Olympus SZ 31MR - point and shoot

[Cottonwood]

M-2 I like what I'm reading here... yes the HS20 is a bit older than the HS30 but for just the lithium battery I could not see making the change, as I actually like the use of the rechargeable AA batteries. Look at your price difference when wanting to purchase a new lithium battery for the HS30, as you will need to have extra on hand when afield shooting. I carry 3 fully charged sets of 4 - AA batteries for good reason.

The HS20 or the HS30 is not a point and shoot camera, it is not a DSLR either, but in between and is called a Bridge Camera.

Here is an article on 7 reasons to shoot RAW http://www.photographyblogger.net/7-...-to-shoot-raw/

When shooting landscapes, seascapes and most of the 90% other things I shoot I do have my camera set to RAW & JPEG Yes this takes up more memory on the memory card, but the post processing results are well worth it.

One guy who saw my work that now hangs in Owney's Restaurant in Bigfork, MT could not believe that I am using the HS20. He commented that "I went out and bought this new DSLR with its expensive lens, and your doing it with a Fuji Bridge camera?"

Fuji now has come out with:

X S1

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_s1/

X10

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x10/

X Pro1 with Interchangeable lens

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/

[M-2]

So glad to see your post, Cottonwood. I have long lurked in the Photography forum and been in awe of your work (among many others here). You are also blessed to have a plethora of gorgeous subject matter where you live, but what you do with it is incredible.

"Bridge camera"....that makes complete sense...thanks for enlightening me. Still, one of my primary needs is light and small....so I suspect the Fuji or other bridge cameras will need to be eliminated from my quest (for now...).

In re: RAW files...question (for you, WyoBull or any of the other experts here): As I understand it so far, shooting .jpg files loses some of the promised megapixels, while RAW does not. Can one post RAW files to a website, or must it be converted into .jpg, .bmp first? I have always posted .jpg here on TBH. Most of my application need will be for website application and not printing. So after fooling with the RAW file, you must then save as .jpg and THEN you lose pixels anyway?

I hope this makes any sense.

[Cottonwood]

M-2 thank you so much for your compliments.

Here are some links that will explain RAW, TIFF and JPEG compression. One of the things I do know is when I shoot in RAW my image that I am working with is 23.5 MB in size, and when I am working with an image in JPEG it is between 12.5 MB and 6 MB in size because of compression of the JPEG image.

http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1199

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/raw.html

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/imagetypes.htm

http://www.idps.org.uk/RawvJpeg.pdf

Another way of looking at comparing JPEG to RAW is if you bake cakes. How much better would the cake be with all the ingredients (RAW) than with just a few (JPEG). I have friends that just have JPEG shooting P&S camera's, where we have shot the very same subject mater. They could not believe the difference after they were ready to print, and then wondered why the difference.