Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Image Capacity Difference
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jul 5, 2021 20:23:37   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
I have both a D7100 and D7200. Each are equipped with identical 32 GB SanDisk Extreme Pro SD cards, two in each.

Normally, after formatting the SD cards, and the cameras both set up for "JPEG Fine L" (or however it is supposed to be), the display shows a total capacity of "1.3K" images.

Today, the D7100 came back from Nikon where it had undergone some "minor surgery". I replaced the two SD cards, formatted the cards, and also -- in both cameras -- changed the settings to "RAW" for card 1 and "JPEG" for card 2. But, after doing this, including formatting the cards, the D7100 shows a total capacity of 589 while the D7200 shows 596.

Why would there be any difference at all between the two cameras?

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 20:32:19   #
Najataagihe
 
Different cameras, different firmware.

The minor surgery might have included a software update which is a slightly different size than the one in the other camera.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 20:52:24   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
1.3K is not and exact #.

---

Reply
 
 
Jul 5, 2021 20:58:22   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
Bill_de wrote:
1.3K is not and exact #.

---


Did not imply that it was.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 20:59:42   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
Najataagihe wrote:
Different cameras, different firmware.

The minor surgery might have included a software update which is a slightly different size than the one in the other camera.


Hadn't considered that. The "minor surgery" was replacing the main board and likely updating the firmware. However, I'm not understanding how that would affect how many images would fit on a formatted SD card.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 21:05:02   #
DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina
 
kb6kgx wrote:
I have both a D7100 and D7200. Each are equipped with identical 32 GB SanDisk Extreme Pro SD cards, two in each.

Normally, after formatting the SD cards, and the cameras both set up for "JPEG Fine L" (or however it is supposed to be), the display shows a total capacity of "1.3K" images.

Today, the D7100 came back from Nikon where it had undergone some "minor surgery". I replaced the two SD cards, formatted the cards, and also -- in both cameras -- changed the settings to "RAW" for card 1 and "JPEG" for card 2. But, after doing this, including formatting the cards, the D7100 shows a total capacity of 589 while the D7200 shows 596.

Why would there be any difference at all between the two cameras?
I have both a D7100 and D7200. Each are equipped w... (show quote)




Noise level,of difference.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 21:07:43   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
DeanS wrote:
Noise level,of difference.


"noise level"?

Reply
 
 
Jul 5, 2021 21:16:22   #
DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina
 
kb6kgx wrote:
"noise level"?


Not a significant difference.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 21:19:20   #
Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States
 
Did you verify the "JPEG Fine L" setting on the repaired camera?
Maybe the service center changed it for testing?

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 21:22:46   #
BebuLamar
 
The number of JPEG is pretty much an estimate as the camera can't know how much it can compress an image until it has the image. So different firmware may do the estimate a bit different.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 21:30:49   #
Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States
 
BebuLamar wrote:
The number of JPEG is pretty much an estimate as the camera can't know how much it can compress an image until it has the image. So different firmware may do the estimate a bit different.


Reply
 
 
Jul 5, 2021 22:15:49   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
Longshadow wrote:
Did you verify the "JPEG Fine L" setting on the repaired camera?
Maybe the service center changed it for testing?


Yes, I went into each camera and confirmed the settings.

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 22:16:27   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
BebuLamar wrote:
The number of JPEG is pretty much an estimate as the camera can't know how much it can compress an image until it has the image. So different firmware may do the estimate a bit different.


Makes sense

Reply
Jul 5, 2021 23:19:36   #
Orphoto Loc: Oregon
 
The difference between 589 and 596 is trivial. Even a small difference in the compression algorithms could account for it. Especially true if raw lossless compressed or raw lossy compressed.

Reply
Jul 6, 2021 03:00:29   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
Orphoto wrote:
The difference between 589 and 596 is trivial. Even a small difference in the compression algorithms could account for it. Especially true if raw lossless compressed or raw lossy compressed.


Appreciate the reply.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.