[Rondec]

NEF is Nikon's RAW format.

Not sure what advantages it has over DNG.

I think any advantages are related to Nikon's proprietary software and how it interacts with the raw files.

[Edvinas]

NEF is Nikon's RAW format.

Not sure what advantages it has over DNG.

Sorry, that was mistype, I had meant "Does Nikon have possibility to shoot in DNG?"

[Edvinas]

I think any advantages are related to Nikon's proprietary software and how it interacts with the raw files.

As far as I know, Nikon does not have possibility to shoot in DNG, right? If this is right, how can we compare NEF with format Nikon does not support at all?

[Rondec]

As far as I know, Nikon does not have possibility to shoot in DNG, right? If this is right, how can we compare NEF with format Nikon does not support at all?

Yes. Nikon deliberately pushes photographers to buy its proprietary software and deliberately doesn't give support to Adobe, so that ACR isn't as good for NEF as Nikon software.

[30v iPentax]

Ensinmäiseksi kannattaa miettiä, käyttääkö Pentax vai haluaako olla luuseri joka haikailee canon tai nikon.

[glee46]

Here's a short video from Adobe on DNG.

I think it does a pretty good job of stating the reasons to use it.

Adobe Evangelists - Julieanne Kost - LR/PS - The Advantages of the DNG File Format | Adobe TV

[cats_five]

I try to avoid all kinds of evangilists.

[FrancisK7]

I've always used DNG. Even on a K10D and filesize constraints. Storage is so cheap nowadays, even quality (fast) storage that space is hardly a factor. DNG is more standard and integrates easily with PS/Lightroom, so this is what I've always used.

I don't like proprietary formats of any kind that only work with a single brand.

[reeftool]

Since Lightroom converts the PEF to DNG anyhow, it's a time saver to shoot in DNG for me. I suppose it will depend on software. If you're not using Adobe products, then PEF might be a better choice. All RAW formats are proprietary, even DNG. Any company using it most likely has to pay a license fee to Adobe.

[theprisoner6]

glee46 - that Adobe vid is great - thanks for posting.

When I bought my K-5 I switched it over to DNG right away. I shoot PEF on my K100d - but convert it to DNG when I import into Lightroom. Its not that I don't trust PEF files, but Lightroom is the core of my workflow so it makes sense to use DNG and I like supporting Open Standards whenever I can.

[glee46]

Since Lightroom converts the PEF to DNG anyhow, it's a time saver to shoot in DNG for me. I suppose it will depend on software. If you're not using Adobe products, then PEF might be a better choice. All RAW formats are proprietary, even DNG. Any company using it most likely has to pay a license fee to Adobe.

Adobe opened it up to be always free. Of course they can afford it, but then, that's another story.

[Entropy]

I've always used DNG. Even on a K10D and filesize constraints. Storage is so cheap nowadays, even quality (fast) storage that space is hardly a factor. DNG is more standard and integrates easily with PS/Lightroom, so this is what I've always used.

I don't like proprietary formats of any kind that only work with a single brand.

It doesn't really matter - it's not like if you buy a new camera you'll ever use it to read the old files.

If you're referring to software that processes the images themselves - if dcraw supports it fully, the argument becomes irrelevant (since a fully open-source implementation means the file format will never become unreadable). The K-5 was the first time since I started shooting Pentax that there wasn't full support for the body I purchased at the time I purchased it. (Semi-early K-5 adopter + ufraw has been a little slow in dev cycle lately, however dcraw did support it at that point in time.) Only reason I'm still using DNG is inertia.

[eAboulafia]

Personnellement je trouve le PEF très bien. UFRAW le gère parfaitement, Aperture aussi, à partir de là la vrai question serait à quoi bon un format DNG d'Adobe et comment que se fait-il qu'un logiciel aussi cher que Photoshop, ne soit pas capable dans ses version antérieure à la CS5 de gérer tous les formats RAW principaux alors que des logiciels libres et gratuit le font.

[dosdan]

NEF is Nikon's RAW format.

Not sure what advantages it has over DNG.

One "advantage" is that it offers a lossy version of raw.

Noise, Dynamic Range and Bit Depth in Digital SLRs -- page 3 (scroll down to the sectioned entitled "An aside on "lossy" NEF compression:"

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d300-review/ (drag your scroll bar half-way down to quickly get to the filesize comparison table in the "Using the Nikon D300" section.

Lossy RAW compression | The Woodwork

An interesting comment from GordonBGood: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=36978168

The quote above his reply mentions that a D7000 raw file is smaller than a K-5 raw file.

Dan

[Racer X 69]

Ensinmäiseksi kannattaa miettiä, käyttääkö Pentax vai haluaako olla luuseri joka haikailee canon tai nikon.

Joten voimme antaa hänen olla häviäjä sitten, eh?

Personnellement je trouve le PEF très bien. UFRAW le gère parfaitement, Aperture aussi, à partir de là la vrai question serait à quoi bon un format DNG d'Adobe et comment que se fait-il qu'un logiciel aussi cher que Photoshop, ne soit pas capable dans ses version antérieure à la CS5 de gérer tous les formats RAW principaux alors que des logiciels libres et gratuit le font.

Oui, je suis d'accord.