It means more code, and more testing in QA. More code for the UI (admittedly small), but also more code because RAW requires a different compressor, a lossless one. And if it's a manufacturer with a proprietary RAW format, like NIkon, they have to decide if they'll support DNG as well.
Whole lot of trouble for a vanishingly small market: ie the set of pros who want RAW but don't mind using a rinky-dink P&S. For instance, I don't care if a low-end P&S supports RAW or not, I simply won't buy one for my own use. I only care to own high IQ cameras. On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Tom C <[email protected]> wrote: > > I was just thinking that it would seem an easy thing to provide the > option to save to RAW format on any digital camera. I won't consider a > camera that doesn't have that ability. So is that functionality being > withheld to differentiate a higher end camera from a lower end model > and therefore command a higher price? > > Obviously casual users don't need it, or want to understand it, but > surely the RAW data (aside from any small degree of massaging) is > there for the saving at some point in time. > > Tom C. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
