what is the difference in a raw picture from a Canon 1dx vs 5d Mark iii or a s95? Is there a difference in the picture, in the information that is stored on the image or something else? I know that raw files from different cameras are not the same. Is a raw file from a better quality camera, a better raw file?
RAW files are simply the raw data captured by the camera’s sensor and then stored. So, by definition, they are all different, because the cameras’ sensors are different.
A “better” camera captures “better” data, so the RAW file would contain that “better” data.
Bob
Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
Pierre,
A lot goes into making that RAW file. The difference is in the lens, the sensor, and the processors in the camera. A 1Dx and 5D Mk III should be somewhat similar, although we haven’t seen the 1Dx yet. They are both full-frame sensors, both that take Canon’s best lenses (the “L” glass), and both have top-of-the-line processors. The s95 is a consumer camera with a pinky-nail sized sensor and a hamster running the computer. :) OK that’s obviously just being mean because I know the s95 is a very, very good compact camera… but it’s in no way shape or form in the same league as a dSLR.
The differences you’ll notice are in noise, dynamic range, sharpness, chromatic aberration, low light performance, and more.
I hope that answers your question!
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
thanks to both of you, Bob and Joseph, now I understand
Pierre
Better sensors = better sensitivity I know its the obvious and already mentioned. The use of bit depth use to be thrown around more as one measure of quality. Cameras use to have 10bits per color. I used (8years ago?) a 6mp Sinar back that had 14 bits/color and it was/is better than most of the 18mp “point and shoots” today. Software engineers can really pull out information locked in that data.
Cheers
davidbmoore@mac.com
Twitter= @davidbmoore
Scottsdale AZ