What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?


5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Having sRAW or mRAW facility and a cropping mode are totally unrelated. We shoot in RAW to allow further processing in 16 bit - nothing more. Assuming the camera has a high MP sensor, then to suggest that you only ever want to post process a digital image if you're going to enlarge the image to the size of a house is ridiculous. How many people really want photographs bigger than A2 all the time ?

Nikon must have lost a load of sales by forcing it's users to be saddled with 36MP files if they want to PP - which most serious photographers do all the time ( unless Nikon has another way that I don't know about ).

The 5D didn't need sRAW - on the MK2 and 3 it is useful. You can guarantee Canon will offer it on an ever higher MP camera because they are ( generally ) in touch with what serious photographers require.

In the same vein in camera cropping to DX is another gimmicky feature, no doubt incorporated to satisfy users of DX lenses on a FX body.


Daybreak broke me loose and brought me back...
Feb 28, 2012
When reading the above comments regarding mRAW, I was wondering how in-camera downscaling (assuming that mRAW is just that) and downscaling in post compares in terms of IQ. Comparable?


May 16, 2012
Wadsworth, OH
Nobody said everybody needs mRAW and sRAW. I stated a case where it is useful. It delivers an image IQ better than jpeg at smaller file sizes. Why is this so hard to understand? If you don't need it, fine, but I've made use of sRAW a ton with shooting sports with a 1DX. If you have strict deadlines go jpg. If you have relaxed timelines, shoot full RAW. Intermediate timelines shoot smaller RAW because it affords better processing vs. jpg but you also don't fill up your card really fast or take a ton of time to upload to a computer. I can fit 1800 sRAW files on a 32GB CF card.