Was a little annoyed that they still aren't supporting JPEG-XL in-camera.

Then looked into what it would take to implement JPEG-XL encode... and yeah. Makes sense why they haven't gone beyond HEIC for now.

Thankfully starting to see JPEG-XL encode IP, but it's new: www.cast-inc.com/press-releases/cast-introduces-jpeg-xl-encoder-ip-core-high-quality-camera-still-image-compression

February 07, 2026 - 14:56 UTC

1
0
5
do you think it’s primarily complexity or licensing costs? or both?
1
0
0
Not licensing. JXL has no royalty. HEIC actually costs them a license.

It's all about the die area spend. HEIC is practically free: they can use the HEVC/H.265 video encoder already on the chip. And JPEG-1992 is so tiny that it's in the noise. JXL is mathematically much more complex (expensive).
1
0
1