Card capacity

bikeit

Senior Member
Im using a 32 GB xqd card and the top LCD display on the camera shows that the card will hold 682 photos yet the card will hold double that, how come? oh I was shooting in CH and always shoot raw.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
 

pforsell

Senior Member
The number of files that will fit to the card is always an estimate, unless you are shooting uncompressed raw. Only those files are always the same size. If you shoot lossless compressed raw, or jpeg, the camera cannot know in advance what you will shoot in the future and how much those files will compress, hence the estimate is based on uncompressed and it is a very conservative number. A landscape shot with a lot of foliage and detail won't compress much, but a shot mostly containing clear blue sky and a small bird will compress a lot.

If you set your camera to lossless compressed and shoot with the lens cap on with settings ISO 100, f/8 and 1/100, those black files will compress immensely and you can probably fit 5000 of those to your card. :)
 
Last edited:

480sparky

Senior Member
14-bit raw will have the most amount of data, which will allow more editing than 12-bit. This does not mean it is better 'quality'. Just more data to work with.
 

pforsell

Senior Member
Which raw choice is the best quality?

Too Long, Didn't Read version:
14 bit lossless compressed


As mentioned above, 14 bit raw is the best option. Because raw is non-gamma corrected and linear, 14 bit file has room for 14 stops of dynamic range, and 12 bit raw for 12 stops. (Jpeg has tone curve and gamma correction applied and has room for about 11 stops of DR.)

Lossless compression is literally lossless. In this mode the camera uses a reversible compression algorithm (not unlike winzip), that is safe to the data. This is the most efficient mode. (See note below)

Some cameras offer also a compressed format (without the lossless modifier), but this mode uses a lossy compression algorithm (not unlike jpeg), that permanently and unretrievably loses data. Most of the lower tier cameras offer only this mode for raw recording. File sizes tend to be in the order of 75 % smaller than uncompressed. I wouldn't use this format if given the option, I'd rather use jpeg when high compression and small files are the priority.



Note: Uncompressed raw offers only one possible advantage over lossless compressed: in the post apocalyptic world humanity might have forgotten how to uncompress data and in this case it is easier to extract the image from an uncompressed file. And this comes with the penalty of 50 % larger files, on average
 

480sparky

Senior Member
............, 14 bit file has room for 14 stops of dynamic range, and 12 bit raw for 12 stops. (Jpeg has tone curve and gamma correction applied and has room for about 11 stops of DR.).............

This is the first I've ever seen this claim. So if the manufacturers wanted to, they could start making 32-bit cameras with 30-stop dynamic range? Or 64-bit cameras for 62 stops of dynamic range?
 

pforsell

Senior Member
This is the first I've ever seen this claim. So if the manufacturers wanted to, they could start making 32-bit cameras with 30-stop dynamic range? Or 64-bit cameras for 62 stops of dynamic range?

I think you read it backwards. And the extraordinary hyperbole in the last two sentences prove that you did it on purpose. Why?

I said 14 bit raw has room for 14 stops of dynamic range. The number of bits used to store the file does not increase the DR, but if you have insufficient number of bits then all of the DR from the sensor cannot be stored as linear raw.
 

480sparky

Senior Member
I think you read it backwards. And the extraordinary hyperbole in the last two sentences prove that you did it on purpose. Why?

I said 14 bit raw has room for 14 stops of dynamic range. The number of bits used to store the file does not increase the DR, but if you have insufficient number of bits then all of the DR from the sensor cannot be stored as linear raw.

Please stop assuming you know how I'm reading your post. It makes you look silly.

I'm saying I've never seen anyone before state that every 'bit' of data depth translates to one stop of dynamic range. How about a link?
 

pforsell

Senior Member
I'm saying I've never seen anyone before state that every 'bit' of data depth translates to one stop of dynamic range. How about a link?

It doesn't and I haven't either seen anyone state that. You are the first person ever discussing it, to my knowledge. Since it is obviously nonsense I leave that matter to you now.

On the other hand every stop of dynamic range requires one bit of data depth in linear raw. But this is a different matter completely.
 

480sparky

Senior Member
It doesn't and I haven't either seen anyone state that. You are the first person ever discussing it, to my knowledge. Since it is obviously nonsense I leave that matter to you now.

On the other hand every stop of dynamic range requires one bit of data depth in linear raw. But this is a different matter completely.

You state bit depth is directly related to dynamic range ability, then claim I'm the one bringing it up, then you state the exact same thing in the next sentence.

Oh well. I guess you won't be able to clarify the matter any more.
 
Top