.rw2?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by MBX, Sep 21, 2008.

  1. MBX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #1
    I'm shooting raw images with my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX150 but Aperture won't recognize the .RW2 files when i try to import.

    Anybody have an idea why? How can i solve this and have aperture recognize the raw-images?

    Thanks
     
  2. MBX thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #3
    Damn. I was assuming raw was a universal format not camera dependent.

    Do you think it will be updated soon to support it?
     
  3. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #4
    Every sensor is different in terms of RAW as it's the data as read off the sensor. In addition each manufacturer has their own format such as .rw2 and .cr2. But understanding the .rw2 file from one camera does not mean anything about the ability to understand a different cameras .rw2 file.

    In terms of updates how old is the camera (when was that model releases)? If it's very new an update may be coming. If it's older Apple may release an update, but I'd not be holding my breath. As it's not a DSLR the chances are not good: Apple have historically not issued many updates for P&S RAW support.
     
  4. MBX thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #5
    Thanks for info.

    This sucks. I read all the specifications and reviews but i forgot that raw isn't equal raw and isn't a universal format. For some reason i thought it was and i thought Aperture recognizes all raw formats.

    Guess need to return the camera now.
     
  5. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #6
    I looked it up. Seems like it's quite a recent camera. RAW support may be coming, but clearly wasn't in the RAW support update released in the last week...

    Support could still be coming, but you could be waiting months for it :(
     
  6. MBX thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #7
    True it's a new camera. But i definitely don't want to hold on it if it could take weeks or months for an update.

    Damn why can't it just be a universal format like tiff? Tiff's are being recognized no matter what camera or new or old. Unfortunately this cam doesn't shoot tiff's and i also need raw.
     
  7. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #8
    Because that would destroy a lot of the advantage or RAW. To get a TIFF the RAW data would have to be demosaiced on camera. One of the advantages of RAW is that this complex process can be carried out in the RAW decoder which can use this additional information. If you had a TIFF you could capture the 14 or 12 bit data for the headroom, but it'd not be the same.
     
  8. MBX thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #9
    How long do you think it could take until Apple updates Raw-compatibility for this camera?

    I can't believe that otherwise we'd have to buy old cameras just because it takes months and months for Apple to update it.

    Any ideas?
     
  9. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #10
    You could just shoot JPEG until the update comes out... it's not like all the sudden you'll see half the quality you're used to.
     
  10. MBX thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #11
    I actually returned the camera and got a complete refund.

    Because i was able to open it's raw images with the software that came on the CD and i was completely shocked to how noisy the images were. As if applied a noise-filter in photoshop. Absolute insult.

    The jpg's were kinda bit noisy too and not as clear/ sharp but i thought well it's jpg-compression after all.

    Anyway, lesson learnt. Never buy cameras with too high MP's unless the sensors really hold up to the promise.

    Hopefully the MP-wars end soon and the manufacturers focus on quality again.
     
  11. King Luis macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    #12
    thats what i'm doing...sorry to bump an old thread but i just got the fx150 a couple hours ago and realized about the rw2 format. kinda sucks but hopefully apple will release something soon. now to my question about rw2....
    the camera provides rw2 and jpeg pictures at the same time...would the jpeg have the same quality as rw2 or is it degraded? and how much of a difference does shooting raw make? on a rating from 1 being not so much to 10 being a huge difference.

    thanks guys.
     
  12. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #13
    eh… tough question

    basically, RAW is better, but the main reason people shoot RAW is that it permits more post-processing…*not greater quality.
     
  13. ferjmarquesjr macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    #14
    Go to: http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/index.html
    Get the free Adobe DNG Converter. Partial solution and support for:
    Panasonic DMC-G1 **
    Panasonic DMC-FX150 **
    Panasonic DMC-FZ28 **
    Panasonic DMC-LX3 **
     
  14. bking1000 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #15
    If I could be so bold -- RAW, IMO, is of questionable value on a small point and shoot (not no value, just questionable for the amount of effort needed to process it). I would look at RAW as a nice fall-back, but don't buy a point and shoot just because it has raw UNLESS you are looking to do a lot of post-processing work, or you have the software and know-how to set up RAW workflows.

    For the Pannys, you can use their included software to do some minor corrections, then save as a tiff, and then work on the tiff in another application (assuming you don't like the Panny software).

    My apologies if you already know all about RAW, but if you are thinking you should get that compact camera to learn how to use RAW, then I'd warn you that you are in for a steep learning curve with limited benefit (small sensors have limited dynamic range, more noise, and less color bit depth, so although the RAWs might get you some better color or highlight recovery, you are going to swim through a lot of noise from the sensor, and you'll still not be able to recover as much as with a DSLR).

    I do know folks who do get benefit out of RAW on their small cams, but they were either willing to put in the learning time, or they already had a RAW workflow and expertise from DSLR work.

    Sorry for the pessimistic post, but I just thought a word of warning might be of help.

    Good luck and happy shooting.
     

Share This Page