12-27-2013, 07:58 PM
Since 2012 there's a Nikon D800 with the same size of raw files. I'm surprised somebody, especially a test-lab, is surprised that another 36MP sensor does create the same file size. 
Btw., in 14bit RAW it's around 40MB - so what? My iMac is 3 yrs old and has no problems at all with that size. And it doesn't matter, if I use Nik Effects and Aperture is producing 217MB 16bit Tiff per file - I bought that machine for such kind of stuff.
Don't fool around with lossy compression - if you want to save diskspace, get a point and shoot and do JPG. It's the other way round: Deleting less good pictures is saving much more diskspace than lossy compression ever could.
It annoys me, if somebody thinks the cause "high resolution" has no effect in file size, disk Space, RAM and a decent multicore processor, but okay, somebody testing more the Canon world and dealing with max 22MP might not be ready for that experience.
Btw., in 14bit RAW it's around 40MB - so what? My iMac is 3 yrs old and has no problems at all with that size. And it doesn't matter, if I use Nik Effects and Aperture is producing 217MB 16bit Tiff per file - I bought that machine for such kind of stuff.Don't fool around with lossy compression - if you want to save diskspace, get a point and shoot and do JPG. It's the other way round: Deleting less good pictures is saving much more diskspace than lossy compression ever could.
It annoys me, if somebody thinks the cause "high resolution" has no effect in file size, disk Space, RAM and a decent multicore processor, but okay, somebody testing more the Canon world and dealing with max 22MP might not be ready for that experience.