BarbK Loc: Cinnaminson, NJ

I have a Nikon 5100 and have been shooting RAW and Jpeg fine. I have Windows 7 and need the jpegs to see what I am working on. However, the buffer fills up quickly when shooting in continuous mode. Would it fill up less quickly if I switched to RAW+ Jpeg basic? Thanks in advance.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Yes it would, but not by much that you would notice.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

One option that would make a difference is to shoot raw only and use one of the many available raw viewers / converters to view and sort your shots

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

Please excuse my ignorance - But maybe you can clarify it --
You say the following: "I have Windows 7 and need the jpegs to see what I am working on."
Since transitioning over from film to digital in 2009 I have never shot in Jpeg always in RAW & have never encountered any need to utilize Jpeg to see what I'm working on ---
So, please explain why you feel you need to in shoot RAW + Jpeg so you can see what you're working on ?????

Selene03

??? I, too, have a question here. I never had trouble seing raw photos from a d5100 on my Windows 7 computers. I know windows 10 stopped updating camera codecs, so sometimes newer cameras were a problem, but I don't understand why you are having the problem with Windows 7. Unfortunately, the best solution is to shoot raw only.

GENorkus Loc: Washington Twp, Michigan

1st, I do not own Nikon. A nice camera though.

When I use RAW+ jpeg it's mainly only because I think I'll need to show them before I get a chance to do PP on the raw images. (Something like showing some photos on the side at a reception.) For most other events, I'll just show one or two from my camera back. No problems.


If you feel you'll need to show or print in a hurry, I'd think that would be the only reason but... as mentioned above, I doubt you'd notice the difference unless it were to be shown very large.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

You can download the Windows codec here: http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/sw/97.html

BarbK Loc: Cinnaminson, NJ

When I put the card in my card reader (in my laptop) I get a jpeg and a NEF file which is a blank folder. I open the NEF file in Adobe RAW to process it. The jpeg lets me see what the image is. Don't know how else to explain it.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

I bet if you load Nikon's version of DPP onto your laptop you will be able to view the NEF file then transfer the file on to Adobe -- This should allow you to shoot in only RAW

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

FYI... No, you don't need JPEGs to "see what you are working on".

Install FastPictureViewer codec on your Win7 computer and you 'll be able to "see" RAW files.... and can stop having to capture RAW+JPEG.

$10.... https://www.fastpictureviewer.com/codecs/

FastPictureViewer codec will enable viewing almost any RAW on almost any version of Windows. I've used it with Canon, Pentax, Olympus and Nikon RAW files. It also allows you to view other types of files such as TIFF, PSD, etc. (It's better than the free Nikon codec, because that ONLY works with Nikon NEF files.)

Once the codec is installed, images can be seen in Windows Explorer as thumbnails (various sizes may be possible, depending upon Windows version).

Images also can be seen enlarged in Windows Picture Viewer... RAW will appear somewhat lower contrast and desaturated because Windows isn't color calibrated. But it's good enough to check focus, composition, image content, etc.

P.S. It also may be a bit misleading to "judge" RAW image files based upon a JPEG produced in-camera. All digital cameras take RAW image initially. When you set the camera to save JPEG, to produce that they essentially are doing a quick RAW conversion according to the settings of the camera: contrast, sharpening, noise reduction, saturation, etc., etc. The result may or may not be what you would have chosen, had you done the RAW conversion later on your computer. Of course, you can change the RAW to taste, since you're capturing both RAW & JPEG. My point, though, is that the out-of-camera JPEG may or may not be a very accurate representation of the image. That JPEG has been "modified"... maybe only a little... maybe a lot!

JCam Loc: MD Eastern Shore

BarbK

In my somewhat less than professional opinion, once you switch to RAW captures, you are going to have larger files filling up available file space. I have basically the same setup as you except that I use a Canon 60D, Win7 PRO and PSE 14 for most of my processing. My Camera is generally set for Large-fine files; I usually shoot in JPEG unless it is a really important shoot, ie. kid's weddings, family affairs, etc. in which case I also use RAW + JPEG so if I mess up some setting or forget to change, I can still recover the prints with RAW much better than JPEG opened in the RAW processor and with a lot less time, but they are done at my schedule with no pressure for immediate results.

If you are shooting RAW in continuous shooting mode and processing them all in RAW, the amount of time you must be spending in PP must be awesome, why? For almost immediate showing of the shots on a projector, large TV screen (or similar equipment), I would think the JPEG would be more than adequate. So long as the focus, exposure and compositions (no heads cut off) are OK, the public will be happy seeing and/or having them. A few years back our Camera Club was asked to take pictures of an 'open to the public' kids (with at least one parent) at a skating event and print a 4" x 6" photo for each kid. Pictures were all taken on the ice while skating. Four of us took pictures, all JPEG; we limited the number of shots per card to about 15-20 so we didn't have any downtime at the printer; we all had extra cards, and one person ran the printer. We only had a couple of bad shots--too slow a shutter speed, camera shake, etc., and those were retaken in a studio like area we had set up in advance.

I didn't hear any complaints and by eliminating extensive PP, the printer was mostly able to keep up so the waits were not very long.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

The OP is using Windows File Explorer to organize and view files.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

I understand that -- It's just my experience with DPP as a base starting point & assuming that the Nikon software is similar is that I achieve better viewing & organization/editing capabilities with this approach -- However, anything would be an improvement over what he is now using

hitdog Loc: Pennsylvania

Thanks for this link to fast picture viewer. Works great .After one of the recent windows 10 updates I lost the ability to view Olympus .ORF files as thumbnails or in windows viewer, works like a charm