DxO and the X Pro1

Bought the newest version of DxO Optics Pro andf discovered that it did not support the Fuji X Pro1. Fine, perfectly understandable, given the technology of the sensor, etc. Then I did some digging on their site and came up with a Word document in which they stated that they had no plans to support the sensor. Pretty definitive. Pretty hard to understand yet discover.

Sent them an email with a request for a rebate, as well as a clarification of their web site for other potential customers. Here was their response:

Alison W. (Support & Assistance)

Nov 24 18:36 (CET)

Greetings,

My apologies, when you purchased, installed, and activated the program, you had to agree to terms that once the program is activated, there is no possibility for a refund. Unfortunately, we never stated that we would support the Fuji X Pro 1, and I do apologize for this, but your account is not eligible for a refund. I can give you copies of the agreement, if you would like, but there is no way to purchase without agreeing to these terms.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

regards,

Alison
DxO Support Team 
DxO Labs

I mean, some of my friends are French, I have relatives that are French, I am half French myself, and have lived in France — but please. Spare me the lawyer lingo.  I guess customer service is no longer a French custom -  at least for these guys.

I knew it was a long shot, but did not expect to be dismissed so smugly. By an Alison, no less...

Ouch!!! That was a cold response. Knowing you just purchased their software to work withthe camera they do not intend to support should have been enough to make an exception to their rule.

I had the same go around with them.  My company purchases a great many of raw processors so we can answer our students question.

The folks at DXO are pretty arrogant, but truthfully we have not had much success with any companies in regards to the Fuji.

It simply indicates that things that do not fit into their concept of the bayer pattern will never be acknowledged.

The only thing you can do is make sure that everyone within your social media reach knows what kind of people DXO is and perhaps that will have some impact on their future sales.

--
El

I would also suggest that you request to speak with someone higher up with a polite but to the point concern and that by not offering a refund to you, in view that you contacted them soon after realizing this, that this will impact your future considerations of purchasing their product in the future and also your recommendation of their products to others.

From reading this, I will be more skeptical to purchasing their product. It does make a difference. Thanks for sharing your experience. You can paste this if you like that it came from a potential professional customer.

I don't know....on their main page, third item down on the main menu list is "Supported Equipment". On that page there is a drop-down menu to choose your camera manufacturer, then a drop down menu with the models supported. The X-Pro 1 is not listed as a supported camera.

Why would you buy something without first checking if your camera was supported?

--
~Stan~

Have a good day!

--
El

You are correct but their is a bigger picture or issue here involving not just DXO but other companies as well.  They have one function and that is to produce software to process imaging files.  Period.

If they flatly refuse to support a camera because of a newer and better technology then what will they do in the future.  One thing is for sure.  Technology will continue to change.  Software companies need to change with them.

This is not about their drop down menu and camera listings.  You are right about that.  But it is about their flat out refusal to even try and develop software for a newer technology and at the same time have the arrogance to reply to a customer in the way they did.

--
El

I see your point El. I treat DxO as a specialized piece of software in that I usually only use it for a specific purpose with certain camera/lens combinations.

Also to add - a lot of companies offer a 30 day money back guarantee. What harm would it do to refund your money since the software will not work with your equipment.

--
~Stan~

DXO offers a free 30-day trial of the software. It is a very simple process to download and try it before you buy it. The "Try" and "Buy" buttons are right next to each other on the web site. It seems the OP clicked the wrong button and that is user error. I've made more costly mistakes.

Buy an X100.  At least that is supported.

Frankly, I find DxO pretty mundane software compared to Lightroom 4+.

--
X100
XPro1; 60mm Macro, 35mm f1.4
XE1/Zoom on order

Good question.  He assumed support was coming?

--
DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinions and/or suggestions of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

...they offer a free 30--day trial so you had a full opportunity to explore its capabilities.  Are you due a refund because you've since discovered that future product development will not move in the direction that you hope for?

--
----------------
Robert A
Canon 5D

Thanks for all the response! Yes, I did the trial, but after a few days I purchased the actual product. My X Pro 1 arrived a day or so later.

My problem is not that they don't support the sensor now. My problems are:

• They don't plan on ever supporting it
• They don't make these plans readily apparent
• They would not issue a refund even given their obfuscation
• They were pretty snotty about it.

I really don't care about getting a $99 refund. It is more that I bought a $2000 + camera and have little support for it.

I  am a longtime Adobe beta testor and all over Lightroom and Photoshop, which, albeitly in limitation, support the camera.

Ça va.

Your issue, then, is that you bought it on the expectation that they would eventually support it and you now learn that they never intend to do so. You think they should have disclosed this, right?

I personally thing that's a bit of a stretch.

I too was troubled by the lack of raw support for my X-Pro, so I simply returned the hardware.  I will repurchase once I can be certain of a more favorable outcome.

--
----------------
Robert A
Canon 5D

I don't see anything wrong with the DxO response. Why should they offer a refund when the camera doesn't show up on the supported list of hardware? If you're "advanced" enough to know of DxO, and purchase their software, then you should be smart enough to read the information they provide on their website.

And the reason they don't support the X-Pro 1 RAW files could be due to lack of resources. It took Fuji years to come up with a mathematical algorithm to process their own RAWs, and it's their own sensor design!   They haven't been very helpful to companies who would normally offer 3rd party RAW support either. They have said they're working with Adobe on RAW support, but that's just Adobe. DxO isn't going to have the resources of Adobe, and they're not getting help from Fuji as far as we know.  Besides, there are only 2 camera models in the world, out of hundreds, that use this particular sensor design, so you can't expect a company to pour their resources into this one line of cameras.

I really don't see how you could blame DxO for any of it.    To me, it's the OP's fault.

Arrgh Matey!

Perhaps they follow in the tradition of the fellow?

http://www.treasurelore.com/florida/gasparilla.htm

Hearing this certainly change my view of them.

-Framus

Any half reasonable person would naturally expect DXO would have support for EISA's "European Professional Compact System Camera of the Year 2012-2013" - which was awarded to the Fujifilm X-Pro1.

See: http://www.eisa.eu/award/33/european-professional-compact-system-camera-2012-2013.html

So I don't blame you for being disappointed.

But I agree with what the others are saying - you should have checked to see whether DXO is a serious RAW processor by making sure it supported the X-Pro1. I use the word "serious" in the context of having the ability to program in support for the revolutionary new X-Trans sensor which is being recognized by many as a potential game changer within the industry.

Fujifilm can beg, grovel and plead with these RAW processing software houses but in the end it comes down to whether they want to build in support for the X-Pro1 in to their own software or not.  It is as simple as that.

And as they themselves have clearly stated in that "Word document in which they stated that they had no plans to support the sensor" they and only they are the ones who are deciding this - not Fujifilm as some clowns are trying to get people to believe.

I've marked DXO off my list of potential software purchases. They don't appear to me to be anywhere near the leading edge.

Cheers

The document says "no plans in the ​short term​".

Except for posting said document on their website, easily found in the support section. And having a very obvious list of supported cameras.

Their solution to refunds is to offer a trial.  Anyway, their reputation for customer support is awful. That's reason enough not to deal with them.

Blame Fuji.

For what it's worth, based on your write up, they have lost any chance to do business with me or the people I work with. I know that the $99 isn't a huge deal to you and you don't seem to really be taking it that hard, but $99 should mean less to them in the face of providing what would universally be seen as excellent customer support. Their lack of willingness to issue a refund over a measily $99 reeks of either desperation or the propensity to cut off one's nose to spite their face. Be it either, it shows that they are not a player in the majors and that we are better off sticking to the real players who will not only end up providing a solution, but are also known for excellence in customer service. Long live Apple and Adobe. We use them both here, and your incident just reaffirms that decision.

Thanks for sharing.

--
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Where is there any evidence that Fuji has provided the information necessary for these companies to provide correct demosaicing?  In fact, Adobe has stated publicly that Fuji did not provide *any* information about the X-Trans sensor either before or immediately after release.  Many months later (late October 2012, if I recall correctly), there were rumors that Fuji and Adobe were finally working together on this, but we still haven't seen any results.

I think it's pretty clearly Fuji's responsibility to publish the specs if they want third-party software companies to support their proprietary sensor array.  If Fuji doesn't release the specs, I fail to see how it's third-party companies' "fault" they do not properly support the sensor.

--

John Walker http://jhwalker.smugmug.com/