EOS 6D Mark II RAW & JPG Image Size Mismatch

[BondJamesBond]

On my EOS 6D Mark II camera, I keep the RAW & JPG settings at maximum size for both (26M, 6240x4160).  However, all my JPG images end up being only mid-single digit mbs (ie, 5-7 range).  I shoot everything in both RAW & JPG, and thankfully 99.8% of the time, it is the RAW image I pick to work on.  However, on the rare occasion when the JPG image turns out better than the RAW one, I would like it to be full size.

I was tempted to select "Clear All Camera Settings" from the camera's menu, but didn't want to take a chance on resetting the image numbering system back to zero.

Any advice?

[SignifDigits]

What makes you think you are losing pixels and/or other information?   It's difficult to determine that is the case just by looking at the file size as JPEG is a compression algorithm and the processor can produce pretty widely variant file sizes based upon ISO and a number of other factors.

RAW files size should be # of pixels * color depth (bits) / 8 (bits per bite).    JPEG file size in bits will range from less to much less.

I'm not saying nothing is wrong, just that file size alone is not a fully reliable indicator. 

[stevet1]

BondJamesBond,

Some of too might be based on the amount of elements in your picture. Photos of single subjects. or ones of a single element or color would have fewer pixels in it than a photo with lots of different elements and colors.

At the very least, go into your menu and look for image quality. Make sure your have the first one (L) selected for jpg's. That's going to be your highest quality.

Steve Thomas

[rs-eos]

Did you set the quality of the JPEG captures to "L" (i.e. Large)? If so, nothing to worry about since both RAW and JPEG images will have the same 26M resolution.

As explained above, RAW images have so much more information in them. JPEG file sizes will vary wildly. e.g. images of simple scenes with low noise will compress to smaller sizes very well.

e.g. during a portrait session where I was turning on just a single light to build up the image, this was the resulting file sizes:

• Key only - RAW: 50.7 MB, JPG: 16.7 MB
• Fill only - RAW: 32.8 MB, JPG: 7.4 MB
• Rim only - RAW: 31.8 MB, JPG: 7 MB
• Hair only - RAW: 25.4 MB, JPG: 3.2 MB
• Background only - RAW: 24.1 MB, JPG: 1.9 MB
• Specular only - RAW: 42.5 MB, JPG: 13 MB
• All lights - RAW: 51 MB, JPG: 16.5 MB

This was using an EOS R5 II (45 MP camera)

[kvbarkley]

It also depends on ISO. Lower ISO's create smaller JPEGS because there is less noise.

[BondJamesBond]

Thanks everyone for replying so quickly!!! I knew that JPG images are a fraction the size of RAW, so giving it some thought and research (opening up the first memory card from two different cameras, on a hard drive), I realized the problem.

On my EOS 5DS R camera, the JPG images from its memory card are close to 20mb. That’s been my main camera the past few years, and since I use RAW probably 99.999% of the time, got confused by how small the JPG image is on the 6D Mark II.  The numbers being the same for both RAW & JPG on the image quality menu screen didn’t help my confusion.

One more question; what's up with the price of SanDisk memory cards? Talk about sticker shock. (smiley face)

[SignifDigits]

The shortage of computer memory - "RAMageddon" is the result of data center demand for high-speed memory and expected to last a few years.  

[kvbarkley]

And it might get worse because the issues in the middle east might put a crimp in the helium supply.

[BurnUnit]

Probably the best way to ensure yourself of the images size is to open the folder containing the files in Windows Explorer (or a similar app). Put your cursor over the file in question, right click and select "Properties", then select the "Details" tab. This should display the pixel dimensions and file sizes for that specific image. There is also other information about the image that you may find useful or interesting.

If you just hover the cursor over the file and wait a couple of seconds, some basic information may be displayed automatically.

[wq9nsc]

I am really happy I ordered my HP desktop last summer because I hate to see how much the price has increased (twin processors with 512 GB each, twin Nvidia workstation graphics cards, four HP 2 TB SSD on the CPU busses, along with regular 4TB SSD and 18TB mechanical HD).  It looks like memory prices are going to be crazy for some time with major manufacturers doing contract pricing 24 months out now.  Of course if the AI bubble pops, it will be much like the rapid change in video cards after demand from the bitcoin miners dropped before the AI price run up hit.

I always transfer files via USB or ethernet depending upon my camera body leaving the cards in place and this is even more important now with the increased pricing to reduce the chances of damage to the cards.Rodger