Rob Studdert mused: > > The worst component of which are 4 bits of padding per pixel, it's completely > redundant and adds around 3MB to the file size, it seems to have been an easy > hurdle to jump for most other manufacturers. Unlike most (or at least most who express an opinion) on this list, I think Pentax did the right thing with their PEF fle format. When the 14-bit sensors come out, Pentax won't have to change their format. They can also use standard software libraries to read and write their image files - a PEF file is actually just a very thinly disguised TIFF file. That's going to make it really easy for any future versions of Photo Laboratory and suchlike to handle both the existing 12-bit and any future 14-bit (or even 16-bit) files.
> Like Bill mentioned, I too hope that DNG is finally adopted as an industry > wide > defacto standard for RAW files, it's well thought out. Fortunately, the very fact that PEF is already basically a TIFF file means that Pentax are probably the most likely manufacturer to switch to using DNG as their internal file format; they're already 95% (or more) of the way there (DNG is also based on TIFF). Incidentally, this "well though out" DNG format also includes the extra four bits of padding per pixel that you berate Pentax for using. The reduction in file size output from the DNG converter comes from the (optional) compression - turn compression off, and DNG files approach PEF files in size.
