# RAW vs MRAW vs SRAW



## SnappingShark

I shoot with a Canon 5DS - It has 50mpx, and so, the original RAW file is pretty large.

Now, the MRAW is only 28mpx and the SRAW even smaller.

My question to any of you know-it-alls (I'm looking at you), besides my ability to crop in closer, will I lose any detail by shooting in MRAW vs RAW? And because I am shooting MRAW, will I gain back some low light performance due to the size of the end-result RAW file being smaller?


----------



## Light Guru

Memory cards are cheep there is no reason NOT to shoot in the highest quality possible.


----------



## SnappingShark

True, but that doesn't answer my question 

Also it effects my workflow if the images are too large so I was curious of the effects of MRAW vs RAW


----------



## Light Guru

BrightByNature said:


> True, but that doesn't answer my question
> 
> Also it effects my workflow if the images are too large so I was curious of the effects of MRAW vs RAW



And Im saying the question is rather pointless.  If you are going to shoot raw there is NO reason not to shoot the highest quality possible.

The only reasons you wouldn't are if you need quick turn around in the images.  And then you would shoot jpeg.


----------



## SnappingShark

Then why do Canon and many other companies in their newest cameras give you the option of multiple sizes? I get for screen / print - but my question was about quality lost and low light performance - not whether I should or not.


----------



## Braineack

a gimmick?

the concept of a lossy raw file just to save some memory space just doesnt make sense to me.

sRAW and mRAW are solutions to a problem that doesn't exist.


----------



## table1349

sRAW Format Explained


----------



## ronlane

Jamie,

I don't think I am going to answer the question you have asked but I will look at it like this and ask you a question (or two). If you have a 50mp RAW image, what is the MRAW file size? the SRAW file size? If these files are bigger than the 5D mk iii's RAW image (24 MP??), then I would think that they would be as good or of a better IQ, so you would be fine.

I can totally see where 1,000's of 50mp RAW images would be taxing on the work flow. But if the MRAW and or SRAW produce better IQ than the 5D mk III, then use them. (I would expect the IQ of any of the files of the 5Ds to be better than the comparable 5D mk III image)


----------



## SnappingShark

Yeah, there's 50mpx (RAW), 28mpx (MRAW) and I think 18mpx for SRAW ... I guess it's more of a curious technical question


----------



## Dave442

What I read suggests that sRaw is an option for fast turnaround where a JPEG would be the other option, but you need the ability to adjust WB in post. 

I think it is a worthwhile camera feature for those of us that have a workflow that processes a Raw file, or a file that will process similarly, and have the occasions where the final image is for the web or other uses. I think as the sensors MP keeps going up the need for this will increase and its probably good that they are start working out the issues now for when it is really needed.

I don't think I would use it as I always forget to change these things later on.


----------



## Light Guru

Dave442 said:


> What I read suggests that sRaw is an option for fast turnaround where a JPEG would be the other option, but you need the ability to adjust WB in post.



Except you wouldn't get faster turnaround time because you still have to make it he WB adjustments in post. 

If you need fast a turnaround there is no post. You shoot and deliver that's it.


----------



## bobbybabaletskos

Light Guru said:


> Dave442 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I read suggests that sRaw is an option for fast turnaround where a JPEG would be the other option, but you need the ability to adjust WB in post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except you wouldn't get faster turnaround time because you still have to make it he WB adjustments in post.
> 
> If you need fast a turnaround there is no post. You shoot and deliver that's it.
Click to expand...

Yes but turnaround would be limited not because of the filesize itself alone.  Turnaround would be slow for limited computer processing power.  It would take sRAW less time to process a wb in a post processing software, hence the less turnaround time

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk


----------



## Light Guru

bobbybabaletskos said:


> Yes but turnaround would be limited not because of the filesize itself alone.  Turnaround would be slow for limited computer processing power.  It would take sRAW less time to process a wb in a post processing software, hence the less turnaround time
> 
> Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk



That processing time would be so minimal in in the turn around time. Unless you are using a archaic computer.


----------



## AJPhotographic

From what I can find, other than a lower pixel count, mRAW and sRAW are still RAW images with the same flexibility and detail as a full size RAW file. I wish my camera had this option as it would reduce shutter lag when shooting timelapse with a short interval between shots. For example, if I want to shoot with a 1 second interval and observe the 180 rule, with a shutter speed of 0.5-0.6 seconds, after about 25 shots the camera will miss an interval as the internal buffer is full. Switching to jpeg does not fix this problem, as although the file size is smaller, the camera then needs to process the jpeg internally and after about 35 shots will also miss an interval. I think it is a very useful feature to have even though it would only get used on occasion, it would still be nice to have as an option.


----------



## kalgra

I think the most interesting question in the OP has been overlooked. "Because I am shooting MRAW, will I gain back some low light".  Or maybe I'm just dumb.

My guess is no that it doesn't work that way but it is an interesting thought. With mraw or sraw do multiple smaller pixels start to act as one larger pixel thereby improving iso performance?

Since I have seen the 5ds and 5dsr knocked for poor iso performance many times for obvious reasons I would assume I would have read if mraw or sraw was an alternative workaround to that problem.


----------



## snowbear

Not  sure if it helps but File types – RAW, S-RAW, M-RAW and JPEG - Canon Professional Network


----------



## TCampbell

One of the biggest reasons to avoid modes such as M-RAW and S-RAW (besides loss of detail) is that these modes are not well-supported by third party editing programs.  Don't be surprised if your favorite editor (which might understand your camera's RAW format) does _not_ understand your camera's MRAW or SRAW formats.

The only _real_ RAW mode is the mode named "RAW" (no prefix... no suffix).  

If you're asking if MRAW or SRAW perform "binning" (which typically would improve the signal-to-noise (SnR) ratio of the image)... I don't know.  I've never tested that nor have I come across any articles that addressed it.

My "guess" is that it's not using true binning because that would imply something like 2x2 binning or 3x3 binning which would mean that "MRAW" should be half as wide and half as tall as full-resolution... but I don't believe that's the case.    They may be using some partial binning algorithm.  Typically whenever you down-sample any image you improve the SnR.


----------



## UncleSteve

So I was doing some indoor low light shooting with my 5DS R a few nights ago and I knew the photos would not be required to print at the size of a large scale poster.  So, I shot on the MRAW setting to save some space and let my system run a little faster when editing (1600+ photos can be a lot).  I was shooting at f2.8 ISO 2000 and a shutter speed of 200.  What i noticed when in the edits is the noise was greatly reduced when compared to the full RAW files in the same settings.  Lightroom and Photoshop had no issue working with the files either.   Another side effect was an increase in buffer when doing long action shots.  

I love the 5DS R, but it was getting really frustrating when not shooting in pure studio with flash to really get all the detail.  Now that I have seen what happens with the MRAW I may find my self using that more often and only going to the full size when I know the prints will require such a file size.  Just my two cents


----------

