LR 4.1 RC2 or Not for Canon 5D3

[Wil]

There have been reports about problems with RC2 in general and Canon files in particular.

It has been reported that LR4 produces banding when pushing under exposed areas of an image from Canon 5DII, III files.  The report is that this problem doesn't exist with Canon's own software, nor Nikon files in LR4.

Questions:
1.  Is it expected that Lightroom will improve its conversions of CR2 files?

2.  Do those with Canon 5D3 cameras think updating to RC2 from RC1 is an improvement?

Thanks,
Wil

[Schewe]

There have been reports about problems with RC2 in general and Canon files in particular.

Reported by whom? Where?

There are reports of UFOs and alien abductions too...doesn't make them true.

[Keith Reeder]

This one's legit, Jeff.

After Michael Reichman's D800 review/comparo with the 5D Mk III, some 5D Mk III users have demsonstrated - very persuasively - that while Lr conversions are very noisy when the shadows are pushed (a la the D800 review), DPP conversions are much closer to the quality of the pushed D800 files.

I've seen the same thing in the 5D Mk III files I've downloaded and converted - the shadows really are pretty good when pushed in DPP, and very, very much better than the results in the LuLa article.

[Schewe]

I've seen the same thing in the 5D Mk III files I've downloaded and converted - the shadows really are pretty good when pushed in DPP, and very, very much better than the results in the LuLa article.

Gotta link? Got settings?

[ihv]

I think it was mostly a false alarm.

1. DPP just doesn't push enough in comparison to LR

2. DPP, at certain noise threshold, will not open up the shadows - this means a cleaner image but the DR is not there.

[Keith Reeder]

Sorry ihv, but you're wrong - you can't say that "the DR isn't there" if opening the shadows in DPP digs out the detail - and it does. The 5D Mk III still isn't as good as the D800, but it's a damn sight better than some would have us believe.

Jeff, I can't recall the page, but in any event I've done my own tests and (although this certainly isn't a criticism of Lr) DPP does an awful lot better than Lr 4 with 5D Mk III files as far as pushed shadows are concerned.

[Hans Kruse]

Sorry ihv, but you're wrong.

Keith, you need to provide links and/or show it yourself.

[Keith Reeder]

Keith, you need to provide links and/or show it yourself.

I don't need to do anything, Hans: anyone can do the tests I've done.

I don't have a horse in this race - I don't own a 5D Mk III - but I know what I've seen, and that's enough for me.

[Hans Kruse]

I don't need to do anything, Hans: anyone can do the tests I've done.

I don't have a horse in this race - I don't own a 5D Mk III - but I know what I've seen, and that's enough for me.

Keith, nobody will take you serious in this way 

[Wil]

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=41409583
is a pretty long thread on this subject.

Wil

[dreed]

FWIW, I have noticed the same with the 5DII.

IMHO, either DPP knows more about the behaviour of the sensor or it just clips the blacks earlier.

My solution has been to just ensure that images are exposed so as to not contain noise and nor do I push them such that it becomes a problem.

[DaveCurtis]

I have compared L4 and DPP with images out of my new 5D3.

There is no problem that I can see with L4. L4 just opens up the shadows and blacks more than DPP to show the delightful 5D3 banding