Francisco Mendonça

That was the case! I was opening the photos with the basic Windows program and once I opened them in Rawttherapee the RAW looked so much better! Thank you so much. I was using the basic photo program that came with Windows and turns out that was a bad idea. I understand that the RAW photos are mainly used for further processing but I thought they should appear better to begin with and that's what happens when I open them with Rawtherapee. Thanks to your comment I found that program and can now make some adjustments to the RAW to make it look a bit better! Thanks a lot. I will indeed look into taking more pictures in JPEG and use RAW only for images that I feel like I will process later. For now I'm using Rawtherapee since I'm just starting out but thanks a lot for the info!

Greetings. I bought a used XT-1 last month and am still in the process of learning everything so this problem may be something very simple that I just couldn't find online and that maybe everyone knows...? The pictures which I've uploaded as examples were taken using the RAW + FINE mode so they are the same picture, except one was compressed based on the RAW data to form a jpeg. Now, the problem I have is that the RAW file (RAF, actually) on my PC does occupy more space (32MB compared to 5MB from the jpeg) but has a lower resolution as you can see. How is this possible? Aren't RAW files the absolute best a camera can produce? Or does the compression to jpeg enhance the details? I'm very confused as you can probably tell. To upload the pics I zoomed in and cropped the rest out. The thing is: for the jpeg, since it has better resolution I didn't need to zoom is as much to get the same result. So the raw had to be zoomed to the max while the jpeg maintained its sharpness and could be furhter zoomed (I guess that's what resolution probably means...). Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you.