[Leica] M9 DNG compression

[photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil Forrest)]

I can't detect any difference in the detail or dynamic range or any
data, for that matter but as has been said before, the uncompressed DNG
files slow down the camera by a factor of 4 when put against my
non-scientific test of wristwatch second hand vs. write time. 

I shot uncompressed for a while but during that time I ALSO had
numerous faults with the camera occur. I had shutter faults occur
several days in a row and twice in one day. I also had obvious
magenta horizontal banding occur while shooting uncompressed. When I
switched back to compressed DNG the problems didn't go away (shutter
faults did) but became far more infrequent. 

M9 is headed to Leica NJ next week for a full warranty service to
address all this, the hot pixels and possibly removal of the 135mm
framelines.

Phil Forrest


On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 12:08:53 -0800
Herbert Kanner <kanner at acm.org> wrote:

> Has anyone ever done a comparison of the 34.6 Mb Leica DNGs to the 
> compressed versions which are 18 Mb more or less depending on the 
> degree of detail in the image? While it is not an issue for me, with 
> a mere 1000 to 2000 images per year, terabyte drives being so cheap, 
> It probably is an issue to the much more prolific professional 
> photographers.
> 
> The question is: has anyone ever found an image where this degree of 
> compression has been seen to matter?
> 
> Herb