Have you selected the "Linear" or "Uncompressed" option when converting? How large are the individual DNGs of lower ISO?
I don't know anything about your camera. I have never owned a Canon. The amount of file size reduction will vary. For instance, I have a Fuji camera that produced raw images, and the DNG converter would reduce the size by about 50%. When I run my Nikon D40 raw images through the DNG converter there is little or no savings. If you are shooting sRaw, that could account for the increase in size. But, then again, since I don't know anything about Canon cameras, it could be that I am just wasting your time.
Thanks guys for the reply. Appreciate the advice.
Jim you may have a point as I am shooting in sRaw.
Will test this out when I get a chance.
Did you figure it out yet? When you convert to DNG it leaves a copy of he CR2 in the same folder. You need to delete the CR2 file and you will see a reduction in size.
I converted 477.3 MB of CR2 to DNG which resulted in a file size of 428 MB.
Hi djkfisher, thanks for the reply but that isn't the answer as I'd copied the DNG files into another folder on conversion.
I believe it may be something to do with the files being shot as sRaw and the way Adobe DNG processes the images based on a profile for my camera.
If anyone else has any ideas I'd be pleased to hear them.
Hi Herbie, thanks for that.
I assume that's probably what's going on with my sRAW files.
When converting to DNG, is "Embed original Raw File" selected?
If it is, it will double the size of the DNG file.
I have not seen any reason to select this option, and the only time that I have seen reference to it (in Better Digital Camera, I think), it was suggested that this option be turned off.