Pentax PEF and Apple MAC FAIL!

Marc Sabatella · 07-07-2009, 02:44 PM

Realistically, the basics of the format stays the same. What changes is the sensor itself, and with it, the quirks of how to best demosaic the data. When a new camera comes out that uses the same sensor as a previous model, it often works to simply edit the file with a hex editor to fool your software into thinking the file came from an earlier model. Trying this on a model with a new sensor is less likely to work well. At best, you'd get an image but with colors looking a bit screwy. At worst, it would be hopeless confused by different number of pixels from one sensor to another.

Zav · 07-07-2009, 04:56 PM

I'll say it again: update camera raw

Adobe - Photoshop : For Macintosh : Camera Raw 5.4 update K-7 PEF is supported.

davemdsn · 07-07-2009, 05:21 PM

I love this topic. It pops up every time a new camera comes out, and I don't just mean Pentax. Every single new camera that hits the market spends on average a couple weeks without raw support from most of the big software players. Even Adobe sometimes makes a new camera wait for a couple months on occasion before it adds support, especially if it's not a Canon or Nikon. Somehow people manage to get their panties in a bunch even though it happens every time. That's the price of being on the cutting edge.

RawheaD · 07-07-2009, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by davemdsn

I love this topic. It pops up every time a new camera comes out, and I don't just mean Pentax. (snip) Somehow people manage to get their panties in a bunch even though it happens every time. That's the price of being on the cutting edge.

Yeah, and not only that, when given sound advice (settle the fcuk down, it happens every time), they get way defensive

Evidence A:

Originally posted by schmik

Thanks for your advice, very useful!

(snip)

Everyone else, thanks.

Mike

I basically said what everyone else said in one sentence, and used the same language as you did (fcuk... isn't that an apparel company in the UK?), so what's your problem?

schmik · 07-07-2009, 06:29 PM

The fact that it happens 'every time' does not make it right. Accepting it makes it happen 'every time'. It's the first 'cutting edge' DSLR I have ever owned. My panites are only in a small knot. As the OP said... i have a work around but I think the vendors could do better. Don't you agree?

Zav.... i have CS3 not CS4 and k7 is not in the latest camera raw bundle.

RawheaD · 07-07-2009, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by schmik

The fact that it happens 'every time' does not make it right. Accepting it makes it happen 'every time'. It's the first 'cutting edge' DSLR I have ever owned. My panites are only in a small knot. As the OP said... i have a work around but I think the vendors could do better. Don't you agree?

Zav.... i have CS3 not CS4 and k7 is not in the latest camera raw bundle.

Yes I agree things could be faster; my point is that to kneejerk react in the way that the OP did, fcuking FAILing companies left and right, and frothing at the mouth isn't the way to go. Hence my sound advice to "settle the fcuk down". If the OP was a calm call for a discourse on how companies could well to faciliate the release of essential software updates, then I would not have had any problem with it ;-)

jstevewhite · 07-07-2009, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by RawheaD

Yes I agree things could be faster; my point is that to kneejerk react in the way that the OP did, fcuking FAILing companies left and right, and frothing at the mouth isn't the way to go. Hence my sound advice to "settle the fcuk down". If the OP was a calm call for a discourse on how companies could well to faciliate the release of essential software updates, then I would not have had any problem with it ;-)

I'm willing to bet (oh, say $5 lol) that Pentax shares a bit of the burden in the delay. I know that many companies are slow to release their proprietary file formats. As it's not likely that we know when Adobe was given access to the format, it's impossible to know what their leadtime was and make any assessment of what's 'reasonable delay', IMO. Flagellating Adobe for not keeping up with Pentax on release day is a bit unreasonable, I think. I'm certain that both Pentax and Adobe have important people in the process thinking "Well, they can shoot DNG 'til the PEF changes are committed." - quite reasonably so, I think.

schmik · 07-07-2009, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by RawheaD

Yes I agree things could be faster; my point is that to kneejerk react in the way that the OP did, fcuking FAILing companies left and right, and frothing at the mouth isn't the way to go. Hence my sound advice to "settle the fcuk down". If the OP was a calm call for a discourse on how companies could well to faciliate the release of essential software updates, then I would not have had any problem with it ;-)

The squeaky wheel gets the oil.

davemdsn · 07-07-2009, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by schmik

The fact that it happens 'every time' does not make it right. Accepting it makes it happen 'every time'. It's the first 'cutting edge' DSLR I have ever owned. My panites are only in a small knot. As the OP said... i have a work around but I think the vendors could do better. Don't you agree?

No, I don't agree. You are talking about three different companies that have nothing to do with each other. None of them call the other up and give away company secrets. A new camera means a new sensor and new proprietary data in the raw file. Since Pentax (nor any other camera company) calls Adobe or Apple and tells them how to interpret that new data those companies have to reverse engineer the data before their software can support it. Both Apple and Adobe work on update cycles that do not correspond with the cycle of the camera companies, which means that if a new camera comes out in mid cycle for Adobe or Apple that new camera has to wait until the next cycle to be included in the update.

I am not trying to be rude, but your original post showered us with profanity so most of us are put immediately on the defensive. This is not a matter or right or wrong, it is a matter of technology changing faster than the speed of people. If you are the first person in town to buy a car that runs on a new type of fuel don't be surprised when the gas stations in town don't carry your fuel for a few weeks.

schmik · 07-07-2009, 11:26 PM

I'll agree that I over-reacted but my original post hardly 'showers' profanity nor was it that much of a rant.

I obviously see things differently than some of you. As the camera vendor, PP vendor and OS vendor have a relationship (of some sort) I see it more as a collaboration rather than competition. Neither Apple nor Adobe make cameras and Pentax doesn't make an OS. Sure they give us a PP tool but it hardly competes with Aperture or photoshop.

So in your car analogy... who would buy such a car. And if they did i'm sure they would be upset to leave it in the garage for weeks. I maintain that they could do better.

I work for a hardware/software vendor and HW is never released without the needed SW. Some of our products need multivendor interoperability and guess what? OSes and patches all come out together because the engineering teams collaborate. It's about a 'solution' rather than individual products that may or may not work together.

As the boy scouts say "be prepared".

mike

attack11 · 07-08-2009, 04:04 AM

Originally posted by schmik

I'll agree that I over-reacted but my original post hardly 'showers' profanity nor was it that much of a rant.

I obviously see things differently than some of you. As the camera vendor, PP vendor and OS vendor have a relationship (of some sort) I see it more as a collaboration rather than competition. Neither Apple nor Adobe make cameras and Pentax doesn't make an OS. Sure they give us a PP tool but it hardly competes with Aperture or photoshop.

So in your car analogy... who would buy such a car. And if they did i'm sure they would be upset to leave it in the garage for weeks. I maintain that they could do better.

I work for a hardware/software vendor and HW is never released without the needed SW. Some of our products need multivendor interoperability and guess what? OSes and patches all come out together because the engineering teams collaborate. It's about a 'solution' rather than individual products that may or may not work together.

As the boy scouts say "be prepared".

mike

your hardware came with first party software support. third party support was also launched roughly the same week.

the work around for your cs3 situation is clearly to shoot dng because you need cs4 for the latest acr. it removes all the headaches of raw support.

in the end, just keep tabs on adobe. their 5.4 beta was out for months and i've been enjoying it.

Marc Sabatella · 07-08-2009, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by schmik

I maintain that they could do better.

Of course "they" could. But it's a much more complex problem than you seem to be assuming. There are hundreds of different cameras out there, and dozens of different applications out there that might want to process their files. It is just not reasonable to expect every single new camera to be supported by every single application immediately upon release. if you have a favorite application that wish were more proactive about adding support for your favorite new cameras, complain to that software vendor, as the onus is mostly on them. But you should also keep in mind that some companies are faster at this than others, and if this is important to you, you might consider switching to an application with a better track record.

Wheatfield · 07-08-2009, 09:56 AM

Something to remember is that often, software companies don't have access to new cameras until they are released, and often manufacturers don't release proprietary format specifications.
This leads companies like Adobe into the position of having to reverse engineer their converter to fit the file.
Pentax was actually pretty smart, as it appears that they released PEF specifications to Adobe prior to the K-7 release, as Lightroom apparently had the converter updated before the camera hit the shelves.
Anyway, with the K-7 there is absolutely no compelling reason to shoot PEF format if you have a program that will convert DNG files.

schmik · 07-08-2009, 08:04 PM

There are not that many DSLRs models out there and i am not expecting every little vendors to support every camera. My expectations from Adobe/Apple/Pentax are higher. Add up the price of a K7+lens/CS3/iMac and it is a very substantial amount of money. These companies have the $$ to do some R&D and get it right. Is it unreasonable for Pentx to send a pre-prod camera using the new PEF format to apple and adobe? They did send one to most magazines and even individual testers.

These three companies are in this together..... more cameras sold = more CS sold and more Aperture sold etc etc. Together they are in 'Imaging'.

mike

davemdsn · 07-08-2009, 08:43 PM

Mike, don't think I don't feel your pain. When I got my first K20 I was in the same boat for about a month. There is just a lot more going on here than you are mentioning. There is nobody at Apple that sits there waiting for new hardware to come in voluntarily from 3rd party vendors. They also make a lot more than just an OS and Aperture. Members of the Aperture team also work on other projects as well. It is just not feasible for them to jump every time a 3rd party developer makes a change in it's hardware.

If you are using Aperture then this whole argument is mute because Aperture supports DNG natively, which means that it will read your K7 files right this very second of you change the raw format to DNG instead of PEF. I am reading that Pentax has finally decided to compress it's DNG files so there is no real reason to shoot PEF at all.

I wish things would be faster, I really do. There are just too many variables for that to be a reality.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
processing options for PEF on older Mac	WMBP	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	10-22-2010 08:47 AM
Macro FAIL!! Not Epic, but FAIL...	icywarm	Photo Critique	3	04-28-2010 05:51 AM
Latest Mac software updates fix K20D firmware 1.01 pef file problems	mstahulak	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	1	07-23-2008 08:00 AM
PEF and Mac	tdmsu	Photographic Technique	6	12-03-2007 06:04 PM
Apple Mac Software	bobartex	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	11-22-2007 10:29 AM

07-07-2009, 02:44 PM	#16
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Realistically, the basics of the format stays the same. What changes is the sensor itself, and with it, the quirks of how to best demosaic the data. When a new camera comes out that uses the same sensor as a previous model, it often works to simply edit the file with a hex editor to fool your software into thinking the file came from an earlier model. Trying this on a model with a new sensor is less likely to work well. At best, you'd get an image but with colors looking a bit screwy. At worst, it would be hopeless confused by different number of pixels from one sensor to another.

07-07-2009, 04:56 PM	#17
Zav Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,371	I'll say it again: update camera raw Adobe - Photoshop : For Macintosh : Camera Raw 5.4 update K-7 PEF is supported.

07-07-2009, 05:21 PM	#18
davemdsn Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Boise, Idaho Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,413	I love this topic. It pops up every time a new camera comes out, and I don't just mean Pentax. Every single new camera that hits the market spends on average a couple weeks without raw support from most of the big software players. Even Adobe sometimes makes a new camera wait for a couple months on occasion before it adds support, especially if it's not a Canon or Nikon. Somehow people manage to get their panties in a bunch even though it happens every time. That's the price of being on the cutting edge.

07-07-2009, 06:15 PM	#19
RawheaD Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: MA, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 831	Originally posted by davemdsn I love this topic. It pops up every time a new camera comes out, and I don't just mean Pentax. (snip) Somehow people manage to get their panties in a bunch even though it happens every time. That's the price of being on the cutting edge. Yeah, and not only that, when given sound advice (settle the fcuk down, it happens every time), they get way defensive Evidence A: Originally posted by schmik Thanks for your advice, very useful! (snip) Everyone else, thanks. Mike I basically said what everyone else said in one sentence, and used the same language as you did (fcuk... isn't that an apparel company in the UK?), so what's your problem?

07-07-2009, 06:29 PM	#20
schmik Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney Aus Photos: Gallery Posts: 527 Original Poster	The fact that it happens 'every time' does not make it right. Accepting it makes it happen 'every time'. It's the first 'cutting edge' DSLR I have ever owned. My panites are only in a small knot. As the OP said... i have a work around but I think the vendors could do better. Don't you agree? Zav.... i have CS3 not CS4 and k7 is not in the latest camera raw bundle.

07-07-2009, 06:56 PM	#21
RawheaD Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: MA, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 831	Originally posted by schmik The fact that it happens 'every time' does not make it right. Accepting it makes it happen 'every time'. It's the first 'cutting edge' DSLR I have ever owned. My panites are only in a small knot. As the OP said... i have a work around but I think the vendors could do better. Don't you agree? Zav.... i have CS3 not CS4 and k7 is not in the latest camera raw bundle. Yes I agree things could be faster; my point is that to kneejerk react in the way that the OP did, fcuking FAILing companies left and right, and frothing at the mouth isn't the way to go. Hence my sound advice to "settle the fcuk down". If the OP was a calm call for a discourse on how companies could well to faciliate the release of essential software updates, then I would not have had any problem with it ;-)

07-07-2009, 07:44 PM	#22
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407	Originally posted by RawheaD Yes I agree things could be faster; my point is that to kneejerk react in the way that the OP did, fcuking FAILing companies left and right, and frothing at the mouth isn't the way to go. Hence my sound advice to "settle the fcuk down". If the OP was a calm call for a discourse on how companies could well to faciliate the release of essential software updates, then I would not have had any problem with it ;-) I'm willing to bet (oh, say $5 lol) that Pentax shares a bit of the burden in the delay. I know that many companies are slow to release their proprietary file formats. As it's not likely that we know when Adobe was given access to the format, it's impossible to know what their leadtime was and make any assessment of what's 'reasonable delay', IMO. Flagellating Adobe for not keeping up with Pentax on release day is a bit unreasonable, I think. I'm certain that both Pentax and Adobe have important people in the process thinking "Well, they can shoot DNG 'til the PEF changes are committed." - quite reasonably so, I think.

07-07-2009, 08:36 PM	#23
schmik Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney Aus Photos: Gallery Posts: 527 Original Poster	Originally posted by RawheaD Yes I agree things could be faster; my point is that to kneejerk react in the way that the OP did, fcuking FAILing companies left and right, and frothing at the mouth isn't the way to go. Hence my sound advice to "settle the fcuk down". If the OP was a calm call for a discourse on how companies could well to faciliate the release of essential software updates, then I would not have had any problem with it ;-) The squeaky wheel gets the oil.

07-07-2009, 09:26 PM	#24
davemdsn Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Boise, Idaho Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,413	Originally posted by schmik The fact that it happens 'every time' does not make it right. Accepting it makes it happen 'every time'. It's the first 'cutting edge' DSLR I have ever owned. My panites are only in a small knot. As the OP said... i have a work around but I think the vendors could do better. Don't you agree? No, I don't agree. You are talking about three different companies that have nothing to do with each other. None of them call the other up and give away company secrets. A new camera means a new sensor and new proprietary data in the raw file. Since Pentax (nor any other camera company) calls Adobe or Apple and tells them how to interpret that new data those companies have to reverse engineer the data before their software can support it. Both Apple and Adobe work on update cycles that do not correspond with the cycle of the camera companies, which means that if a new camera comes out in mid cycle for Adobe or Apple that new camera has to wait until the next cycle to be included in the update. I am not trying to be rude, but your original post showered us with profanity so most of us are put immediately on the defensive. This is not a matter or right or wrong, it is a matter of technology changing faster than the speed of people. If you are the first person in town to buy a car that runs on a new type of fuel don't be surprised when the gas stations in town don't carry your fuel for a few weeks.

07-07-2009, 11:26 PM	#25
schmik Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney Aus Photos: Gallery Posts: 527 Original Poster	I'll agree that I over-reacted but my original post hardly 'showers' profanity nor was it that much of a rant. I obviously see things differently than some of you. As the camera vendor, PP vendor and OS vendor have a relationship (of some sort) I see it more as a collaboration rather than competition. Neither Apple nor Adobe make cameras and Pentax doesn't make an OS. Sure they give us a PP tool but it hardly competes with Aperture or photoshop. So in your car analogy... who would buy such a car. And if they did i'm sure they would be upset to leave it in the garage for weeks. I maintain that they could do better. I work for a hardware/software vendor and HW is never released without the needed SW. Some of our products need multivendor interoperability and guess what? OSes and patches all come out together because the engineering teams collaborate. It's about a 'solution' rather than individual products that may or may not work together. As the boy scouts say "be prepared". mike

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-08-2009, 04:04 AM	#26
attack11 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Ottawa, ON - Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 658	Originally posted by schmik I'll agree that I over-reacted but my original post hardly 'showers' profanity nor was it that much of a rant. I obviously see things differently than some of you. As the camera vendor, PP vendor and OS vendor have a relationship (of some sort) I see it more as a collaboration rather than competition. Neither Apple nor Adobe make cameras and Pentax doesn't make an OS. Sure they give us a PP tool but it hardly competes with Aperture or photoshop. So in your car analogy... who would buy such a car. And if they did i'm sure they would be upset to leave it in the garage for weeks. I maintain that they could do better. I work for a hardware/software vendor and HW is never released without the needed SW. Some of our products need multivendor interoperability and guess what? OSes and patches all come out together because the engineering teams collaborate. It's about a 'solution' rather than individual products that may or may not work together. As the boy scouts say "be prepared". mike your hardware came with first party software support. third party support was also launched roughly the same week. the work around for your cs3 situation is clearly to shoot dng because you need cs4 for the latest acr. it removes all the headaches of raw support. in the end, just keep tabs on adobe. their 5.4 beta was out for months and i've been enjoying it.

07-08-2009, 08:18 AM	#27
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by schmik I maintain that they could do better. Of course "they" could. But it's a much more complex problem than you seem to be assuming. There are hundreds of different cameras out there, and dozens of different applications out there that might want to process their files. It is just not reasonable to expect every single new camera to be supported by every single application immediately upon release. if you have a favorite application that wish were more proactive about adding support for your favorite new cameras, complain to that software vendor, as the onus is mostly on them. But you should also keep in mind that some companies are faster at this than others, and if this is important to you, you might consider switching to an application with a better track record.

07-08-2009, 09:56 AM	#28
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Something to remember is that often, software companies don't have access to new cameras until they are released, and often manufacturers don't release proprietary format specifications. This leads companies like Adobe into the position of having to reverse engineer their converter to fit the file. Pentax was actually pretty smart, as it appears that they released PEF specifications to Adobe prior to the K-7 release, as Lightroom apparently had the converter updated before the camera hit the shelves. Anyway, with the K-7 there is absolutely no compelling reason to shoot PEF format if you have a program that will convert DNG files.

07-08-2009, 08:04 PM	#29
schmik Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney Aus Photos: Gallery Posts: 527 Original Poster	There are not that many DSLRs models out there and i am not expecting every little vendors to support every camera. My expectations from Adobe/Apple/Pentax are higher. Add up the price of a K7+lens/CS3/iMac and it is a very substantial amount of money. These companies have the $$ to do some R&D and get it right. Is it unreasonable for Pentx to send a pre-prod camera using the new PEF format to apple and adobe? They did send one to most magazines and even individual testers. These three companies are in this together..... more cameras sold = more CS sold and more Aperture sold etc etc. Together they are in 'Imaging'. mike

07-08-2009, 08:43 PM	#30
davemdsn Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Boise, Idaho Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,413	Mike, don't think I don't feel your pain. When I got my first K20 I was in the same boat for about a month. There is just a lot more going on here than you are mentioning. There is nobody at Apple that sits there waiting for new hardware to come in voluntarily from 3rd party vendors. They also make a lot more than just an OS and Aperture. Members of the Aperture team also work on other projects as well. It is just not feasible for them to jump every time a 3rd party developer makes a change in it's hardware. If you are using Aperture then this whole argument is mute because Aperture supports DNG natively, which means that it will read your K7 files right this very second of you change the raw format to DNG instead of PEF. I am reading that Pentax has finally decided to compress it's DNG files so there is no real reason to shoot PEF at all. I wish things would be faster, I really do. There are just too many variables for that to be a reality.