[Jasvox]

I'm also curious. I've always used PEF but the K-01 only creates DNG. If this is the direction for the M processors, I need to learn alittle more about DNG.

What is to learn? You process them exactly the same.

Jason

[Anvh]

"raw files do not have a color space. sRGB and aRGB only effect jpegs from the camera."
-original posted by enoeske

I wasn't saying it in the sense of have both settings simultaneously as much as I was saying no matter what you're shooting why not set-up your camera to the same format as the software you're going to use for post processing

I think you missed the point.

RAW does not have a colourspace, so if you set the camera up to use sRGB or aRGB then it won't effect the RAW file.

[Philoslothical]

I think he was expressing his preference for when shooting jpeg, suggesting that OP set it up this way prior to needing it. Not everyone shoots raw all the time (I do, but I don't mind the mandatory post processing).

[Prieni]

I don't use big memory cards and don't recommend doing so. I always carry several 8G cards with me instead of one 32G. The reason is simple, don't put everything in the same basket. It's risk mitigation. With one 32G you could risk loosing 32G worth of priceless memories...with 8G then it's 8G you see the drill...

Following that train of thought you should take DNG's as you get less pictures on one card and in the case of malfunction loose less images.

[ducdao]

Following that train of thought you should take DNG's as you get less pictures on one card and in the case of malfunction loose less images.

And following your train of thought, one should not take any pictures, that way there is no risk of loosing anything.

I think you get my initial point already which is maximizing the use of space while mitigating the risks of loosing your precious memories.

[Prieni]

And following your train of thought, one should not take any pictures, that way there is no risk of loosing anything.

Hey, I didn't voice any fear of loosing any images. And I haven't lost any so far (touches wood).

I think you get my initial point already which is maximizing the use of space while mitigating the risks of loosing your precious memories.

Yes, but... So far I haven't had any problems with 4 GB cards in the K-5 taking DNG's even on vacation. I usually have another 4 GB card with me but never needed to resort to it due to memory size problems. But then I'm not one using a shotgun approach to photography...

Prieni

[Anvh]

I've never broke a card or have one fail on me but i've lost several....
So instead of carrying several cards i used mainly one big one and a backup.

I think he was expressing his preference for when shooting jpeg, suggesting that OP set it up this way prior to needing it. Not everyone shoots raw all the time (I do, but I don't mind the mandatory post processing).

Ah okay, thought we were talking about RAW.

[ducdao]

I've never broke a card or have one fail on me but i've lost several....
So instead of carrying several cards i used mainly one big one and a backup.


Ah okay, thought we were talking about RAW.

I didn't happen before doesn't equate to "It won't happen".

Nonetheless, I guess I'm more cautious and I don't trust in my luck...

[Anvh]

I won't argue with that but i'm only saying that i'm more afraid of actually losing the SD card then that they will fail on me.

Anyway who is good here in calulating probability?
Somehow it doesn't make much sense to me.
If i've two cards instead of one card then i have twice the risk that a card will fail on me right so how does that work out?
Does adding more cards actually lower the risk or is it falls security?

[DeadJohn]

We've drifted off topic but I guess the original question has been answered.

I agree with Anvh that the risk of misplacing a card is greater than the risk of a card failing. I think most amateurs are fine using a single large card. The odds of failure are low, and even if your luck runs out and kills a card, your maximum loss is one day of photos. Small odds and relatively small consequences = not worth trying to mitigate the risk.

If you're taking once-in-a-lifetime photos, on a multi-day safari with no chance to download photos every night, or a pro on a special assignment, then a more sophisticated card management strategy might be needed. Multiple cards and multiple cameras might save a catastrophic failure.

[rvannatta]

I don't use big memory cards and don't recommend doing so. I always carry several 8G cards with me instead of one 32G. The reason is simple, don't put everything in the same basket. It's risk mitigation. With one 32G you could risk loosing 32G worth of priceless memories...with 8G then it's 8G you see the drill...

I just carry several 32's I don't think I've ever filled one up. I dump them onto my computer daily and the computer gets backed up to the cloud
every night with a cloud backup service (Carbonite), but likewise if I come around a corner and see the Martians unloading a flyng saucer,
it won't be lack of card space that keeps me from taking pictures.

[Schraubstock]

If i've two cards instead of one card then i have twice the risk that a card will fail on me right so how does that work out?

How does that work?
I understand the Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) Is obtained in different ways namely tests in the lab, accumulated field failure records, or prediction models. You can obtain these data from only one unit or a number of units where each unit's datum is correlated to obtain a result as an average. The more units are tested the higher the MTBF figure will be until a plateau is reached, unless the units are so bad that all are failing then MTBF will be very low.

So if you test a number of units some will fail earlier than others and one can calculate an average MTBF. This means the more cards you take along on your trip the more you dilute the chance of experiencing a failure. Because if you are taking only one card and you are unlucky for this one to fail you will have experienced, as an individual, a 100% failure rate. But if this one rotten card is one of ten you took along you can see that you will spread your risk factor. (And you have nine others to carry on.)
This is my take of it.

Now how do you calculate MTBL ? (Mean Time Between Loss) I have got no bloody idea.

Greetings

[Wheatfield]

Originally posted by Anvh Quote If i've two cards instead of one card then i have twice the risk that a card will fail on me right so how does that work out? How does that work?

If each card has the same likelihood of failing, then every time you add a card, you have increased the chance of having a card fail.

[riff]

If each card has the same likelihood of failing, then every time you add a card, you have increased the chance of having a card fail.

Indeed, works the same as lotto tickets.

[Anvh]

So if you test a number of units some will fail earlier than others and one can calculate an average MTBF. This means the more cards you take along on your trip the more you dilute the chance of experiencing a failure. Because if you are taking only one card and you are unlucky for this one to fail you will have experienced, as an individual, a 100% failure rate. But if this one rotten card is one of ten you took along you can see that you will spread your risk factor. (And you have nine others to carry on.)

Actually when you increase the number of cards you increase the number of failures.

If 1 out of 10 cards fail and you have 10 cards then changes are 100% one will fail on you while if i've only 1 the changes of failure off the card is only 10%.
Sure if the card fails i lose everything but if i've 2 cards then changes are higher (double?) that i lose half a day.

I'm not saying you're wrong just that it's quite a complicated matter and i actually doubt it actually work the way we think it works.
What's better to do, i don't know but i'm content with using bigger cards since it involves less changing cards and the card is always full when you are the busiest.