If the incremental price of an 80x isn't significant, I'd get it too. It will
certainly make the card have a longer useful lifetime.
Skip
----- Original Message ---------------
Subject: [OM] Re: Q. for E-1 Owners
From: "Wilcox, Joel F" <joel-wilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:06:18 -0500
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>Hi Winsor,
>
>It's just that I'm too curious about the extent of Olympus' support for
>WA and what it might mean in working with RAW images in the C-5060, so
>I'll probably pop for the 80x. Might definitely get one cheaper 512
>though. I'll probably get a reader anyway and walk away from the
>computer most of the time when it uploads.
>
>> Raw vs. jpeg: while you may be able to extract the ultimate quality
>> possible from a raw image because the file will stand up
>> better to post
>> processing, if you are used to nailing your exposure most of the time
>> with color slide film, you should be able to shoot fine quality jpeg
>> with almost no difference in the appearance of the final image. Then
>> you do not have to worry about much post processing, extra
>> storage for
>> a trip like a lap top or large expensive, super fast CF cards.
>
>With OM-2S or OM-4 I can get good exposures on slides, yes. Is it your
>implication that exposing for the highlights is the best way to preserve
>the most data in jpeg mode? I hope so. I actually think this makes the
>most sense for what I want to do, with an occasional RAW bracket for
>insurance. Isn't the histogram helpful for this as well?
>
>Joel W.
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|