Skip to main content
W
WILLPHOTO11
Participant
November 21, 2019
Question

canon 5d mk4

  • November 21, 2019
  • 3 replies
  • 658 views

I just did a shoot using my old canon 7d mk1 and my new 5d mk4. I set the 7 on large raw and the 5 on medium to try to create similar file sizes. Both produced raw files of around 25mb, however when processing through lightroom, the 7d produced an average file size of 15mb, 5184 x 3456 and the 5d gave me an average of 7mb 5040 x 3360. Any ideas?

This topic has been closed for replies.

3 replies

JohanElzenga
Community Expert
JohanElzengaCommunity Expert
Community Expert
November 26, 2019

How many times do we have to say that the file size of a jpeg is irrelevant?

-- Johan W. Elzenga
Todd Shaner
Todd Shaner
Legend
November 26, 2019

Johan, I believe the OP's question is relevant, "When processing through lightroom, the 7d produced an average file size of 15mb, 5184 x 3456 and the 5d gave me an average of 7mb 5040 x 3360. Any ideas?"

 

We know there are things that can cause this, but without examining the files there's no way anyone can determine specifically why (differences in noise, subject type, etc.). That's the question being asked.

Todd Shaner
Todd Shaner
Legend
November 24, 2019

MRAW and SRAW files are technically not raw files and consequently don't have the same dynamic range as full size raw files. Because of this and other issues with these reduced-sized pseudo raw files I suggest using them only for less critical shooting applications. If storage is the issue memory cards are pretty darn cheap today.
https://www.slrlounge.com/canon-raw-image-size-and-dynamic-range-comparison/

https://photographylife.com/sraw-format-explained

W
WILLPHOTO11Author
Participant
November 26, 2019

I just tested both on Full Raw, 7d 14.1mb after processing and 5d 17.9mb. When I tested both on Large jpeg straight out of camera both file sizes were very similar at 6.33mb for the 7d and 6.5mb for the 5d, that cant be right?

Will

Todd Shaner
Todd Shaner
Legend
November 26, 2019

JPEG file size is dependent on sensor resolution (Megapixels), quality setting (in-camera, in-LR), subject detail, and noise in the image. The full raw file sizes appear smaller than expected and may indicate the cause of what you're seeing. I suggest posting the two raw files and two camera JPEG files to Dropbox or other file sharing site and I'll take a look at them.

JohanElzenga
Community Expert
JohanElzengaCommunity Expert
Community Expert
November 21, 2019

Are you talking about exported jpeg files? The file size of a jpeg is hardly relevant, because jpegs are compressed and compression efficiency can vary a lot. Noisy images and images with lots of detail compress less well than images with fewer detail and/or less noise.

-- Johan W. Elzenga
    W
    WILLPHOTO11Author
    Participant
    November 24, 2019

    Yes both exporting to jpeg. same images but new camera half the file size?

    JohanElzenga
    Community Expert
    JohanElzengaCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    November 24, 2019

    Like I said, that is irrelevant. The new camera could be less noisy. Especially since the images are reduced in size (which decreases noise).

    -- Johan W. Elzenga
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices