Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-01-2007, 05:01 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia Beach VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,364
K10D - Pef vs Dng Raw

Just a quick observation. I shoot in raw. I switched to shooting pef now that ACR supports it.

Because the pef files are compressed, I am getting about 160+ shots from my 2 gig cards, vs 123 for dng. I sure do wish the counter read the right number of shots remaining. It would also be nice if the Dng files were also compressed.

No complaints, just observation and wishes.

05-01-2007, 05:47 AM   #2
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
QuoteOriginally posted by roscot Quote
Just a quick observation. I shoot in raw. I switched to shooting pef now that ACR supports it.

Because the pef files are compressed, I am getting about 160+ shots from my 2 gig cards, vs 123 for dng. I sure do wish the counter read the right number of shots remaining. It would also be nice if the Dng files were also compressed.

No complaints, just observation and wishes.

I shoot in the RAW, too. Still a bit cold in the mornings so occasionally I wrap a scarf around the privates but I've been told that looks a bit strange--damn fashion police!

I get the same shot performance, but that's the first I heard of a counter. I usually wait until the LCD thingy is blinking that infernal card full message--you'd think they would make a card that held all the shots anyone would every want to take.

DNG? PEF?? Compressed??? I just thought they was pictures.
05-01-2007, 06:19 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia Beach VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,364
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jfdavis58 Quote
I shoot in the RAW, too. Still a bit cold in the mornings so occasionally I wrap a scarf around the privates but I've been told that looks a bit strange--damn fashion police!
LOL

QuoteOriginally posted by jfdavis58 Quote
I get the same shot performance, but that's the first I heard of a counter. I usually wait until the LCD thingy is blinking that infernal card full message--you'd think they would make a card that held all the shots anyone would every want to take.

DNG? PEF?? Compressed??? I just thought they was pictures.

My, My, somebody's had their Wheaties this morning.
05-01-2007, 06:36 AM   #4
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
In all seriousness, this is one of those niggling little anomalies that defy easy explanation. One would think that the software could make a better estimate of frames remaining; surely somebody noticed the discrepancy back at the factory or when beta testing, or somewhere?!?!?! How do you explain to the spouse or a newbie that it's just an estimate and that it's obviously wrong and you paid how much for this toy?

Guess we just chalk it up to the cameras endearing character.

05-01-2007, 07:01 AM   #5
Veteran Member
volosong's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Antelope Valley, SoCal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 660
QuoteOriginally posted by jfdavis58 Quote
...and you paid how much for this toy?
This comment is too close to home! Thank goodness the images are better than anything that the relatives' p&s cameras take.

By the way, just this last week, based on a previous discussion, I switched from DNG+ to PEF+. Until someone mentioned it, hadn't realized that PEF files are now compressed. It means an extra step in my workflow (converting from PEF to DNG for archival purposes).

I'm just glad that all of the Pentax dSLR bodies look alike to the uninitiated. Everybody still thinks I shoot with my two-plus year old DS.
05-01-2007, 07:32 AM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia Beach VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,364
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by volosong Quote
I'm just glad that all of the Pentax dSLR bodies look alike to the uninitiated. Everybody still thinks I shoot with my two-plus year old DS.
LOL. So true. Do you remember when a 2 year old camera was still considered brand new?
05-01-2007, 12:07 PM   #7
Veteran Member
volosong's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Antelope Valley, SoCal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 660
QuoteOriginally posted by roscot Quote
Do you remember when a 2 year old camera was still considered brand new?
Aarg! Previous to my DS purchase the other year, my only SLR purchase was the MX back in 1976. Good little camera. Served my needs quite nicely for about 28 years. Since I got that first DS, I got a second to serve as a backup, which has seen very little use. Then, placed an order for the K10D when it was first announced. Got tired of waiting, so went out and got the K100D. Another nice little camera. Then, the K10D finally arrived.

What the heck am I going to do with so many bodies. Thought of keeping the DS bodies for stereo photography. But, that's just a fancy and not practical. Just something to experiment with. Would need another matching lens to what I already have, and need to manufacture a mounting bracket with the appropriate separation for parallax. Instead, I'll probably sell them.

I'll keep the K100D to serve as a backup to the K10D. Even used it over the weekend. The K10D is the primary camera now. Will probably sell the MX too, but that is a tough decision. One that I've been struggling with for two years now.

I'm set! The next Pentax dSLR is going to have to be something very special to cause me to abandon the K10D. The K10D does everything I want it to do.

All I need is a set of those DA* zooms. Then I can sell off all of my old zoom collection and most of the early model primes (K, M, and A lenses). I'll keep the FA and DA primes.
05-01-2007, 12:16 PM   #8
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 230
The two things I like about my DS over my K10D are the TTL ability for my older flashes (not that I really use 'em, except my ring flash), and the smaller size for taking snaps with.

05-01-2007, 12:33 PM   #9
Site Supporter
LeoTaylor's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Connecticut
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 679
I always look at "Shots Remaining" like I look at "Minutes Remaining", "Fuel Remaining", and other indicators that are inherently a guess. Reading this thread prompted me to look at 5 months of Astrophoto PEFS. The 2100 files vary from 9247 to 11837 bytes (per Windows search). That is a 1.28 : 1 range. I noticed my directories seem to group smaller and larger files together. This is because I image different objects each night, some objects compress better than others. Further complicating the estimate as to space required is Windows disk format varies considerably in wasted space depending on the file sizes. A file a few bytes larger may waste an entire disk sector.

There is no way the camera can calculate exactly how many more pictures you can take when we save files that vary in size. I have not paid attention to how far off the display is or even if it is low or high, my 2 GB cards always have enough space for me!
05-01-2007, 01:13 PM   #10
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
QuoteOriginally posted by LeoTaylor Quote
I always look at "Shots Remaining" like I look at "Minutes Remaining", "Fuel Remaining", and other indicators that are inherently a guess. Reading this thread prompted me to look at 5 months of Astrophoto PEFS. The 2100 files vary from 9247 to 11837 bytes (per Windows search). That is a 1.28 : 1 range. I noticed my directories seem to group smaller and larger files together. This is because I image different objects each night, some objects compress better than others. Further complicating the estimate as to space required is Windows disk format varies considerably in wasted space depending on the file sizes. A file a few bytes larger may waste an entire disk sector.

There is no way the camera can calculate exactly how many more pictures you can take when we save files that vary in size. I have not paid attention to how far off the display is or even if it is low or high, my 2 GB cards always have enough space for me!
All true and well understood. But 123 to 160+ is missing by a wide margin--even widows can estimate better than that. AND coupled with the nearly spot-on nature of JPEG counts and DNG counts it still sums to 'something overlooked' and 'something not quite right', back at the factory.

Edit: ...and even the manual is misprinted to show DNG=PEF count.
05-01-2007, 01:55 PM   #11
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
The 123 count is the minimum that can fit on the card. Compression ratios vary depending on each photo, so it's technically impossible to get a 100% accurate count of shots left. I prefer to have the minimum count showing so I don't overestimate how many more photos I can take.
05-01-2007, 02:10 PM   #12
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
QuoteOriginally posted by SuperJared Quote
The 123 count is the minimum that can fit on the card. Compression ratios vary depending on each photo, so it's technically impossible to get a 100% accurate count of shots left. I prefer to have the minimum count showing so I don't overestimate how many more photos I can take.

Again, true-not much to disagree about.

But with each passing shot it does get closer to being full.

It's wild looking down and seeing 60 shots remaining; shooting 12, looking again and seeing 58 remaining--or similar.

Other times it say 45 left, shoot 5 and it says 39. I know it depends on actual scene requirements.

This seems significant enough to require some explanation in the manual, an addendum, something.
05-01-2007, 03:42 PM   #13
Veteran Member
photo_mom's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 545
QuoteOriginally posted by roscot Quote
Just a quick observation. I shoot in raw. I switched to shooting pef now that ACR supports it.

Because the pef files are compressed, I am getting about 160+ shots from my 2 gig cards, vs 123 for dng. I sure do wish the counter read the right number of shots remaining. It would also be nice if the Dng files were also compressed.

No complaints, just observation and wishes.
Hi Alan!

Maybe I'm missing something here. I haven't read through all the posts yet. But I have always shot RAW PEF. I only get 122 files on a Sandisk Extreme III 2G card. The counter on the top LED always counts down from 122 to 0, unless I'm in TAv mode where it shows the ISO. But then it briefly changes to the number left before changing back to the ISO.

In the 'C' menu option, I've got the 'Recordable Image No.' option set to 1, which is 'always show recordable images for current card.'

Is this what you want it to do? (uh, besides the part about compressing DNG files. We can always wish and hope...)
05-01-2007, 05:51 PM   #14
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 57
I just went though this exercise. I shot DNG+ and PEF+ on many images in my backyard, with varied types of exposure situations. I converted them on 7 converters. I couldn't tell the difference when I viewed them on the 7 converters. The converters were different, but the RAW files appeared the same within each individual converters.
05-01-2007, 08:17 PM   #15
Veteran Member
GaryML's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 441
The one real advantage of shooting DNG is that you have a chance to recover the files if the file allocation table of the SD card is corrupted. AFAIK, the recovery utilities will support DNG format but won't support PEF.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dng, dslr, files, observation, pef, pef vs dng, photography, raw, shots, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RAW shooting, PEF or DNG? Gian Pentax DSLR Discussion 27 09-16-2009 09:04 PM
RAW in Linux - PEF vs. DNG? danbob Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 55 07-26-2009 01:47 PM
K200d raw format: dng vs. pef tibbitts Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 03-04-2009 11:01 AM
RAW files? PEF versus DNG? rdrum76 Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 1 11-03-2008 11:59 AM
RAW - PEF vs DNG??? rprii Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 12-11-2006 08:51 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top