Which camera for best jpegs

tijuana taxi

tijuana taxi

Messages
15,780
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Interested to know which interchangeable lens camera you reckon produces the best jpegs?

From my own user experience I can only comment on Canon and Pentax so would be interested to hear from owners of other makes.

Definitely not Canon although I must admit to never having tinkered that much with the picture style settings as I only use jpegs as previews before editing the RAW files.

Do recall being quite impressed with jpegs from a couple of Pentax DSLR's I owned, definitely better in my opinion than their Canon counterparts

It begs the question do manufacturers of the higher end models expect users to post process RAW and subsequently spend less time devising in camera algoritihims to produce the best looking jpeg

I understand that compact cameras are designed to give their best reproduction straight from the camera, but wondering where or if that deliberate effort stops

Not trying to provoke a which is best method debate, but can see how sometimes it would be nice to cut down on the computer work, but that really isn't possible for me given my current cameras efforts
 
For your information, 99.99% of photos from international agencies, such as Getty Images and Reuters, are from in-camera JPEGs.
 
yes Pentax have better than average in camera processing IMO, I was always most happy with what the K5ii and K30 produced compared to every other DSLR I have owned(and I have owned lots)..

had a Fuji X20 for a few weeks and even though I failed to gel with the camera the in camera jpgs seemed very good, plus with all the built in film simulation and effect modes it would be a good option. have been impressed with the Canon G16 too, not sure I would trust it large print but again like the Fuji the in camera modes are very good, the starry night sky is the best I have seen.
 
You may not be aware of it Rich but Canon (and the others too, I guess) have the ability to upload a picture style. You can edit a shot of your choice to get the look that you're after and then upload the recipe so that the body will apply the settings to any future shots.

Bob
 
For your information, 99.99% of photos from international agencies, such as Getty Images and Reuters, are from in-camera JPEGs.
Click to expand...

I suspect an equal amount of wildlife, landscape and portrait photos are not

Bob
Thanks for that information, I was vaguely aware of that capability, maybe I should research it more although I suspect the processed RAW would still be my preferential method
 
Odd question, I think camera manufacturers know their users, and if Canon and Nikon thought it was important they'd put more effort in. We can read a lot into the fact that they don't and that Pentax and Fuji do, and why Sony offer a wider range of WB presets and in camera special effect filters.

If I needed in camera JPEGs, I'd put some effort into modifying a picture style to suit. The only time I've needed it at all I chose to shoot B&W and slightly customised the in camera yellow filter to use as the default style.
 
Another vote for Fuji,from reading reviews the manufacture that seem to have most variable j-peg depending on the cameras you use from them are Sony & Panasonic :)

Quick edit had great j-peg from Nikon aswell
 
tijuana taxi said:
Interested to know which interchangeable lens camera you reckon produces the best jpegs?
Click to expand...
Best? In what way.
I have here an Olympus e-600 which (along with certain related models) is almost guaranteed to produce a NICE Jpeg, out of the box or tweaked settings, doesn't matter.
 
Fuji and Olympus by reputation - however their default jpegs tend to be quite saturated and punchy, so 'best' depends on taste. My Olympus E-PL1 did produce some great jpegs though and of course you can reduce or increase jpeg saturation, contrast, noise reduction and sharpening to taste in the camera settings as well as selecting a 'style' (natural, vivid etc).
 
Any picture can be converted to Jpeg, and that is with any make of camera. Even my Nikon D800 shooting in TIFF producing well over 100 MB photos can be reduce down to Jpeg. As for which lens that again depends on too many variables to give a definate answer.

So what are you actually asking?
With all due respect Rich your question is vague

If you had said something like I wonder which DSLR camera and lens produces the best Jpegs when being used in a studio using a particular lighting setup or for street views in average day/night light or something similar and at a particular distance as a wide/narrow angle shot then you might get a more definative reply.

Using a cheap lens will not produce the same quality of an expensive lens All DSLR cameras are capable of producing decent Jpegs on average same as most compact camera can. |It all depends on the conditions shooting under that alters things
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
Any picture can be converted to Jpeg, and that is with any make of camera. Even my Nikon D800 shooting in TIFF producing well over 100 MB photos can be reduce down to Jpeg. So with all due respect Rich your question is a bit pointless
Click to expand...
He was asking about in-camera jpg's as I understood it. And the phrase 'with all due respect' is patronising since it fails to quantify the respect due and thus leaves open the prospect of nil. Neither do we need, in this context, to know the size of your tiff's!
 
Last edited:
I have three picture styles setup on my 5d mkii one for landscapes/scenery, one for people and one for black and white which means after a trip 90% of my shots can just be uploaded converted and saved leaving me to tweak the 10% that I really like that will make it onto flickr, forums or into albums.

If you want really nice straight out of camera no tweaks applied jpegs I have always been an
Olympus fan.
 
Last edited:
okay this got me thinking about my Merrill's, by default using the Foveon sensor is wasted if you don't use the mahoosive Sigma RAW files so I have spent an hour messing around with in camera colour modes and JPG only, the results are very impressive especially B&W..

so I reckon a good percentage of cameras are capable of decent SOOC jpgs whether be default or with a little tweaking.
 
James J said:
Leica has the best SOOC JPEGS, especially when it comes to black and white.
Click to expand...
??
Leica digital surely ONLY when it comes to black and white, their SOOC colours have been well-dodgy through M8, M9 bodies (or are you taling about Leica's versions of Panasonics?)
and early Panasonic Lumix m4/3rds cameras (G1,G2, GH1, GF1) have a darned good "Dynamic B&W" setting too.
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
??
Leica digital surely ONLY when it comes to black and white, their SOOC colours have been well-dodgy through M8, M9 bodies (or are you taling about Leica's versions of Panasonics?)
and early Panasonic Lumix m4/3rds cameras (G1,G2, GH1, GF1) have a darned good "Dynamic B&W" setting too.
Click to expand...

Nope the colours are fine as long as you aren't in an environment that the auto white balance can't fix.
 
I have a Fuji x100 and am impressed with the JPEG colour and have friends that also use some of the other x series Fuji's and they all say how impressed they are with the JPEG's too!
 
James J said:
Nope the colours are fine as long as you aren't in an environment that the auto white balance can't fix.
Click to expand...
Not in my experience - the SOOC jpegs from my M8 are probably the worst for colour balance of any camera I've owned. Shooting raw is essential with mine and then the results are excellent. In my experience of using a wide range of cameras, I'd say the Fuji X cameras produce the best jpegs SOOC. I've tried editing the raws in PS and can rarely get a better result.
 
I've always found Fuji to have a higher saturation and clarity, so probably why they look good straightnoutmof camera with no tweaking. Most modern slrs have many options, not just picture style to affect jpeg capture.

I had a custom setup when shooting sports and just went with jpeg most of the time without issues. Not only did that help cut down processing the raws but it meant I could load onto iPad quickly and display at the end of matches.

It might be worth experimenting with what you have?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top