Why are Fuji RAF files bigger than Oly ORF files?

Started Jun 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
WT21
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,629Gear list
Like?
Re: Why are Fuji RAF files bigger than Oly ORF files?
In reply to nixda, Jun 26, 2013

nixda wrote:

WT21 wrote:

Looking through some test shots, I see the Fuji RAF files (XE1) tend to be around 25MB for ISO 200 and Olympus OMD ORF files tend to be around 15MB.

This doesn't make any sense, because they are both about 16MP. Also, the Fuji generally is a little less noisy.

Are ORF files compressed RAW (hopefully loss-less??) and Fuji un- or less-compressed? Is Fuji more bits?

Anyone know the answer?

As stated before, the RAF files aren't compressed. Several manufacturers do compress their raw files (losslessly, but lossy formats exist as well). One giveaway is that the RAF files are always the same size. Compressed raw files generally vary in size.

If you want to save space (a lot of space...), you can compress the RAF files on your computer. If on a Mac or any other Unix machine, use the program 'bzip2' (in the terminal). You can save up to 80%, depending on the scene. There are likely similar compression tools on Windows.

If we assume lossless compression works as advertised, what's the benefit of uncompressed files? I would guess less pressure on the in-camera processor (and the Fuji's is feeble, it seems to me), but burns up cards and maybe would extend write times...

 WT21's gear list:WT21's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Alpha NEX-6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow