Axel Mertes
Well-known member
4K RAW to 2K RGB obviously makes sense except that it doesn't save much on data requirements -- in theory, 4K RAW is four-times the size of 2K RAW, and 2K RGB is three-times the size of 2K RAW... so the difference in file size between 4K RAW and 2K RGB isn't that much.
David,
this is basically correct - but its also the reason why many poeple ask for the 2K RAW from the full sensor, as they might need more storage capacity in the field, but do not have the maximum resolution requirements after all.
If you can store 4K RAW its not a big hit to store instead a 2K RGB (for which no RED CODE codec exists at the moment if I am right). So the 2K RAW scaled from 4K RAW seems closer to become available IMHO.
And as you don't gain much space from 2K RGB, but loose the very important 4th quadrant info to resemble the 3+K original resolution contained in the 4K RAW, I'd then rather go for the 4K RAW, as this codec is in our hands. Further, as Graeme pointed out, different filters will need to be applied to 4K RAW before becoming a good 2K RGB, thus being irreversible in worsed case to resemble a 4K then, so no big saving at all - after all.
If another codecs comes along in future, then talk again
Regards,
Axel