[Robert Barnett]

I am going to guess that the counter in the camera isn't actually doing anything smart. Since compression will change from image to image depending on how much detail there is or isn't and since the camera has no idea what you will shoot until you shoot it there is now way it can tell you 100%. As an example shoot a blue sky with no clounds then shoot a brick wall. The sky will compress a lot more than the brick wall will.

I am betting that Pentax and probably most other camera makers do some in house testing and then set the average number per memory card size. Nothing specail. As you take pictures and it can look at what you are taking (file size and compression wise) it could be more accurate to some extent if Pentax made it that smart. I don't think they did.

Robert

[Donald]

this was my pet peeve, now become outright disgust with dslr cameras. So much incredible computing technology yet something as simple as an indexing counter is never accurate, isn't even close to actual, it is in effect a placebo, a suggestion that it actually works. Ridiculous.

Of course every technology argument applies, every shot has different data, etc.

Just give us a programmable shot counter, mapped to a button so I can zero it! Such ridiculously easy firmware programming. For 100+ years film photographers counted number of shots taken of a scene, bracketing, etc., knowing they would have usable image within X number of captures.

As it is now the shot count suggester on dslr's may be the most useless, laughable attribute they currently carry.

[Matjazz]

Image counters on *Ist DS and K100D Super are very accurate when shooting raw but then again the two cameras don't compress raw files which means little variation in size (9,5-10,5MB).
On an empty 2gb card I have 185 images available and can usually shoot 192.

[procyon]

this was my pet peeve, now become outright disgust with dslr cameras. So much incredible computing technology yet something as simple as an indexing counter is never accurate, isn't even close to actual, it is in effect a placebo, a suggestion that it actually works. Ridiculous.

Of course every technology argument applies, every shot has different data, etc.

Just give us a programmable shot counter, mapped to a button so I can zero it! Such ridiculously easy firmware programming. For 100+ years film photographers counted number of shots taken of a scene, bracketing, etc., knowing they would have usable image within X number of captures.

As it is now the shot count suggester on dslr's may be the most useless, laughable attribute they currently carry.

I like the shot counter as it is. I really do. Nothing wrong with it in my opinion. Yours can of course be different, but what I want to say, is that it is not useless to everyone.
I like that I get a bit more shots than it predicts. I like that I don't have to be worried whether the number X shown is not X-10 for example. I like to be on the safe side.
If I really needed to see how many shots I took of a certain subject, then I can just memorize the number in the first filename.

[simons-photography]

its telling you how much space is left in DNG files learn to live with it its best that it gives you that than a haphazard prediction I'd be much happier if it just gave it in MB I know what I'm shooting