Is it worth converting RAW files to DNG?

I find it hard to believe that future Adobe programs are going to stop reading CR2 or (whatever the Nikon version is called) files. I mean, if they can convert them in the future, then they can read them in the future…

I hesitate to do it because it takes up more space and I see no real benefit

Why do you, or why don't you, convert your files?

Photoshop isn't going to stop allowing their programs to read the RAW format. It can result in a great loss of revenue for their company. However, their programs aren't always up to date with cameras, and cameras are created and designed quicker than Photoshop itself.

To answer whether it's worth the trouble, yes. I delete the original files, anyway, while keeping my TIFF copies that I convert from NEF, from RAW. I delete the NEF files, to make room for new ones. If you're really into photography, the answer is yes. If you aren't into photography, then no. I was very accustomed to working straight from RAW when I used my Olympus e420, but now I have my new Nikon D3100, and quite honestly, I prefer the new options. All of my pictures are saved automatically as TIFF when I begin converting.

Anyway, I convert from RAW, to NEF, to TIFF, and then lastly to JPG.

RAW files are your negative. Do NOT lose them.

Because the RAW files contain All the information captured by your sensor, they can be used years later using newer software. Image quality of legacy files can be improved over time as parametric image editors improve.

DNG is an open source version of the RAW files. There are times when a RAW file must be converted to a DNG file like when using Xrites Colorchecker Passport or when you find yourself with an older version of a photo program that does not support newer versions RAW files.

http://dpbestflow.org/camera/raw-vs-rendered

If you take your images as RAW (Nikon=NEF) then you really ought to treat them as Negatives and retain them. Whilst this may take up motre space, storage is cheap if you adopt the right procedure(s).

In my case I transfer images into a temporary folder where I edit images to rename them and add appropriate IPTC data. Once that is done I transfer images to a monthly folder and - at the end of each month I transfer the whole month's folder to a pair of hard drives, one of which is my backup whilst the other is my working file for image requests.

Since I use NIKON Software I'm basing this process on Nikon's guarantee that any future software introduced by the company will be backward compatible - that is it will successfully handle earlier versions of images which are in NEF format. To date I have taken images from 2001 using Nikon D100 / D200 / D300 and D700 cameras and my current version of Nikon NX2 handles them all.

This procedure has been adopted after much thought but I acknowledge it is reliant on Nikon's guarantee of backward compatability which - to date - it has kept to.

The follow-on to this is that when I copy images into a work area to create JPEGs for possible publication I can edit the image to best suit the needs of the recipient and assist his work in preparing them for publication. This gives me greater control of how my image will appear in the appropriatte publication whether it be printed on varying paper qualities or viewed digitally via the internet.

I also send material to a film library whose requirement is for TIFF images and - since these are larger still than the original NEFs I create the TIFFs from the NEFs as required rather than taking up unnecessary space.