James, On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 09:22:04 +1000, J and K Messervy wrote:
>I agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, the only benefit of using DNG >over PEF is the lossless compression freeing up storage space. if shooting >DNG in the K10D means uncompressed DNGs, I can't see any benefit for me over >PEF. Indeed, compression would have been an advantage to save card space. Being uncompressed, it is much less attractive, the only remaining point is RAW converters being able to handle it without a software update ... I would still convert (either PEF or out-of-camera DNG) to a compressed DNG however, to save space in my archives, and to keep all post-processing info IN that same DNG file ... (not in a database or 'sidecar' files :-) BTW: I played with that leaked RAW DNG file from the Samsung camera at Photokina, which is almost 17Mb in size. It can be handled fine with Adobe Camera RAW, and feeding it through the DNG converter results in a 9Mb DNG that also works fine ... Regards, JvW ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jan van Wijk; http://www.dfsee.com/gallery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
