E-PL5 Image quality question

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by kgeissler, Dec 11, 2012.

  1. kgeissler

    kgeissler Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 25, 2012
    Rowlett, TX
    I was reading the review of the E-PL5 at Photography Blog and came to the section on image quality here: Olympus E-PL5 Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

    Why do the JPG images look (in my opinion) better than the RAW images? It makes me wonder why I am shooting in RAW mode.
  2. Ranger Rick

    Ranger Rick Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 11, 2009
    Tempe, AZ
    Real Name:
    From a cursory look at the site, it would seem the RAWs are not processed (just converted), whereas the jpegs are processed in camera. Unprocessed RAWs never look "as good" as OOC jpegs until the RAWs are processed. Jpegs are "baked" in camera, RAWs are not
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Uncle Frank

    Uncle Frank Photo Enthusiast

    Jul 26, 2012
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    I shoot a Nikon dslr, and always shoot in RAW. But the jpegs from my pl2 are so good that I can't match them doing it myself. Shooting jpeg has saved a lot of time and storage space, and is one of the reasons that I'm an Oly fan.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Spuff

    Spuff Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 5, 2010
    Berkshire, UK.
    For most Jpgs vs RAW I cannot, whatever I do in Lightroom, get the RAW to look as good as the Jpg.
    The only exception to this was in a moon shot where the RAW was more pleasing and avoided the Jpg artefacts that appear in some heavy crop circumstances with the EPL5 (pit-like marks).
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Agent00soul

    Agent00soul Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 22, 2010
    I'm mostly shooting JPEG to cut down on computer work hours, but I must say that I can almost always improve on the OOC JPEG when (on occasions) doing raw processing in Lightroom from E-M5 and E-PM2 files. In those cases, I always shoot raw+jpeg, so I can compare my result from the raw file with the in-camera jpeg.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. OhWellOK

    OhWellOK Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 4, 2012
    Brooklyn, NY
    I generally can make my RAW pics have that little extra something over the .jpg with just a little Lightroom work. You also have a lot more adjustment power on the RAW file over the flattened .jpgs-a blown sky in a photo, for instance. This is because the RAW image is 12bit color, vs the flattened 8bit color of .jpg; less information to work with. Google it for a more technical explanation, than I'm capable of :smile:

    I'm always amazed at the cloud detail you can pull out of a very horrible looking white sky with just a very slight adjustment.
  7. reva

    reva Mu-43 Rookie

    Feb 24, 2010
    South Jersey (Philly!)
    Real Name:
    Hey Frank, funny seeing the same names here and the cafe :)

    I'm slowly coming to the same conclusions.. I've been doing jpg+raw for a little bit now since getting the EPL5 and I'm discarding 95% of the raw shots, except for a few special cases where I'm going to push further than I imagined when taking the initial photo!
  8. M4/3

    M4/3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 24, 2011
    Try it yourself; i.e. shoot RAW + jpeg. Then try to get the RAW to look as good or better than the in camera jpeg. Until very recently I was a jpeg only shooter then I got a computer that was powerful enough to work with RAW images fairly quickly. I was very pleased with the results and so now I shoot RAW + jpeg and if the image is real important for some reason then I will process the RAW to try to make it look better than the in camera jpeg.
  9. DL Photo

    DL Photo Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 15, 2012
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Real Name:
    Same for me: RAW + jpeg.

    The next question is do you have your jpeg settings on "fine" or other?