selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

That may be normal for Canon but not for Nikon, Sony or Fuji.

I just tested an A7 and got three different "quality" settings for an arbitrary 24MP image: Standard 7.06mb, Fine 9.71mb and Extra Fine 17.7mb.

My Fuji X100T offers Normal and Fine. My Nikon Df offers TIFF, Fine, Normal and Basic and the Z7 offers TIFF and two versions of each of the JPEG, one with an asterisk which I'm sure is discussed in the manual but I don't really care since I only use raw.

The difference in quality is in the compression (no compression for TIFF).

There is no point in comparing the in-camera results to the results from an editor on the computer since the camera's compression is probably just a quick approximation of what you can get from your computer.

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

This is great advice. After I got my first DSLR, I started out shooting only jpeg for around six months. When I compared some identical shots with those of my friend who was at Glacier Point with me one day, I thought I was doing something wrong. That day I learned what a simple dehaze slider in Lightroom could do for landscapes. I've shot with both RAW and jpeg ever since, and I've learned what I can do in post processing.

I wish I had RAW files for some of my early jpeg-only shots.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

There are two other choices you can make on some cameras.

Raw bit depth (12- or 14-bit) will affect the size of the raw file as well as the JPEG and TIFF (8-bit). This will also impact the overall quality of both the in-camera JPEG and the output from the computer.

Raw crop factor - besides a possible choice of full or APS-C a camera might also offer other aspect ratios like square, 3:4 or 4:5. This will affect the size of both the raw file and the JPEG whichever way it is created.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Scotty - we all expect so much, much more out of your UHH performance. Your Df does not provide compression options for your 8-bit TIFF files. Regarding the JPEG compression ratio of the Nikon cameras, it's hard to understand their reference of 1:4 (fine) vs the other two options. Does 1 to 4 equate to 75% JPEG quality in computer software such as Lightroom, or 100%, or what?

The Sony manuals are so miserable, they're worthless to understand the quality option. It seems Sony has advanced just a bit as a pro-grade camera company, not in terms of their user manuals, but at least in options avaiable by the a7IV, the JPEG quality options are now Standard and Light, even though the words are vague (meaningless).

We're left to assume (i.e., guess) whether the highest 'quality' JPEG from the camera is the best (100%) quality or something else, where running a computer-based JPEG conversion from RAW is always a better result.

And finally, a JPEG is an 8-bit file, just as the TIFF from these Nikon cameras. Whether the camera sensor (RAW) started as 14- or 12- or any bit-depth over 8, the color data still has to be mapped to the colorspace selection of the 8-bit output. The in-camera conversion isn't going to make a difference for the sensor type, although the manufacturer has plenty of options to tweak / control how their cameras run this mapping action to the target 8-bit output file.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Affinity has a comprehensive adjustable haze removable filter which works equally well for JPG or RAW.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Wow you sound like Jared Polin. Time for a wig? 🤣🤣🤣

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I'm sorry, but the statement about cameras not having a quality setting is incorrect. All of my cameras offer two choices for JPEG files...resolution and quality. I am aware of older cameras that do not offer any choices, partial choices, or a limited range of choices, but these options have been much less limited for the last 10 years or more, at least for many Nikon models.

Grahame Loc: Fiji

Really?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I could have said that better, instead by pointing out the words and limited descriptions of the camera options, when available, that have no relation to how various software products provide for JPEG quality. Take the JPEG compression ratio of the Nikon cameras, it's hard to understand their reference of 1:4 (fine) vs the other two options. Does 1 to 4 equate to 75% JPEG quality in computer software such as Lightroom, or 100%, or what? For Sony, what does 'standard' vs 'light' mean?

therwol Loc: USA

8 pages so far and counting. I ate too much popcorn. I'm getting a headache.

(Download)

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Affinity Photo only has a haze removal filter for RGB (JPEG/TIFF) images -- not for raw files.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Much is always made here in the comparison of 14 (or 12) bit raw files to the 8 bit JPEG files saved by the camera. The truth is that while the file size allows for saving that much data, for almost all cameras, the actual capture of 14 bits of dynamic range occurs only when shooting at the camera's "native ISO," usually somewhere around 100 or maybe 200. As soon as a photographer moves up from there, the camera begins capturing (and recording) progressively less dynamic range. I don't remember the actual value, but the raw files of night sky images captured with my D850 at ISO 5000 probably comtained somewhere around 5 or 6 stops of dynamic range.

Was raw the way to go with those shots? Absolutely. But it is interesting to consider that I got quite usable JPEG review images on my rear display when taking them. At some point I'm going to go back and see if anything can be done with thise JPEGs, just for fun and to see if I can annoy folks here.

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

Don't take him seriously. he's just trying to ruffle some feathers. He particularly loves it in the raw vs JPG fights or discussions.

Leinik Loc: Rochester NY

Thanks for the clarification ,0)

srt101fan

Who are you replying to? Only The Shadow knows....