DxO Optics Pro 8: What's New

Optics Pro 8 features a more streamlined user interface for PC users (shown here) and a more efficient tool palette arrangement on both Windows and Mac platforms.

DxO Optics Pro 8 is the newest version of DxO Labs' raw editing software. Optics Pro combines image organization and management with a wealth of editing and optical correction tools and the ability to batch process your camera's native raw files into TIFF, JPEG and DNG file formats. While Optics Pro 8 isn't a dramatic upgrade from version 7, it does introduce a new automated tonal recovery tool and print capability along with a revised user interface and image editing enhancements. In this very brief overview I'll highlight the most significant changes for current users. In an upcoming article we'll be taking a much more detailed look at image quality, workflow and output options as we compare Optics Pro 8 against Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 and Phase One's Capture One Pro 7.

Among the changes users will find in version 8 are a reorganized palette layout that puts the most commonly used editing tools in close proximity, a new highlight and shadow recovery tool, sliders for localized tonal adjustments and a 'smart' saturation option, which treats colors differently depending on their vibrancy. Version 8 also introduces a basic print module with support for single and multi-image layouts along with automated output sharpening tuned for the specified print size.

The modular approach

Although this overview is aimed primarily at current Optics Pro users, it's worth taking a moment to highlight DxO's modular approach to automated optical corrections. DxO Optics Pro's central appeal to raw shooting enthusiasts revolves around the use of lens-specific modules (see below) that provide detailed information about the optical performance of any supported camera/lens combination. This means the software can perform automated corrections for lens distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberration and corner softness based on data that DxO has obtained from testing their sample of the given body/lens combination.

Achieving the benefits of Optics Pro's automated lens corrections requires the installation of 'optics modules' which contain data about specific camera/lens combinations.

Optics modules are available for download within the application (see above). And once installed, any images from a camera/lens combination for which an optics module exists will have corrections applied automatically. The downside to such a lens-specific approach is that if you have a lens which is not supported in combination with your camera body, you'll have to apply these optical corrections manually, offering little practical benefit over using competing raw converters. For a complete list of currently supported camera/lens combinations, please visit the supported equipment page of DxO's site.

New Features

In Optics Pro 8, DxO has sought to address issues related both to productivity and of course image quality. In this overview we'll take a brief look at the following features and enhancements:

Click here to continue reading our DxO Optics Pro 8 article...

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

Comments

Total comments: 110
00112233
By 00112233 (6 months ago)

Does anyone knows if combination Canon 6D with Samyang lenses are supported?

0 upvotes
GaryW
By GaryW (Jan 17, 2013)

DxO version 8 doesn't feel like a huge upgrade over 7, but they have done a good job of giving simple controls that give great results quickly. Your preferred settings can be saved to a preset.

How much is your time worth?

As for the upgrade pricing, it's less than the retail price, although I wouldn't mind if it was cheaper. Compare it with the other software I use, Corel's Paint Shop Pro: the upgrade pricing is so silly, it's often just as cheap to buy it at full retail, if I can find it on discount. I just looked up Lightroom upgrade, and I paid less for DxO's (since I don't need the Elite version and caught them when they released the update when they put it on sale).

If the price is so burdonsome, go use one of many free RAW converters -- UFRaw, Raw Therapee, etc.

Adobe never gave me the rebate I submitted. Do I go on forums and post multiple messages about it? ;-) So if you want to make service the issue, I'm sure you can find poor service from time to time anywhere.

0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Jan 15, 2013)

useless crap.
version 8 still does not support DNG.

yeah you can export DNG but the program won´t display DNG files.

what idiocy....

and you think their normnalized sensor benchmark is stupid.....

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
OnTheWeb
By OnTheWeb (Jan 17, 2013)

On their website they indicate DXO will be integrated to support PSP Elements 11 by the end of January, 2013. Don't know if that will bring DNG support, though.

0 upvotes
Steve oliphant
By Steve oliphant (Jan 10, 2013)

Wow i'm only seeing negative things about DxO i use Aperture and it works great no problems here.The pictures of the red Ferraris look really orange is that what you get if you shoot nikon?.........Aperture is only $79.00 in addition get Pixelmator for$20 and tour set.If you have a pc stick to light room it's not bad ...

0 upvotes
Sandy Fleischberg
By Sandy Fleischberg (Dec 26, 2012)

Just to prove the point in regards to their business practice:

"OFFERS EXTENDED THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2012"

Last year they played this game until March !

Do they have no shame in France or Luxembourg ???

1 upvote
Sandy Fleischberg
By Sandy Fleischberg (Dec 20, 2012)

Something you should be aware of :

"This upgrade is free for all owners of DxO Optics Pro 8, as well as for photographers who purchased a DxO Optics Pro 7 license on or after September 1, 2012. "

How can they get away with this I WONDER !!!

All others like me who bought DXO Optics Pro 7 at FULL RETAIL are kicked
in their b****d.

They also try to pressure you into purchasing the program by setting time limitations that are never kept.
Version 7 was available for a reduced price until March 2012 !!!

HIGHLY UNETHICAL if you ask me.

Thank you DXO labs ! Have a nice day !

1 upvote
Yuyutsu
By Yuyutsu (Dec 12, 2012)

Only thing I did NOT like about DxO 8 is that it runs much much slower than 7.5 on my computer .

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 12, 2012)

hello Yuyutsu,

I'm sorry to hear that. Version 8 performances are normally similar to version 7 performances.

Here are some hints :

- check that the version 7 (if still installed on your computer) is quicker within the same configuration (same image, with same correction settings ...)

- Please make sure that you have not activated in the preference tab some options that slow the application. For exemple, in version 8, we added the possibility to see the noise reduction at any level of zoom. (in version 7, you needed to be at least at 75%).

If you don't get satisfaction, don't hesitate to write to the customer support.(http://support.dxo.com/home )

hope it helps,
Best,

0 upvotes
Sandy Fleischberg
By Sandy Fleischberg (Dec 20, 2012)

You are joking Oli,

This is like doing business >>French boutique - style <<.

The cloths shrink but one can not exchange them.

Can't you sell us something that works fresh out of the box ?

Last year you could not even provide a hard copy on CD
it too you 11 weeks to deliver.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Sandy Fleischberg
By Sandy Fleischberg (Dec 7, 2012)

This company will take your last penny.
They are hopelessly delayed in their development of modules.
Leica and Sigma cameras are without any support.
They have no customer service.
Never answer any inquiry.
They sell updates of their software as new versions for full retail.
There is still no update for Version 7 because they plan to cash in again around x-mas
with "version 8"... as they do every year.
It is shameless !

1 upvote
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 12, 2012)

Hello Sandy,

Looks like you come here like a hurrican and try to blast everything :)

well, let me try to answer because it is a bit easy to write what you say ...

- "delay in modules". We never commit on modules, we give an idea on our website. Priorities are always changing as they are based on our customer needs. If you have a camera / lens that no one use, I think that you can understand that you won't be served first...

- Leica, Sigma : they are clearly not our priority. At DxO, we only want to deliver the best in Image Quality. this is the reason why we calibrate in our labs all the lens / camera combination. Quality has a cost and we can focus on brand like Leica and Sigma only after dealing with Canon, Nikon, Sony... as they represent the most part of the market. I think everyone can understand.

- no customer service ? here is the link: http://support.dxo.com/home
and you can send your private request if needed of course

2 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 12, 2012)

(2nd part)

- never answer any inquiry --> Ok, please provide me the opened ticket number that you have so I can check with the customer service. If you didn't get any ticket number, it means that your inquiry was never sent / received by our customer service.

- "They sell updates of their software as new versions for full retail" --> I don't understand what you mean. Please go in your online customer account, you will have access to your upgrade price. You will need the information you used when you registered.
link: https://shop.dxo.com/login_upgrade.php?action=countryback&CountryShow=International

I won't reply to the 2 other "questions" as it is of course a non sense after reading my previous answer.

Best,
Olivier

2 upvotes
The Photo Ninja
By The Photo Ninja (Dec 19, 2012)

I agree on not answering emails. My last twomemailsmhave gone unanswered.mmone was about a sale and one was about the ikon p7700

1 upvote
Sandy Fleischberg
By Sandy Fleischberg (Dec 26, 2012)

Thank you Photo Ninja, Thank you Oli,

This is not a personal vendetta against Oli,
who is probably only the paid help of this outfit
who now has to answer to all of this.

Certainly more transparency would help.
I use this product and I see it's potential.
I just can't agree to their "French" modus operandi.

They are a privately owned company and a such they are probably not used to answer to shareholders.
But that should not give them the impression that
we are not watchful in regards to what kind of business practice they engage in.

So far I am not impressed !
... moreover as per today they prove again that they don't keep to anything they say - but change things just as they please.

Judge for yourself !

1 upvote
Claustral
By Claustral (Dec 3, 2012)

I use both LR4 and DOP8. I have a long history with DOP and about 6 months with LR. A few points:
Both are useful but have different strengths. LR of course offers local adjustments, and a fair ingestion engine. DxO offers notably more accurate distortion correction and and an easier/faster work-flow for images that are in good shape straight out of the camera.

DOP8 is a significant upgrade to DOP7 but in ways that DxO isn't likely to admit. It's the most stable version of DOP since version 5. Version 7 would fall over in all sorts of ways. DOP8 has been rock solid for me.

Secondly I strongly suspect that most of the code is new, which bodes well for future versions. Importantly the sometimes odd colour handling, especially with more extreme settings, is a thing of the past. The new DxO lighting control is easier to use than in previous version and yields more natural looking results.

DOP8 is well worth having along with LR4, especially for architecture and Urbex.

0 upvotes
PatrickP
By PatrickP (Nov 29, 2012)

Lightroom 4 as a complete package was on sale for $75 during thanksgiving in the US.

The DXO upgrade from v7 elite to v8 elite is $99 US. Even during promotion period it was $69.

So a DXO upgrade cost the same or more than the LR4 complete package.

Not to mention starting with LR4, LR actually understand Nikon colors better than DXO. With DXO you usually have to start with ViewNX/CNX conversion to TIFF, and then run the TIFFs through DXO to fix the geometric distortion or perspective distortion. LR / ACR is now close enough to do it in one shot.

2 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (Nov 30, 2012)

That said if one was a jpeg shooter (majority of the time) the colours look great in DXO from my D700. I did notice a difference in colour if importing raw NEFs though. I really do like the Jpeg colours in DXO and if you shoot to prevent overexposure jpegs from FF work great, you certainly can apply geometric and distortion corrections and I can also apply the HDR lighting settings to DXO jpegs well. With your statements have you actually tried the DXO software or is this opinions from other sources. NEF in DXO is doable I just adjust colour temperatures etc. for acceptable results. It works. DXO is a great product. Cost is only relative to advantages of functionality and DXO has lots. My many clients love the final colours of DXO images. I prefer the customizable interface on DXO more than LR and I own both.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
1 upvote
adamy
By adamy (Nov 27, 2012)

Please include Linux's Darktable and Apple's Aperture into the Raw Converters shoot out as well as both of these softwares are equally match in ablity to work with RAW photograph.

2 upvotes
gsmithfam
By gsmithfam (Nov 27, 2012)

I recently purchased a D600 and am not pleased with the color reproduction of my RAW files in Lightroom. Can anyone speak to this? Would this program be a better match and produce better color results? I'm using the default VIEW NX from Nikon but really do not like the limitations. It however produces fantastic results of my RAW images. Anyway, anyone have any experience with this? Thanks!

0 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 27, 2012)

Make sure you have the latest ACR version, there was a beta D600 conversion there until recently. I recommend Camera Neutral profile with a nudge to clarity and vibrance saved as a preset. Beautiful.

2 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (Nov 27, 2012)

From what I remember reading and also trying out with my D700 files is that the embedded picture style settings in the Raw files are accessible through View NX and Capture NX but not from other raw converters, unless this has changed. Colour is somewhat different from the Magrath colour charts from incamera Jpeg to Raw. See the colour page on D700 review with dpreview archives to see what I mean. I shoot both Jpeg and Raw and often like the Jpeg better due to nicer colours to start with and picture settings applied including more dynamic range already expanded from ADL setting.

2 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (Nov 26, 2012)

Local dodging brush adjustments, I keep hoping they will eventually add to software. However, I have been using it since DXO Pro 4.9 and now have 8.0 and on the 27inch iMac with lots of Ram and i7 processor, this software is fast. I prefer it over Lightroom. DXO has its personal palettes you can set up your favourite correction modules in sequence order on both sides of 27 inch screen, so little to no scrolling so changes can be quick and easy. You can set up presets so when you import images, some things are already done or turned on in import (or turned off ) and the rest you can do manually.

Automatic noise reduction and auto sharpening on import images applies to specific lens and camera modules you setup and you can change these settings as well to a new default if you wish (ie. lower the noise reduction settings for example). In my opinion, most new users would likely appreciate its many advantages if they used it for a month or so, however it is still easy to learn.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
spitfire31
By spitfire31 (Nov 26, 2012)

I certainly will not buy another upgrade to DxO OP until the day that they FINALLY see the light and give it LOCAL ADJUSTMENTs, à la Lightroom.

Smart this and smart that can never replace the artistic eye of the photographer.

1 upvote
raincoat
By raincoat (Nov 25, 2012)

DXO v8 is an important version. It's the first time they've released a major release in under a year, and made the free upgrade amnesty under a month.

It was already a bit suspicious when they jumped from v7.0x to v7.5 suddenly with no significant changes and still many unfixed bugs. It's obvious they want to move to a defacto subscription model here.

A lot of users bought and used v7 for 2-3months before v8 was announced. June 2012 was when v7.5x was starting to become stable, and hence a lot of people were buying. Now an incremental update and DXO asking for more cash? You can imagine a lot of loyal customers are no longer...

The important thing to note is that camera body support is version specific. While an owner of PS CS1 can use the new ACR to decode new camera RAW formats, a DXO user is forced to buy the latest version.

2 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (Nov 26, 2012)

PS CS1 users CANNOT open new camera RAW formats. PS CS5 won't even open D600 RAW files you need CS6. Almost all software is like this.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 26, 2012)

Adobe offers a free DNG converter app, so if you're willing to use a converted DNG instead of the native raw file format, you can process files from a new camera using an older version of PS's ACR.

0 upvotes
LP0WELL
By LP0WELL (Nov 30, 2012)

DxO Labs' V8 upgrade offer was not free, it was only a discount and it ended just two weeks after it was announced. I purchased V7.5 earlier this year and now DxO Labs is expecting me to pay full price for an upgrade in less than a year. I consider that predatory pricing and an insult to existing users.

0 upvotes
jkmroczek
By jkmroczek (Nov 25, 2012)

I am DXO user from version 6 through 7. I appreciate their idea of composing body and lens and give you the best image from this pair. I underestand that it is very expensive attitude so they have to have money for all tests.

I have tested DXO 8 for some time. I agree with many of you that it is not worth money for upgrade (even during the promotion). It is also not worth a number 8. It is 7.someting.

Guys at DXO have so many things to do with this software to be worth its price for a new version:
Interface still can't benefit dual screen stations (you cannot dock palletes on the second screen nor size image browser (it is too wide)
Print module is rather beta
New tools are limited

Many enterprise software houses (Symantec, EMC, Oracle for example) have the annual price for maintanance. It is something between 20 and 30% of initial purchase price. I thing it is more fair than DXO tactic of releasing "new version" each year and saying that you have to pay for this "revolution".

1 upvote
rusticus
By rusticus (Nov 25, 2012)

what's new? no support for Fuji EXR RAW . . .

1 upvote
Jolly Oly
By Jolly Oly (Nov 25, 2012)

On the first look it looks like a minor upgrade, not worth $100 for Elite version upgrade.
But the biggest issue I have now is that I don't trust them any more.
With DxO the whole meaning of fast, automatic workflow with minimum involvement and very good end results is based on modules. So when I bought v.7 more than one year ago the module for one of my favourite lens was almost out. Then it was postponed to 10/2012, and in 10/2012 was postponed again to 2013. That is more than one year delay for one of the most used mFT lens - the Panansonic 14mm f/2.5 pancake.
So if modul for some of your equipment is on the planned list, don't take that too seriously. A shame but true.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
JackRoch
By JackRoch (Nov 27, 2012)

I quite agree. I think the wait for the 14mm module has been quite a bit longer than that. What makes the wait even more bizarre is that the 14mm+body has been a standard offering from Panasonic since (at least) the GF2.

I only use the 14mm + 20mm so it's extremely frustrating to have DxO's particular benefits only available for some pics.

1 upvote
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello Jolly and JackRoch,

The list you are refering to is provided solely for informational purposes but I can perfectly understand that you are not happy.
We always try to do more and more modules. Approx 10.000 modules are available (5.000 made in 2012). The priority of the roadmap is made based on different factors. One of them is the number of people asking for the module.
So if you have not vote yet, you can tell DxO that you want your lens to be supported, it could help.

I provide you the link : http://www.dxo.com/intl/photo/support/modules/availability/pb_availability

Best,
Olivier

2 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (Nov 25, 2012)

DXO definitely need to add support for profoto rgb... and a local adjustment brush.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Nov 25, 2012)

Oh, all these Lr4 fanboys...
This is not about how the programmes measure against each other, it's about which one suits your photographic style and your equipment better. As for me, having bought Pro 7 last June and tried V8, there's no way back. V8 brings two extraordinary improvements over the previous version: smart lighting and selective tone. Now DxO provides the kind of control I experienced when I demo'ed Lr4, plus the great optical and geometric corrections which Adobe can only dream of. It's better for me - for my style and my gear -, but others may think otherwise. If Lr4 suited me better, I'd have bought it instead. No point in saying X is better than Y based solely on objective criteria.
People complain a lot about DxO's interface: well, Lr4 might be more intuitive and a bit faster, but it all goes down the drain as it takes ages to complete the final processing stage. At least that's what I found.

3 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 25, 2012)

The final save in LR is many times faster with LR than it is with DXO.

3 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (Nov 25, 2012)

I for one am waiting for the 1-shot-HDR promised with v6.0

In the meantime I've learnt to expose properly, since each version of DXO has been less forgiving in NR than the last. 'Smart' EV, lighting in DXO are useless to me.

0 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Nov 25, 2012)

Reilly, I tried both and I'm absolutely sure of what I stated. Final processing takes me between 12 and 20 seconds with DxO; with Lr4 I've got enough time to get myself a cup of cofee...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 26, 2012)

LR D800e 50MP raw: 5 seconds to full res jpg.

0 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Nov 26, 2012)

Either we aren't talking about the same thing - final processing and saving the file at the end of processing - or you have a NASA-spec computer. 5 seconds?

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 27, 2012)

I'm talking about saving a 50MB raw to full size jpg in no more than 6 seconds with all Lightroom adjustments, what are you talking about? The lengthy grind of the DXO "processing" save to jpg with the green bar?
I have an i7 with 8GB.

0 upvotes
PhotoKhan
By PhotoKhan (Nov 25, 2012)

What!?!?!
No root-kit?
Rats...
PK

0 upvotes
nightshadow1
By nightshadow1 (Nov 25, 2012)

I do think this is a very good upgrade to DXO. There always seems to be a mixed bag with the DXO upgrades. There has been NO converter IMHO that has better color for Nikon than Capture NX2, but the interface and crashes suck. The price is too high with Nikon's greedy pricing and forget about ever getting timely updates. They should include it or at least give a substantial discount. This new DXO upgrade has made things easier for me by improving the color, saturation and recovery (in my landscapes) and making it so easy to create presets. I don't include noise or sharpening in my DXO presets.

On my re-dos, I have improved most of my old shots regardless of how I had processed them previoulsy. Compared to LR, they both have their strong points and weaknesses. To me, the "auto lens correction" in LR sucks. No matter what I do, the the DXO corrections always seem to be much better! Now I use LR more for my cataloging, DXO or ACR for conversion and NIK for noise sharpening, and efex.

2 upvotes
Hoddo
By Hoddo (Nov 25, 2012)

Once I would have agreed with you but having recently tried Capture 1 I'm changing my mind and that's using their older '6' version. Apparently, v7 is better still and worth downloading the 30 day trial. The downside is that it's expensive.

0 upvotes
Joetsu
By Joetsu (Nov 25, 2012)

This is a bit off topic but so many respondees here are obviously very experienced on this topic of post-processing, so I'd like to ask for your help. I use a Mac and was intending to buy Aperture to go with my upcoming purchase of the Panny GH3. I read comparisons of Aperture and Lightroom and there didn't seem a lot in it. But after reading your comments here, I see Aperture isn't included along with the Big 3 for a future head-to-head review. Why is this?

0 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (Nov 25, 2012)

I am a PC

1 upvote
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 25, 2012)

Aperture is Mac-only. And with our broad cross-section of readers, we'll be featuring cross-platform raw converters in that upcoming piece.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
JakeB
By JakeB (Nov 25, 2012)

But most serious photographers use Macs.

Strange to cater to the PC-Accountant types.

0 upvotes
OnTheWeb
By OnTheWeb (Jan 17, 2013)

@JakeB "But most serious photographers use Macs? "

Can you provide a link to support this claim?

0 upvotes
f8andshowup
By f8andshowup (Nov 24, 2012)

Sure, DxO Optics Pro contains a great converter and does top-quality image enhancement.

It does not matter though, because this software has one of the worst user interfaces in the history of software. It is complicated, convoluted, and unnecessarily time consuming.

Skip it, and you will make both your life and your photography better.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Spectro
By Spectro (Nov 24, 2012)

I agree, I tried a trail version of 7 and it was like something Olympus like interface. After using LR4 for a while, DoX was just odd. But I wouldn't discount them if I the result are better. Too bad the rial version is over, I'll stick with LR4 and get Capture 3 whenever that comes out

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello to both,

Thank you for your comments,

The good news is that the interface (Windows version) has been completly rebuild in version 8.

So if you have so time, don't hesitate to do a new try.

Best,
Olivier

*On mac it has been partially rebuild, the major improvment is the support of Retina screens that not everyone is doing yet :)

0 upvotes
carpediem007
By carpediem007 (Nov 24, 2012)

Again, still no support for the Ricoh GXR. :-(

Worse, STILL NO DNG support whatsoever. DNGs aren't even displayed in their "browser"...

And yes, I have been asking them for GXR / DNG support since version 3 or 4. :-(

6 upvotes
sodacan
By sodacan (Nov 24, 2012)

Now I don't have this software but here's a quote from the first chapter: "... and the ability to batch process your camera's native raw files into TIFF, JPEG and DNG file formats."

If it can batch raw files into DNG, I would expect it to be able to show DNG files as well.

0 upvotes
carpediem007
By carpediem007 (Nov 25, 2012)

That's what just about everybody would "expect". Unfortunately it's not so. DxO doesn't even display DNGs... :-(

0 upvotes
Chris Epler
By Chris Epler (Nov 26, 2012)

Wow, STILL no DNG support? Wow, they REALLY don't like DNG. Oh well. I wrote them asking them about that after having converted a number of images to DNG and discarding my RAW files and they wrote back rather crassly something along the lines of 'well, serves you right!'. They have a big beef against the DNG format.

0 upvotes
MJSfoto1956
By MJSfoto1956 (Nov 24, 2012)

I've been using DxO for years and v8 is a very minor upgrade -- basically v7 with a nicer GUI and some new features. I personally like the way DxO does conversion -- I find it quite natural. I use their default setting for most images unless I want to bias it towards highlights or shadows. It does a remarkable job preserving the last bit of highlights if you specify such bias in the highlight settings. I agree with an earlier poster that if you are looking for HDR (which is what he was describing), DxO is not the best of the bunch. What I find makes for the best such images is to create two versions of the same picture -- one biased for highlights and one biased for shadows (saving each in differently named folders) then combine them myself in Photoshop to match my own "look". Unfortunately, there is no way to do this with a single click in DxO. Hopefully they might add such a feature in the future.

3 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (Nov 25, 2012)

Actually, it was natural. But from v7 they stuffed up the color management. What you see within DXO is no longer what you see in the output with your calibrated monitor profile.

0 upvotes
castleofargh
By castleofargh (Nov 24, 2012)

one stupid thing on dxo for my use.(and so easy to fix)

simple example: i move a dot on the curve and want to see if it s better or not.
as it is now i will ctrl+Z. dxo will re-render last preview... i wait ...
if i ctrl+y, again dxo will re-render the preview of something that was done 10sec ago!! wtf? how much time would we save if you simply cache the last 2 previews? photoshop can ctrl+Z until the end of times with no freeze, why can't we do a 2steps toggle in less than 5sec?
implement this plz! that s not hard work.

and i can't talk for everybody, but i would like this feature as a toggle on the image clic. because see the original pic, i want to do it maybe twice in the process. see last step preview i want to do it 50times per image.
to me this default toggle between original image and last setting is just some boasting toy, not something really usefull.

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello castleofargh,

Thank you for your feedback. I will transfer your info to the Product team.
If you want to send more comments, don't hesitate to go on our facebook page : http://www.facebook.com/DxOLabs?ref=hl

Best,
Olivier

0 upvotes
OnTheWeb
By OnTheWeb (Jan 17, 2013)

I agree with castleofargh... you used to be able to single mouse-click between current view and the original just by mouse-clicking on the image being worked on at the time. This is a critical feature to have back.

0 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Nov 24, 2012)

I was a true follower of all their prime, gold, platinum versions what’s so ever named.

In detailed comparisons I detected that their claim never could reach the original raw converters as from Olympus, Nikon, Canon, or Sigma. The noise reduction algorithms from DxO ruined many of my landscape tonalities. The parallel processing took eternities. The program’s hung ups were legend.

I found them a marketing gag with no substance. DxO quietly died away from my workstations about one year ago.

Rest in peace DxO. Technical software incompetence in practice.

0 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Nov 24, 2012)

I've had the same experience with Nikon Capture. I suspect that the camera manufacturer's raw converters take into account the noise characteristics of the camera, something that '3rd party' software is unable to do.

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello Thomas,

Our goal at DxO is to provide you with Image Quality superior than any other brand you have mentionned. So, I'm sorry to hear that you had a bad experience with the version you used.

If you have some time for a new try, I would suggest you to download the trial of version 8. In case there is something that goes wrong on your images, I would recommand you to report the information to the technical hotline team -they will be welcome to help you.

Best,
Olivier

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello gsum,

At DxO, we measure all the cameras output both in RAW and JPEG in all the settings conditions. Hence, we take into account all the noise characteristics of the camera.
(I assume that the camera is supported by DxO Optics Pro)

Best,
Olivier

0 upvotes
Peksu
By Peksu (Nov 24, 2012)

I used DxO 7 for a long time, and took the time to learn the meaning and fine details of all of the complicated controls, but something about the tonality was never right.

The before and after -pictures of the white boats show exactly what I had problems with; the after-picture looks like s**t. It unnatural, and in DxO, no matter how much you tweak, every time you want to lift shadows or bring down highlights, and/or increase contrast, that happens. There is no way to make it look natural without clipping one of the two, it has a weird grunge look to it. Eventually I tried Lightroom, and was instantly converted. That same boat picture in Lightroom would look great, with the entire dynamic range used, yet contrasty and punchy. Probably many other software would fare fine too, but DxO just cant compress dynamic range and look natural.

3 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 24, 2012)

I think you've put your finger on it right there. Tonality is a hit your gut or miss proposition, and DXO cannot hold a candle to LR4 in that department, to say nothing of the dozens of extra clicks one needs to produce a finished product. I keep waiting for DXO to get better, because I like the geometry correction, but so far they've been highly resistant to change.

1 upvote
antonio freddo
By antonio freddo (Nov 24, 2012)

Again? I am really considering uninstalling the version 7 from my Mac. In this time of crisis, you can do a lot with the money.

1 upvote
Zoran K
By Zoran K (Nov 24, 2012)

I have yet to find another converter that will automatically adjust images in seconds accordingly to specific camera and lenses.

2 upvotes
coffeefrog
By coffeefrog (Nov 24, 2012)

fastest? version 8? I like what it does but fast is not how I would describe it.

0 upvotes
Der Steppenwolf
By Der Steppenwolf (Nov 24, 2012)

Get a decent computer, and NO laptops are not considered decent in photoediting world.
Get a fast GPU, and get 16GB Ram with and SSD. DXO is by far fastest out there when using GPU acceleration.

4 upvotes
iru
By iru (Nov 24, 2012)

No, it's not. That's why I just switched to Capture One after test-driving both new releases for some days. Capture One is way faster. That's with a GTX 580 and OpenCL enabled. SSD vs. disk makes not much difference in UI reponsiveness from my testing.

2 upvotes
castleofargh
By castleofargh (Nov 24, 2012)

yes it is the fastest from an automated standpoint, no other software will do that much alone and thus so fast.

no it s not fast as it can sometimes freeze for several seconds just to refresh a preview. other softwares don't lag so much.

so i guess it depends on how much you want to tweak the image yourself.

0 upvotes
sodacan
By sodacan (Nov 24, 2012)

This is quite near the point I'm most interested in: performance. LR4 can do pretty much all I want to do but it's a resource hog and sometimes stalls, wondering if DxO Optics is any better. FYI I run an average PC of Quad CPU / 8GB / 460GTX / SSD.

0 upvotes
castleofargh
By castleofargh (Nov 25, 2012)

@sodacan i m afraid it will be at best the same.
that depends mostly on what default settings you will use.
but as optical tools will always be used in dxo and not that much or after manually in LR, you will tend to have more processing for each preview in dxo from the beginning. and so more lag.

you should test the trial version of dxo, it s a complete version, not a light one. so you really see what you would pay for.

1 upvote
Zoran K
By Zoran K (Nov 24, 2012)

From my experience, DxO is probably the fastest RAW converter that will give you excellent results from camera raw files, with unparalleled corrections tied to specific lenses and camera sensors.

It is not perfect tool, but whatever is doing - is doing almost perfectly, especially in noise reduction, geometry correction, chromatic aberration and recovering of image detail.

4 upvotes
iru
By iru (Nov 24, 2012)

Did you test C1? It's so much more responsive. Describing DxO as the "fastest" RAW converter seems weird to me. Or do you mean workflow-wise?

I used DxO for the last 5 years exclusively but switched after the new release still wasn't responsive enough. C1 is way better in this area.

2 upvotes
leerob
By leerob (Nov 24, 2012)

They take their time to include FZ200.
Maybe in a year modules will be there.

0 upvotes
AlanG
By AlanG (Nov 23, 2012)

Continuation of post below.

The printing feature is totally pathetic compared with what is available in other programs such as ACDSee. You cannot add a header or a footer to proof sheets. And there is very little customization of file name, appearance, etc. Definitely something I would never use.

The only reason I can see for me to pay the "upgrade" price for version 8 is if it eventually supports my new Nex 6 camera. But I don't see why I should have to pay $99 just because they have made the choice to force you to pay for a new version mostly just to get camera support. This should never have been considered a new version in my opinion... the changes just don't mount up to much more than window dressing and a useless very basic printing feature.

I've been begging DXO to give me back the features and project efficiency of version 6 with the support for my 5D III and Nex 6. But they say I must move on to new versions even if I feel I they are taking me backwards in efficiency.

1 upvote
AlanG
By AlanG (Nov 23, 2012)

I've been using DXO for a long time. I have benn pretty upset that version 7 and version 8 have removed some useful features that were in version 6. The usability in "Projects" mode is not as good either.

That being said I compared version 8 with version 7 and don't see much reason to upgrade. The interface looks better but has not added any new features... other than some automated exposure and lighting (HDR) controls that I would never use in place of the manual controls. I could not see any difference in image quality and I was carefully studying both programs side by side using identical settings in each one.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 24, 2012)

The $150 upgrade from Standard to Elite 8 is not the least bit tempting. As well, DXO needs to improve their interface big time. Way too many clicks compared to LR.

0 upvotes
antonio freddo
By antonio freddo (Nov 24, 2012)

I keep my opinion (see previous reply): I will not give, again, $69,00 for an upgrade to a software that to me is a mess. Since I bought version 6 ($199,00) and paid $ 69,00 for the upgrade to 7, I used it exactly 2 (two) time. No, gentlemen, no $69,00 for it. My main photo editing software are PS, Nik and Topaz.

0 upvotes
mojorisn
By mojorisn (Nov 24, 2012)

I am very aggravated that DXO requires a second version ("Elite") to be able to use my Canon 5DII. Is there any other RAW processing program that requires a more expensive version to allow functionality with a FF camera?
Also, as mentioned the printing module is less than adequate.
Les

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

to all,

Thank you for your comments.

Just a few lines to explain the difference between Standard and Elite editions.

At DxO, we measure every combination of Lens and Camera in order to create the DxO Optics Module. We have about 6 labs in the US and in Europe to be able to do all the calibration... already approx 10.000 modules done. As a consequence, the software applies corrections dedicated to both the hardware you are using (in every shooting conditions) and the content of the image.

As you can imagine, it has a cost and that is the reason why decided to do a split in 2 editions. Standard edition for entry level + mid level cameras and Elite edition which covers the FF cameras in addition of the perimeter of the Standard edition.

Best,
Olivier

0 upvotes
steven_k
By steven_k (Nov 23, 2012)

What about Sony A99 support?

1 upvote
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello Steven!

Even if officially, the camera should be supported in january (http://www.dxo.com/intl/photo/dxo_optics_pro/for_your_equipment) Everything is made internally to have this camera supported before the end of the year. The target is third week of december if everything goes well.

Olivier

0 upvotes
enable cookies
By enable cookies (Nov 23, 2012)

I think the problem comes down to the sensor. I'm not a boffin where this is concerned, but given the XPro-1 and XE-1 use an X-Trans sensor rather than the normal Bayer sensor, I assume the whole approach to processing RAW files differs considerably from other cameras.

If that is the case, DXO might consider it not viable to do all the coding for a little used sensor with possibly very different processing needs.

The little extract that designdog posted from the website seems most helpful in clarifying their intentions. Expect nothing soon.

Perhaps someone knows if there is some workaround, such as converting the RAW files, that would enable the DXO features.

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

You are correct,

To our knowledge and the feedbacks that we get from photographers and some people at Fuji itself ... there is absolutly no RAW converter that take advantage of the new Fuji sensors. I mean, not only supporting the new format but giving a satisfactory result.

For those who want to know why, you will find here our official answer that explains why those cameras are not yet supported by DxO Optics Pro : http://support.dxo.com/entries/22223617-will-the-camera-fuji-x-pro-1-x-e1-x10-xf1-x-s1-be-supported

Olivier

0 upvotes
Pictus
By Pictus (Nov 23, 2012)

For DXO guys:
-Need NATIVE color space bigger than Adobe RGB, see http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=54284.0
-Again no 'multi point color balance tool' for the Windows version :(

For Amadou Diallo, please include Photo Ninja into the comparative as it is another excellent high-end converter.
Corel AfterShot Pro would be a good idea too as it is the fastest of all.
Some users need quality above all, others speed ...

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 23, 2012)

Dont take it personally, but Photo Ninja is about as high-end or excellent as RT or most DCraw based "GUIs".

I tried it, but its too simple, quite slow, not special in any way and very "beta-ish".

Reality is that we have 3 main converters which actually are usable - LR/ACR, CP7, DXO8. Then there are semi-usable SilkyPix and ACDSee (which is sometimes suprisingly decent). And then all odds and oddities of RAW converting world, usually based on DCraw. Not sure if Photo Ninja is based on DCraw or not, but its not better then those based on it.

Special place belongs to highly modified DCraw based RPP (Mac only unfortunately) and ofc Aperture. RPP is bit clumsy, but can do tricks that nothing else can (like producing usable pics from SD1M and X-Pro 1 or X-E 1).

1 upvote
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 23, 2012)

Pictus, thanks for the suggestions. It's likely we'll limit the raw converter shoot out to the three apps I mentioned, as they're the most popular and mature cross-platform options. But I'll consider whether we can incorporate Photo Ninja in some way, as many users are probably not aware the "Ninja" is now a raw converter as well.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Ak pinxit
By Ak pinxit (Nov 24, 2012)

Photo Ninja does carry "Beta-ish" mood on it , but not in Noise reduction nor Detail extraction department , IMO best RAW converter today . LR has polished , well designed UI but now it has to step down and make room for new player .

0 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (Nov 25, 2012)

How about Raw Developer..??

0 upvotes
designdog
By designdog (Nov 23, 2012)

What is missing, unfortunately discovered by me after I purchased it, is support for the Fuji X Pro1...

3 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Nov 23, 2012)

Maybe you should have got informed before purchasing it. But don't despair, new modules are coming all the time. And you may do your corrections manually until support for your gorgeous X-Pro 1 comes.

4 upvotes
Geniet
By Geniet (Nov 23, 2012)

A kind remark;
Within the program, under the drop down menu 'DxO modules' there is the possibility 'Suggest a DxO Optics Module to DxO Labs'.
The 'Fuji X Pro 1' surely deserves to be added. The Fuji FinePix X100 module, after all, is also available.

0 upvotes
designdog
By designdog (Nov 23, 2012)

If you burrow down deep on their web site, which I just did this afternoon, you will discover a document that explaims their position. Here is the final sentence:

Although DxO Labs tries to respond to photographers’ requests to provide support for specific camera models, there are no plans for supporting the Fuji X-Pro 1 in the short term.

I have sent them an email asking for a refund, and requesting a bit more clarity on their web site.

5 upvotes
Nerval
By Nerval (Nov 23, 2012)

@Designdog
Hmmm... Funny coming from DxO. They're usually pretty reactive to provide support for raw files and optical correction, after all that's the main thing about the soft...
I'm interested in the Fuji X series, and I've been using DxO OP7, so could you please post the link here (about DxO not supporting fuji, and why, if they give reasons), it might help other readers.
Cheers

PS : I just checked and actually neither the X-Pro1 or the X-E1 are listed among the Fujifilm supported cameras for lens correction, so not there not supported, all right. But I could not find the additional details you mentioned, and that's the interesting part, I mean: short term? What is short term? Why?

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
alexovic
By alexovic (Nov 23, 2012)

I would try it again if it doesn't install the Pace anti-piracy software as a bonus, which messes with your PC and you cant get rid off...

5 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 23, 2012)

Pace anti-piracy? Lol, checked that online. DxO wants to commit suicide? :D I wont even try it with it..

Seriously, SW that installs something like this should be banned. It wont stop pirates (it never does), but it will bother users (as always).

DxO reminds me Ubisoft with their whining and blaming pirates for all loss (DxO didnt reach that yet, guess its matter of time).

1 upvote
castleofargh
By castleofargh (Nov 24, 2012)

they ve got a protocol to follow to create a module for each camera, when a sensor isn't like others or works differently it is more than likely that dxo will not bother/be able to do it.

2 upvotes
Lan
By Lan (Nov 24, 2012)

@Nerval: I suspect the reason neither camera is supported is that they're not based on the standard Bayer filter (read wiki).

Unlike 99% of the other cameras on the market, Fuji use their own CFA pattern. The good news is that it doesn't produce Moiré in any appreciable way, and it increases luminance detail when compared to a camera with an AA filter (because you don't need one) - unfortunately the major drawback is that it seems to damage the colour resolution.

If you're shooting weddings or architectural shots the Fuji CFA may be a benefit; if you're shooting anything with fine colour detail it's really not a good idea...

The CFA choice makes a significant difference to the way you need to convert the RAW files into a conventional image. So, if you've spent a long time working on Bayer conversion routines, you'll need to start again to use the Fuji sensor layout - it requires significantly different processing.

1 upvote
Douglas69
By Douglas69 (Nov 24, 2012)

I've used DXO Elite since version 1.0. That version worked wonders with 10D Canon images shot with the kit lens. Things change. I'm using Nikon (FF) and Pentax (MF) cameras now and although DXO has changed, some might say improved ...it does not handle Nikon D800 or Pentax Medium format files anywhere near as well as the instant improvement I found on 10D images that compelled me to buy the software in the first place.

I only bought the "Elite" version because of my D800. I should have chosen one of the many alternatives that not just handles Nikon files well but also works with the large files from a medium format camera.

We won't be updating it again and unless the company behind DXO changes its practice of charging for what should be a free incremental update, we won't be buying the software again, any time soon. This is a pity because I liked the way it automatically corrected lens anomalies.

Doug

0 upvotes
Pahila
By Pahila (Nov 25, 2012)

I think as far as raw converters go, nothing beats Capture one in quality and workflow is pretty flexible too. just my 2 cents.

0 upvotes
JRApprentice
By JRApprentice (Nov 25, 2012)

I think the problem with the X-Pro1 etc. illustrates the flaw in the DXO business plan Whenever a new camera body comes out they should match it to all of the available lenses by their own stated standards. Similarly, when a new lens comes out they should, by rights, match it to all the available camera bodies. The problem is exponential getting bigger by the day. They have massively expanded their testing capability over recent months and still cannot find time to test low volume stars like the X-Pro1.

They are bound to go for the high volume Canons and Nikons etc.. before the less numerous models, to keep sales interest up.
Then there is the question of when to drop old models from the analysis, after 3 years, 4 or maybe 10?

0 upvotes
Nerval
By Nerval (Nov 26, 2012)

@Lan

@Lan

It's a bit disappointing that they do not bother taking up on the Fuji... This camera renders very fine details on the picture, so a support for the raw and lens distortion correction would have been nice.

I kinda worked out the bit about the colour filter array from the X-Pro1 review with the demosaicking issues and so on, but sill I liked it.

It seemed to do outstandingly well in terms of low light performance and dynamic range, but I did not know that it would cause the colour spectrum to deteriorate compared with a bayer array...

So thanks for the insights if I get the chance to borrow one at the local dealer I'll definitly take a look at that.

0 upvotes
Dave Thompson
By Dave Thompson (Nov 26, 2012)

Have tried this on a Macbook Pro Retina and far too slow. There is a big delay when making adjustments and loading files. Lightroom is way ahead..... and why no plans for supporting Fuji X pro 1??

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello to all,

Concerning Fuji cameras :

The problem is not in the DxO Optics Module creation but in the demosaicing algorithms that can't work on their new sensors.

You will find here our official answer that explains why those cameras are not yet supported : http://support.dxo.com/entries/22223617-will-the-camera-fuji-x-pro-1-x-e1-x10-xf1-x-s1-be-supported

Olivier

0 upvotes
Olivier from DxO Labs
By Olivier from DxO Labs (Dec 5, 2012)

Hello to alexovic, Mescalamba and others that are concerned about about the anti piracy system used by DxO:

DxO is no longer using any PACE product. Hence, both DxO Optics Pro 7.5 and higher (therefore including version 8 :) ), DxO FilmPack 3.2 and higher and DxO ViewPoint are not using this kind of protection.

Olivier

0 upvotes
Dan Ortego
By Dan Ortego (4 months ago)

I haven't used DxO since version 7 so I just downloaded this v.9 to take a look. Just like others have mentioned, it still doesn't support DNG from my Sony Alpha 900.

The layout is cleaner and the auto-lighting adjustments are nice. Even so, I don't see it as a replacement for LR5 which is vastly more convenient and polished.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 110