HEIF to JPEG faster conversion?

[nalla]

I am trying to shoot in HEIF instead of JPEG, but there's one major thing getting in my way. Is there a way to convert HEIF photos to JPEG in-camera faster than doing it one at a time? It takes me far too long to go through hundreds of photos and convert them individually. If not, is there a good fast way to do it on my windows computer? I can't shoot in RAW for a few unrelated reasons, and I need to shoot in HEIF in-camera.

[FloridaDrafter]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"Single purpose is to make smaller files as I understand it but since the only camera that can make one is the 1DX Mk III as I also understand it. I don't have one!  Perhaps others by now? I also don't think any printers will print from it either. Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, or Edge won't display it?"

---

It just doesn't make a smaller file, but includes more dynamic range in the image, 8bit to16, IIRC. So smaller with better IQ. It's available on most of the R series cameras, but you have to enable it in the "HDR PQ Settings" in order for it to show in the "Image Quality" menu.

It's going to be interesting to see how far this format will go. As you pointed out, it's not highly supported at this point. I had to download a codec from Canon just to get DPP to open HEIF files, although it would batch convert them without it.

[kvbarkley]

The only big dog using it is the Apple iPhone and other pieces of the Apple ecosystem.

[ebiggs1]

"So smaller with better IQ."

Don't get me wrong I am all for smaller files but as I understand it, there is no increase in IQ. It uses all the help from 16 bit just to make the file smaller. Like I say my 1DX doesn't make them so I really do't know. Just what I have been reading. Since retiring, yeah retiring , I have filled three 2TB external HDs and one, my Z: drive, in my desktop which also has three 2TB HDs. Time for another external HD and transferring those photos!

Seagate has a 5TB External Hard Drive for a little over a $100 bucks and Prime! So it is not a matter of file size so much anymore.

But, hey, they are bound to make things, if not better, than different for sure. 

[kvbarkley]

I would argue that a smaller file size, with the same image quality, *is* better image quality!

[Waddizzle]

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

I would argue that a smaller file size, with the same image quality, *is* better image quality!

---

The HEIF files might contain more bits per pixel, but they also contain more compression, which slows down processing.  

[ebiggs1]

"I would argue that a smaller file size, with the same image quality, *is* better image quality!"

Your statement needs just a small adjustment to make us agree. I would argue that a smaller file size, with the same image quality, *is* better image quality!

[jrhoffman75]

My understanding is that the purpose is to create JPEG size files without the loss of quality that comes with JPEG compression. It’s not trying to save hard drive space but rather it is for digital sharing on devices that have much less storage than a hard drive v

Windows 10 has a codec available that will allow the files to be displayed just like JPEG.