I recommend searching this forum; this subject is discussed every couple of weeks so there is a *ton* of existing discussion on the tradeoffs. Note the specific model matters a lot. On some models, the PEF files are not compressed, on other models, the PEF files are compressed but the DNG files are not; the K-7 compressed them both.
Exactly - hence on the K20D, I shoot PEF whereas on the K-7 I've switched to DNG. I prefer the DNGs for use with Lightroom since metadata is stored within the file rather than in a sidecar file, so I use Lightroom to convert the PEFs to DNG on import.
I believe file size does matter in camera, even if you have a large card, since it will impact buffer capacity and clear time, affecting rapid shooting speed - especially on cameras like the K200d which have smaller buffers.
EDIT: ...so I didn't vote since I use both file types.
I read below article before I've purchased my camera and always used DNG based on this information at dpreview, I also think DNG will be more universal than the PEF in the distant future:
I experimented with JPG and PEF on the K20D, but have settled into DNG. I rarely fill an 8 MB card and rarely shoot in continuous mode. Size & buffer considerations are normally not an issue.
DNG - Almost any program I can think of can open a DNG file now. Including the Finder on my Mac Mini. I can't see any visible difference between PEF and DNG so the universal access and standard ruled out on this one. Either way it will always be RAW, I don't shoot anything in JPG anymore.
I did too. PEF lost any reason to exist since now DNG is losslessly compressed as well.
Now if only there would be some sort of firmware upgrades to get K200D's to losslessly compress their DNGs in-camera. My DNGs come out twice as big as the PEFs.
PEF because i am a MAC Aperture user and preview and conversion of DNG is not supported
Hmm, I'm the opposite: DNG, because the K7's PEF format is still not supported on MacOS (10.6.1 included)... I use Aperture, which supports DNG - and previews fine for me.
I use DNG, mainly just because it has more support in different programs and will probably
be around for a lot longer without being changed. I can fit 166 DNG and 167 PEF onto a
4gb card. DNG's around 23mb and PEF's a bit over 10mb, but still only able to fit 1 extra
PEF on the card. I would have thought I could fit more PEF files on the card considering they are a much smaller file.
I can fit 166 DNG and 167 PEF onto a
4gb card. DNG's around 23mb and PEF's a bit over 10mb, but still only able to fit 1 extra
PEF on the card. I would have thought I could fit more PEF files on the card considering they are a much smaller file.
You can. The camera is lying to you about how many images it can fit. Well, not on purpose - it just has no idea just how effective its PEF compression is going to be, so it guesses conservatively. But start shooting and you'll see you really can fit a lot more than what it says. You'll notice the counter doesn't go down with every shot; it keeps recalculating.
PEF because i am a MAC Aperture user and preview and conversion of DNG is not supported
Alman, did you mean the other way around? I am a Mac Aperture user and have no issues with any of the DNG files I've created over the last 2 years or so...
I'd use DNG since memory cards are not as prohibitively expensive as they were 3 years ago. My workflow usually involves LR2 and CS4 so I'd rather my files skip the step the conversion step from PEF to DNG.