On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 01:01:16AM -0500, Lawrence Kwan wrote: > On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, John Francis wrote: > > I'm sure it was. It's just that almost certainly* this isn't exactly > > how it came out of the camera - at the very least it's been run through > > some piece of software (such as the Adobe DNG converter) which can read > > an uncompressed DNG and write out the same data using the compressed DNG > > format. > > I have asked this specific question, and the original poster stated that > the DNG file was out of the camera. Although he mentioned opening it in > CS2 and the original 10M PEF file. Here's his exact word: > > ==================== > The DNG file was out of the camera. I just copied the file to CS2 to view > it. The file is 6.87 MP (says compressed lossless) from the original 10 MP > PEF file. The K10D gives you a choice to shoot either PEF or DNG. > > Steve
I think the original poster, Steve, is just confused as to what you are asking. He says the file was originally a 10MP PEF. That's the file size I've seen reported before for compressed PEFs. Converting to DNG (in CS2?) will give you a compressed DNG. This is still "straight out of the camera" as far as image quality is concerned, but not bit-for-bit identical with what the camera would produce if you selected DNG as your RAW format. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
