DNG vs PEF?

photog · 07-05-2009, 02:56 AM

It seems to me that the only real issue between these two is file size. i rarely do a single day's shoot oh more that say 1600 exposures. If you need to do more shooting in PEF (lossless compression) will allow about 20-30% more depending on content.
The main issue may be HDD space. I have only 2TB on board plus one more on desk as backup. However, I do value this space and conserve if I can.
DNG Converter ((5.4 has recently been released for free download. I have made a test of 100 K-20D DNG files Aafter conversion the new files took up 62.25999% of the space of the originals.
This conversion is LOSSLESS!
Ron McDermott

eagle · 07-05-2009, 03:09 AM

Hi Ron,

Is this different from setting your camera to output DNG Raw files? I have always done this, and never used the PEF format at all.

**Ash** · 07-05-2009, 03:27 AM

Try a search on this forum - there are quite a few discussions about the subtle differences between these formats - mostly centred around which software is converting them to JPEG.

I've personally opted with PEF with ACR 4 doing the conversion - is a great combination IMO.

Parallax · 07-05-2009, 06:22 AM

Originally posted by eagle

Hi Ron,

Is this different from setting your camera to output DNG Raw files? I have always done this, and never used the PEF format at all.

It is different in that the camera does not compress the .dng files.

Marc Sabatella · 07-05-2009, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by eagle

Is this different from setting your camera to output DNG Raw files? I have always done this, and never used the PEF format at all.

Size. DNG files form the camera are uncompressed and are much larger than the corresponding PEF files; DNG files created by the DNG converter are compressed and are actually smaller than PEF.

**ManuH** · 07-05-2009, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

Size. DNG files form the camera are uncompressed and are much larger than the corresponding PEF files; DNG files created by the DNG converter are compressed and are actually smaller than PEF.

That's maybe because PEF always embed a full-size one-star preview JPEG. With the DNG conversion this is not mandatory and this can let you save 1-2MB.

soccerjoe5 · 07-05-2009, 10:01 AM

I think I read that the DNGs in the K-7 are compressed now, so I wonder how the file sizes of the DNG and PEFs compare now.

**ManuH** · 07-05-2009, 12:28 PM

Originally posted by soccerjoe5

I think I read that the DNGs in the K-7 are compressed now, so I wonder how the file sizes of the DNG and PEFs compare now.

They shouldn't be much different I suppose but for me this is a great new feature because I won't have to convert to compressed DNG during the Lightroom import. The import will thus be much faster and use less CPU power and I won't lose the original RAW (once converted to DNG, Pentax Photo Laboratory or the camera does not recognize it).

davemdsn · 07-05-2009, 01:44 PM

I have been converting my pef files to dng since my *istD days. With a library well over 30,000 images the saved space per file really adds up. I don't like the Pentax software so the loss of compatibility there doesn't bother me. I have also checked with Photoshop and a pef vs a converted dng shows to be mathematically identical as far as the image is concerned.

ryan s · 07-05-2009, 01:52 PM

DNG + ACR

DNG because I know Adobe will always (hopefully!) keep supporting its own format.

photog · 07-05-2009, 10:25 PM

Hi eagle
In the custom menu (See p 154 of Operating manual) on page 158 under the heading "Setting the File Format" see "Setting the File Format" you will see the dialog box for selecting between PEF and DNG (remember DNG is the open standard file format supported by Adobe). I am corrently using DNG but downloading to the computer using the free "DNG Converted" which has an option for lossless compression.
Eagle, this should work for you.
Regards
Ron McDermott
Brisbane, Queensland

GeneV · 07-06-2009, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Try a search on this forum - there are quite a few discussions about the subtle differences between these formats - mostly centred around which software is converting them to JPEG.

I've personally opted with PEF with ACR 4 doing the conversion - is a great combination IMO.

I second that. With the codec for Vista, they are even viewable as thumbnails.

WheresWaldo · 07-06-2009, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

I second that. With the codec for Vista, they are even viewable as thumbnails.

They are not viewable as thumbnails in XP or Vista 64 Explorer. The codec does allow them to be used in WIC compatible imaging software

**Ash** · 07-06-2009, 03:02 PM

What? No thumbnails. That's tough to work with...

WheresWaldo · 07-06-2009, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by Ash

What? No thumbnails. That's tough to work with...

Nope, no thumbnails. DNG has the same issue unless you buy the third party codec from ardfry.

07-05-2009, 02:56 AM	#1
photog Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia Posts: 165	DNG vs PEF? It seems to me that the only real issue between these two is file size. i rarely do a single day's shoot oh more that say 1600 exposures. If you need to do more shooting in PEF (lossless compression) will allow about 20-30% more depending on content. The main issue may be HDD space. I have only 2TB on board plus one more on desk as backup. However, I do value this space and conserve if I can. DNG Converter ((5.4 has recently been released for free download. I have made a test of 100 K-20D DNG files Aafter conversion the new files took up 62.25999% of the space of the originals. This conversion is LOSSLESS! Ron McDermott

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PEF or DNG?	Jodokast96	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	60	03-22-2010 11:34 AM
PEF vs DNG.	sergio_fucchi	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	2	01-30-2009 07:06 PM
PEF or DNG?	marius	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	08-17-2008 01:34 PM
PEF vs DNG	MikeD	Photographic Technique	3	01-24-2008 05:17 AM
PEF vs DNG	Fireball	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	07-21-2007 08:01 PM

07-05-2009, 03:09 AM	#2
eagle Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Brisbane Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 82	Hi Ron, Is this different from setting your camera to output DNG Raw files? I have always done this, and never used the PEF format at all.

07-05-2009, 03:27 AM	#3
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Try a search on this forum - there are quite a few discussions about the subtle differences between these formats - mostly centred around which software is converting them to JPEG. I've personally opted with PEF with ACR 4 doing the conversion - is a great combination IMO.

07-05-2009, 06:22 AM	#4
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by eagle Hi Ron, Is this different from setting your camera to output DNG Raw files? I have always done this, and never used the PEF format at all. It is different in that the camera does not compress the .dng files.

07-05-2009, 07:48 AM	#5
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by eagle Is this different from setting your camera to output DNG Raw files? I have always done this, and never used the PEF format at all. Size. DNG files form the camera are uncompressed and are much larger than the corresponding PEF files; DNG files created by the DNG converter are compressed and are actually smaller than PEF.

07-05-2009, 09:11 AM	#6
ManuH Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Montreal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,249	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Size. DNG files form the camera are uncompressed and are much larger than the corresponding PEF files; DNG files created by the DNG converter are compressed and are actually smaller than PEF. That's maybe because PEF always embed a full-size one-star preview JPEG. With the DNG conversion this is not mandatory and this can let you save 1-2MB.

07-05-2009, 10:01 AM	#7
soccerjoe5 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,343	I think I read that the DNGs in the K-7 are compressed now, so I wonder how the file sizes of the DNG and PEFs compare now.

07-05-2009, 12:28 PM	#8
ManuH Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Montreal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,249	Originally posted by soccerjoe5 I think I read that the DNGs in the K-7 are compressed now, so I wonder how the file sizes of the DNG and PEFs compare now. They shouldn't be much different I suppose but for me this is a great new feature because I won't have to convert to compressed DNG during the Lightroom import. The import will thus be much faster and use less CPU power and I won't lose the original RAW (once converted to DNG, Pentax Photo Laboratory or the camera does not recognize it).

07-05-2009, 01:44 PM	#9
davemdsn Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Boise, Idaho Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,413	I have been converting my pef files to dng since my *istD days. With a library well over 30,000 images the saved space per file really adds up. I don't like the Pentax software so the loss of compatibility there doesn't bother me. I have also checked with Photoshop and a pef vs a converted dng shows to be mathematically identical as far as the image is concerned.

07-05-2009, 01:52 PM	#10
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	DNG + ACR DNG because I know Adobe will always (hopefully!) keep supporting its own format.

07-05-2009, 10:25 PM	#11
photog Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia Posts: 165 Original Poster	Hi eagle In the custom menu (See p 154 of Operating manual) on page 158 under the heading "Setting the File Format" see "Setting the File Format" you will see the dialog box for selecting between PEF and DNG (remember DNG is the open standard file format supported by Adobe). I am corrently using DNG but downloading to the computer using the free "DNG Converted" which has an option for lossless compression. Eagle, this should work for you. Regards Ron McDermott Brisbane, Queensland

07-06-2009, 02:16 PM	#12
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Ash Try a search on this forum - there are quite a few discussions about the subtle differences between these formats - mostly centred around which software is converting them to JPEG. I've personally opted with PEF with ACR 4 doing the conversion - is a great combination IMO. I second that. With the codec for Vista, they are even viewable as thumbnails.

07-06-2009, 02:36 PM	#13
WheresWaldo Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: North Carolina Photos: Gallery Posts: 498	Originally posted by GeneV I second that. With the codec for Vista, they are even viewable as thumbnails. They are not viewable as thumbnails in XP or Vista 64 Explorer. The codec does allow them to be used in WIC compatible imaging software

07-06-2009, 03:02 PM	#14
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	What? No thumbnails. That's tough to work with...

07-06-2009, 05:20 PM	#15
WheresWaldo Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: North Carolina Photos: Gallery Posts: 498	Originally posted by Ash What? No thumbnails. That's tough to work with... Nope, no thumbnails. DNG has the same issue unless you buy the third party codec from ardfry.