Canon revamps DPP

[Phil Indeblanc]

I remember me liking the Canon dev, but had some speed and other issues that didn't allow easy integration to use with other apps...
Has Canon redefined it?

I'll be downloading at trying it out asap.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/digital_photo_professional_4_0_launched.do

[kirkt]

Be aware of the following:

At launch, DPP 4.0 is compatible with Canon’s current range of full-frame DSLRs, including the EOS-1D X, EOS-1D C, EOS 5D Mark III and EOS 6D. For other models, an update of DPP 3.14 will be released.

kirk

[Chris_Brown]

Yet another reason for the DNG standard.

[Rhossydd]

Be aware of the following:
"At launch, DPP 4.0 is compatible with Canon’s current range"

I hope they see sense and extend it to cover all past Pro bodies too.

I can see a lot of resentment from those who've paid thousands for the EOS1 cameras in the recent past being excluded from this upgrade. Plus those that use older bodies as back ups/additional bodies alongside the latest cameras.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

"For other models, an update of DPP 3.14 will be released."

Yet another reason for the DNG standard.

How's that Chris? All models (even the Raws from my Powershot G3) are fully supported by a free DPP 3.xx Rawconverter from Canon (and also by a slew of others, including RawTherapee, and many others that are often based on DCRaw, available for Mac/Win/Linux).

The new more advanced features of DPP require certain camera hardware, and Raw formats, to be able to convert/correct/optimize, so it makes no sense to drag along backwards compatibility for models that miss the features that are needed. Two separate versions seems to make sense for easier maintenance.

It is already the case that e.g. some legacy lenses do not transmit certain parameters that are needed for distortion correction (e.g. distance), which produces menu choices in DPP that do not function, and that will only get more often to be the case as new features are added to the new hardware and Raw files.

DNG won't be able to understand those new tags or maker notes (why would Canon in this case try to explain their function to their competitors), let alone utilize them, so the best it can do is copy them to the DNG as deadweight/bloat. DNG adds nothing, it's just a wrapper around a Raw that can already be better decoded by other programs.

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I hope they see sense and extend it to cover all past Pro bodies too.

We'll have to see how far back they will go with supporting legacy models.

I can see a lot of resentment from those who've paid thousands for the EOS1 cameras in the recent past being excluded from this upgrade. Plus those that use older bodies as back ups/additional bodies alongside the latest cameras.

Are there still many EOS-D30 users around (who can BTW continue using DPP 3.xx, if they do not already use something else)?

I see no real issue as long as Canon offers a (free) converter for those legacy models (which are often also covered by other software).

Cheers,
Bart

[Damon Lynch]

It is already the case that e.g. some legacy lenses do not transmit certain parameters that are needed for distortion correction (e.g. distance), which produces menu choices in DPP that do not function, and that will only get more often to be the case as new features are added to the new hardware and Raw files.

I wonder if that's why the original 300mm f/2.8 IS has no lens profile? But then again the relatively old 135mm f/2.0 does. Maybe the fact that there is a Mark II of the 300 but not the 135 also has something to do with it.

In my opinion for a small minority of images DPP is the best tool for the job. For example in my experience DPP produces the sharpest results of any RAW converter I've tried with Canon wide angle lenses.

It's a pity DPP 4.0's highlight recovery is still clearly inferior to Adobe's. Or that they while they have Wide gamut RGB 16 bit TIFF output, they don't support ProPhotoRGB. The sharpening isn't too hot either but there are always other solutions for that problem.

[Chris_Brown]

"For other models, an update of DPP 3.14 will be released."

Yet another reason for the DNG standard.

How's that Chris? All models (even the Raws from my Powershot G3) are fully supported by a free DPP 3.xx Rawconverter from Canon (and also by a slew of others, including RawTherapee, and many others that are often based on DCRaw, available for Mac/Win/Linux).

By Canon locking out older camera models, they are denying users of older cameras the opportunity to make improvements on their raw images with new, improved Canon software. If Adobe released a version of ACR that locked out older camera models, there'd be quite a few angry customers.

Canon offers a utility to convert raw files for use in DPP v4. Why not include that feature in DPP?

My point is that the DNG standard is out there to prevent photographers from losing the ability to process their images, no matter how old they are, or what camera wrote the file. It appears Canon is not concerned with that.

[Vladimirovich]

My point is that the DNG standard is out there to prevent photographers from losing the ability to process their images, no matter how old they are, or what camera wrote the file. It appears Canon is not concerned with that.

that is very aligned with the concept of Adobe CC where you loose the ability to work w/ your raws using adjustments you did w/ ACR once you stop paying Adobe... DNG by itself 'd not prevent Canon from locking out DNGs from old models - it is a manufacturers call if they see that DNG is coming from an old camera or does not have their proprietary information inside, etc