it was taken with the stock camera app which is always in this format:
2015-06-22 11.37.27.jpg
So if you configure the 3rd party app (e.g. Camera FV-5) to save as DSCNxxxx.jpg you end up with “2015-06-22 11.37.27.jpg” on Dropbox but DSCNxxxx.jpg in Gallery!
This is evidently because Dropbox grabs the image (via a hook into the O/S) and gives the file a name before the 3rd party camera app gets a chance to save it under the specified name.
However this reveals something else which the 3rd party app vendors don’t want to talk about, and it puts some comms I have had with some of them in a different light (in terms of which questions/suggestions of mine are being avoided 
). It means the 3rd party apps are no more than “expanded control panels” for the Android camera API. All the image manipulation which you think the camera app is doing is actually done by the O/S.
So when the camera app has settings for say Saturation, it is actually using an API feature for implementing that. If this was not true then the dropboxed image would not contain anything you have done in the camera app! So if I suggest to an app vendor that he should provide finer steps for saturation control (because the existing 3 steps are far too coarse) and he doesn’t want to discuss it, I can see why… He has no means to implement anything.
Only if/when Android provides RAW in the API (coming “soon” supposedly, though updating will wipe out my rooting) will 3rd party camera apps be able to actually do anything really useful. But then what will happen to the dropboxed images? The camera app will have to explicitly submit them for upload, whereas currently it knows nothing about Dropbox. It’s going to need a change of architecture. I suppose, currently, a 3rd party camera app could ask for a “100% jpeg” and then offer various manipulation on that in the app but I wonder if anybody bothers.
Peter – not sure when you did your course, but certainly in the current version of Lightroom (which you can buy as a stand-alone bit of software; you don’t have to have a subscription) that’s not the case. All the options are available. As I say, whether you’ll get a better result working on a file that hasn’t already been “done” by the camera is another matter.
You’re not wrong about JPEG compression but again, in my experience, for onscreen use, or for printing a 10×8, it makes no difference, unless you’re cropping so you’re only using small proportion of the original.
I think both JPG and RAW have their place in different circumstances – certainly JPG is great if you want to shoot and (automatically) upload for people to see. File size and thus time may be an issue, depending on how many you shoot and what equipment you have. For a wedding I’m sticking to RAW because in some, rare, circumstances it might be advantageous and there are no downsides whatsoever. It’s more time, more work, more equipment, but none of those are at issue.
Compact Camera Odyssee ….
Contrary to what I wrote above the Nikon S9900 compact camera AND the Panasonic TZ-61 are both junk. After reading many test reports and amazon.de reviews I was sure that the S9900 would be a good new travel camera for days when I do not want to carry the heavy Nikon D4.
I had about 10 digital Nikon compact cameras in the past, and I must say most were really bad. In between I once had a Canon S90, which was good but i sold it (for reasons I cannot recall). The last couple of years I used an AW110 waterproof Nikon for the beach and under water and a Nikon P7100, which was “ok”, but not more (slow focus, slow in general, but “ok” picture quality.
Because I will travel Japan for three weeks in August I thought about not carrying the D4 (which makes no sense if you don’t carry the best three lenses aswell ..) … so I was looking for a compact camera with good picture quality, WIFI and, if possible, GPS.
I got the S9900 yesterday, and made some test shots while walking to a restaurant in the neighbourhood yesterday. First I really loved it: 30 x zoom, very fast focus, and the pictures looked great – on the little screen. Big disappointment at home: The photos my iPhone 6 makes are much better than what the S9900 delivers for € 300. What is a 30 x zoom lense good for if the images have JPEG artifacts in Fine mode and ISO 100! I made about 100 pictures today, in all settings, and afterwards I packed it and printed the amazon return voucher. No way would i want that camera.
Then I went to the next camera store and bought a Panasonic TZ-61, a camera that is praised in amazon reviews and on many digital camera websites. 30 x zoom aswell, GPS, WIFI, RAW format (!) … very similar to the Nikon by features and looks similar too. This time I needed ten pictures only: The image quality is even worse (!) than that of the Nikon. In ISO 100 all images in good light are all completely noisy. Wow! I packed it after ten shots. And that’s a camera that gets an average of 4.5 stars on amazon.
I brought it back to the camera store and looked at the SONY RX-100II and the Canon G7X. They both have a 1 inch sensor, a 4 or 5 x zoom only, no GPS. Both cost € 499, so much more than the two other compacts i tried. A second battery for the Canons costs € 80, only € 40 with Sony. Since they probably have the same sensor, and are very similar by features, I bought the SONY. A bit smaller, very nice design, RAW, 1080 HD movie, WIFI, NFC, a very interesting low light mode (that makes 4 pictures and combines them). It has no GPS, but that can be solved with one of those apps that uses the GPS position of my iPhone and can write the location data to the digital pictures by comparing the time (I only learned today that this exists)
I made one photo of the flowers on our balcony with the small Sony, opened it on the Mac and decided to keep it. Picture quality in JPEG fine is similar to an average DSLR, very nice. No smearing, no artifacts, beautiful color, sharp … all I need.
The only thing that’s better on both the Nikon and the Panasonic is the UIX, but ok, I’ll learn it, I mean I learned the GNS430.
My Conclusion: If you are into photography, not only occasional picture making, forget all compact cameras below the level of the G7X and the RX-100. The LX-100 from Panasonic is probably even a bit better, but is € 650 and too bulky. The Nikon S9900 and the Panasonic TX-61 are both considered the top cameras in the € 300 class, but I would not want them for free. A € 50 Nikon D70 from ebay with a 24-70 lens is much better than those two.
Here’s a good review of the little Sony: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m2
100 % Crop, not edited, Sony RX-100II
Thanks for that report, Flyer59.
And that’s a camera that gets an average of 4.5 stars on amazon.
And one wonders why people are happy with phone pics for everything these days? Mediocrity rules.
The old Canon S90 would have done a pic of that plant, as well.
I would not touch anything from Nikon after having had one of their compacts a few years ago, and seen their “customer service” when it broke a few times.
that can be solved with one of those apps that uses the GPS position of my iPhone and can write the location data to the digital pictures by comparing the time (I only learned today that this exists)
The Canon S120 seems to do something similar, but it’s not clear what it actually does. I would expect the G7X to be better still i.e. outstanding. The LX100 is similar/better but as you say too big to go into a pocket.
which makes no sense if you don’t carry the best three lenses aswell
Don’t you think things have changed in recent years? I have a 17-70 on my Pentax K3 and rarely change it. It was about 500 quid and is the best I can get for that camera. I do have a cheap Pentax 50-200 also but rarely use it, and anyway it’s crap quality. The days of carrying say 5 lenses are long gone (for me) because the modern lenses have a decent zoom range without the quality dropping too much, IMHO.
I think the Sony is better than the G7X. Read the review on DPREVIEW, especially the conclusion. And it’s even more compact than the Canon.
Last sentence of that review (*): Overall, the RX100 II is virtually untouchable in its compact camera class. For anyone simply looking for the best image quality from a compact, the RX100 II is the answer. Enthusiasts, however, should be cautioned. Anyone who picks up the camera will love the images it produces, but someone looking for a more satisfying shooting experience might need to look elsewhere.
I do have a travel zoom for the D4, sure, a very good 28-300. But it cannot get close to those € 2000 ED lenses. The images of the € 800 travel zoom look fantastic .. until you see one that was done with a professional lense. But that makes only sense if you shoot in a very disciplined way, which you never do when you travel with kids. In the DSLR sector Nikon really rules (Canon and Nikon are actually very close here), and (at least here in Germany) the customer service is perfect. They clean my DSLRs for free, and i even got a new body for free some years ago – after I dropped it!
But the compacts are a different story. Here Nikon sucks, and they always sucked. Canon is much better, but Sony seems to be – at least on that level. And the Sony has some features the Canon doesn’t. By the way: The G7X uses a SONY sensor aswell, maybe even the same one as the Sony RX-100 II.
From now on I will ignore amazon reviews completely. I compared the images of both the 9900 Nikon and the TZ-61 Panasonic with my iPhone 6 … the iPhone 6 really makes much nicer pictures, although it’s almost unbelievable.
(*)Yes, why should this review be better than the other ones? I think that DPREVIEW is one of the very few sites that does really professional testing. At least they don’t lie like most other sites.
Anyone who picks up the camera will love the images it produces, but someone looking for a more satisfying shooting experience might need to look elsewhere.
What was the writer smoking? That’s bullsh1t and waffle, surely. Satisfying shooting experience? It’s a bloody camera! Not a rifle.
The images of the € 800 travel zoom look fantastic .. until you see one that was done with a professional lens
That will always be the case, which is why those who make money out of it do spend four or sometimes five figures on lenses. But that’s mainly to get long range shots at a decent quality e.g. birdwatching, or the various kinds of journalistic / papparatzi / catch-somebody-naked applications where an embarassing photo can be worth 10k-100k. From my POV, which is “normal” photos, I don’t think the long lenses get used much. I would pay “any” money for a better 17-70 lens but there aren’t any AFAIK.
That said, I got this yesterday from a few tens of nm away, using the crappy long lens (the colour is wrong but I don’t know how to tweak it)
I am going waste a chunk of my life tonight and tomorrow with Lightroom and the Annecy pics
DPREVIEW is a very good site.
Satisfying shooting experience?
Well, I understand what he is talking about :-) It’s about the user interface. The buttons are a little small and the UIX is really less intuitive with the Sony. I don’t care, the image quality (i did some more) is really superb.
What I really hate is the new trend to charge the battery inside the camera, which means you cannot have one battery in the camera and charge the other one. So i ordered a nice charger and two extra batteries on amazon …
@Flyer59, you might like this: https://www.polarr.co It’s like Lightroom for you iOS device, including selective colour correction etc.
Progress on this is very slow.
Samsung S7 and S8
and zoomed in 1:1
Virtually no difference. Same 12MP sensor from Sony.
1 year’s R&D apart; top of the line phones.
I think that apart from gimmicks (like Samsung’s daft feature for recognising a place you have photographed, via some database lookup) progress on phone cameras has more or less stopped. This is probably because Marketing perceives zero interest in phones being thicker, and the last phone with a decent camera (Nokia 808) failed for a variety of reasons.
My guess is that R&D will move to producing less crappy better videos, which is generally the way social media and the general throwaway media culture is moving. The S7 can do ok-ish 1080P 60fps videos and the S8 is probably better. Both can do 4K with no stabilisation i.e. difficult to get good results.
