Adobe Camera Raw, Lightroom and DNG Converter add EOS 7D II, X100T, G7 X, NX1 and LX100 support

Not with Windows 7 Pro 64.

Though I'm running PhotoShop/Bridge CS6. (I don't have LR 5, or 4, etc).

Nov 24, 2014permalink

LightCatcherLT

Adobe's European region sites do not allow to buy Lightroom 5 as standalone anymore. Links exists, but nothing gets shown upon clicking it. Does that mean that 5.7 means end of LR5 standalone?

Nov 21, 2014permalink

Nic Planarchy

Works fine for me here in the UK. Somewhat convoluted yes as they'd rather I went with CC but I can pick up Lightroom and put in my basket for £102.57 direct from their website.

Nov 21, 2014permalink

nikonianer

ah jes, also for this absolutely uninteresting 750 thing somewhere from a very unpopular manufacturer - not important at all

Nov 20, 2014permalink

The Squire

I don't understand why Adobe cant make the DNG converter a plugin for Lightroom. That way I can import new camera model's RAW files, via DNG Converter, to my 'old' version of Lightroom without having to pay for a software upgrade. Oh, hang on...

Nov 20, 2014permalink

BaldCol

It's easy enough to convert using the free DNG converter then export into whichever LR version you have. It's only one extra step and think of all the money that one step is saving you.

Nov 25, 2014permalink

The Squire

@BaldCo - Yes, I think I might try that for a bit. LR4 wont import my nice new LX100 RAW files so I'll try stepping it through DNG Converter.

It is just one more step but if I've got a full card of 64GB files that one extra step that includes re-encoding and creating an extra set of copies could be many minutes.

Nov 25, 2014permalink

The Squire

Panasonic DMC-CM1? The 1" camera-phone? You can't even buy that yet!

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Revenant

It was only released in France, Germany and Austria.

Nov 21, 2014permalink

Lightroom has been working fine for me with various NEFs, ORFs, RW2s, up to now, so I tried the RAW files from FUJI X30, it is so slow to import the files that it is unusable. I'll have to go back to work with them through CS6 Camera Raw, which works fine, but it is not a very efficient work flow when one has to edit & process several hundred files every evening.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

I have just made a new folder, and put just one Fuji X30 file in to it, and importing it into Lightroom was immediate. However, if I try to import the same file from another folder with 2500 other files, Lightroom just doesn't want to know :)

Nov 20, 2014permalink

OLY and PANY RAW files still working fine and fast. So the problem in my case is just with the FUJI X30 RAW files.

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

Deleted 5.7, re-installed 5.6. Lightroom back to speed. Will wait for the bugs to be cleaned before I install a newer version. By the way, if you try to re-install 5.6 without deleting 5.7, it says installed 5.6, but it is still 5.7. So one has to delete 5.7 first.

Now, back to converting Fuji X30 RAWs via PS6 Camera Raw.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

https://photographylife.com/adobes-software-bloating-performance-issues-and-bugs

graybalanced:

It's not real fast on a Windows computer, but it doesn't crash or if it does something aint right.

Same computer, for me, PhotoShop CS6+Bridge are faster.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

22223

does anybody know where i can download an offline Adobe Camera Raw 8.7 installer?
please do not tell me photoshop will update itself.
thanx.

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

Gosman

Nasim comments on the new upgrade in his editorial today:

Nov 19, 2014*permalink

I've had no problems with ACR 8.7 running within PhotoShop CS6 and Bridge CS6.

Haven't yet tried DNG Converter 8.7.

It's not news that Lightroom is bloated and slow. So is Sigma Pro Photo.

So specify the problem program too.

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

graybalanced

Lightroom rarely crashes on my and I hardly hear about it crashing from most people. Also, I get OK performance, but I'm on a Mac, not a PC.

Makes you wonder what is up with his system configuration...

Nov 20, 2014permalink

graybalanced:

It's not real fast on a Windows computer, but it doesn't crash or if it does something aint right.

Same computer, for me, PhotoShop CS6+Bridge are faster.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Serious Sam

When they added new fuji models, does that mean they fixed the sharpness issue of the old ones??

Nov 19, 2014permalink

gonzalu

I am still having issues with Nikon D810 profiles. Portrait is the only one without a major problem. The others have a lot of artifacting in smooth colored areas like Sky. Adobe Standard profile is fine.

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Are you using PhotoShop?

Or LR?

(Not that I use profiles, and I extract to tiff, but I've noted no artifact trouble with my D810 extractions.)

Nov 20, 2014permalink

gonzalu

I use both... both ACR and LR show the same problems for me :/ Only Portrait and Flat do proper demosaicing.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Todd Jones

Yeah, you would think so!!!!

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Tim O'Connor

The LR update is still not showing up in Creative cloud for some reason...

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Is LR really part of Creative Cloud? (I genuinely don't know, I thought LR 5 still separate and that's the latest.)

ACR shows up as an update for PhotoShop CS6.

Nov 19, 2014*permalink

Josh152

You can get LR either separate or as part of the CC. It's actually a good deal if you go CC though. You can get LR and PS CC together for only 9.99/month.

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Josh152:

"good" only if you know you'll ever use it for 6 months total.

I like Bridge a whole lot more than LR for organization.

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Okay, I'll bite..

why is it only ""good" only if you know you'll ever use it for 6 months total."?

Nov 19, 2014permalink

http://petapixel.com/2014/07/10/lightroom-now-remains-mostly-functional-even-license-runs/

Rental software dies if you don't pay. Whereas my copy of PhotoShop CS6 will be some of the best software for image editing for years, and I paid something like $199 for the upgrade from PhotoShop CS5.

So the math is in my favor assuming I use the software for a year or so.

I'm all in favor for rental being an option too--particularly for seriously expensive software like SolidWorks, which starts at $4000 for the license. (The CAD software I use already offers the rental option--along with outright purchase of the license.)

Nov 20, 2014permalink

graybalanced

Lightroom is an exception in that it will not completely die if you stop paying.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW; I still dont get how the $199 upgrade is in your favor. Sure the upgrade cost you $199, what did the initial purchase of PS (and LR) cost... I'm ballparking $500 for CS5, $120 for LR and another $199 for the CS6 upgrade. Thats a (conservative?) estimate of $819 for owning the software or 81 months of rental (that includes all updates). And I get to spread the cost over 8.75 years.

How many updates (at $199?) over 8.75 yrs is that?

How again is the math in your favor?

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

Josh152

@string

The only way his math makes sense is if he counting it as 9.99/month for LR only versus the one time LR upgrade for $70 and ignoring that you also get the latest version of PS with it.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

String:

PhotoShop CS5 cost me $250.

Once you have PhotoShop CS there is no reason to purchase LightRoom, it offers no other features.

So your figure is way way off. And the software, including PhotoShop CS5, will run forever.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Josh152:

The fact remains that the software dies if you stop paying--and there's no option to buy.

And dying software can be costly.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Thats funny... I use PS and LR all the time together and I find them both rather invaluable.

Dying software is not nearly as expensive as obsolete software.

I just checked your gear list HowaboutRAW: you list a Noctilux (and other Leica glass). That lens alone is $11K (US) and yet $10/month is a rip off? LOL, man thats rich!

Nov 20, 2014permalink

String:

It's been a while since Leica M lenses were made in Canada and my Noctilux cost a lot less. You don't appear to know much about Noctilux lenses from Leica. For example mine was a F/1.0, not F/0.95.

PhotoShop CS6 is far form obsolete, and will remain incredible photo editing software for years. If not extraction software.

It's not the $10 a month, it's the fact that the software only works with continued payment.

Somehow I'm guessing your Photoshop didn't come with Bridge, mine did. Bridge makes silly software like LR unnecessary.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

"Somehow I'm guessing your Photoshop didn't come with Bridge, mine did. Bridge makes silly software like LR unnecessary."

That statement alone tells me everything I need to know. Thanks!

Nov 20, 2014permalink

String:

Really?

LR isn't really editing software, it's just an inexpensive way of getting a full Camera Raw.

Camera Raw also comes with PhotoShop CS6.

And that leaves LR as organization software, but CS6 already has separate organization software--that's faster that LR; called Bridge.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

I'm sorry if you cant do a simple Google search on LR5 vs PS6 but there are far far to many differences in workflow to even start on here.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

https://photographylife.com/photoshop-vs-lightroom

String:

PS CS6 is a much more powerful editing program than LR. No one disputes this for a second.

Bridge is faster that LR, and easy to use. Though the easiest way to use Bridge for multiple variations of the same image is to create whole new files--so that uses disc space.

I realize this is from 2011, but this makes the point about LR being organization software, with some editing features, and PhotoShop being powerful editing software (found with that Google search you suggested):

And then there's Adobe Bridge.

I sometimes think that you've confused PhotoShop Elements with PhotoShop CS.

The big reason to prefer Bridge over Lightroom is that LR has to construct Libraries and that's a huge drag on the system.

Bridge sees the folders as libraries, which I think easier. Then if you like you can add keywords and make those libraries easily search and findable within Bridge. As I say, right Bridge uses more storage space.

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

Paul Guba

Tether support for 810?

Nov 19, 2014permalink

gonzalu

Does not look like it.

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Paul Guba

Capture 1 has it. Guess not a priority for Adobe.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Mollysnoot2

You seem to be missing the section in the release notes which reads:

"Newly supported cameras for Tethered Capture in Lightroom 5.7: Nikon D810".

Guess not a priority for Paul Guba to check. ;)

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Paul Guba

Actually not. My friend called me from a shoot asking why his new camera wouldn't tether. I am stuck with a crappy D800 ;-) that tethers fine.

Nov 21, 2014permalink

Robert F. Tobler

My standing complaint: missing support for the Sigma Merrill cameras. This is supremely annoying, especially since a small outfit like Irident Digital manages to support these cameras. SHAME ON YOU ADOBE!

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Mark Banas

Sorry to say, Robert, but Adobe, like every other company of a certain size, has to justify the cost to support (and continue supporting) an extremely niche product like Foveon-sensored cameras. ACR kind of supports the earlier Foveons through work done by Dave Coffin of dcraw, but the results are not stellar. Smaller developers, like Iridient (Hi, Brian!) can gain traction and meaningful sales by supporting those niche products as an alternative.

Consider if Adobe sells 5,000 more copies of Lightroom thanks to Merrill support, and now consider Iridient selling 5,000 licenses of their software. Which one will notice and appreciate the return?

Nov 19, 2014permalink

LensBeginner

A pity it's Mac only, looks like it's a very capable piece of software.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Robert F. Tobler

Mark, the earlier Foveons where even more of a niche than the Merrills, and the support for them was pretty solid. I even verified that for these earlier Foveons I could produce the same quality as Sigmas raw converter, and subsequently only used ACR for these files. In the light of supporting an even smaller niche, the non-support of the Merrills is all the more annoying.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

@Mark Banas

Adobe's imaging software are industry standards and for that reason alone they should be supporting Sigma's cameras.
You also bring up costs, but if tiny little Iridient can do it how significant do you think the costs would be to the comparatively huge Adobe? It would be insignificant.

Nov 20, 2014permalink

Mark Banas

@JanePete
I understand this won't make a lot of sense to those outside of the software industry (I worked for Autodesk for a long time, similar in size and culture to Adobe). Adding Merrill support to ACR may not seem like a big deal to you, but given Adobe's size, literally every task needs to be justified in terms of Dev, QA, Docs, Support costs (etc.), as well as the impact on some very big, and very important products like Lightroom and Photoshop.

Those two are industry-standard applications for a reason; Adobe doesn't add something to them unless it is as good, or better, than what already exists. (But let's not debate that.) What would be the results of Adobe adding half-arsed support for Merrill (and now Quattro)? Anyone remember the X-Trans support debacle (and Fuji is a much bigger market player)? To do it right, the cost is definitely not insignificant for a company like Adobe.

Hard to believe, but sheer scale and money does not solve software problems (ask Microsoft!).

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

(unknown member)

@Mark Banas

"Those two are industry-standard applications for a reason; Adobe doesn't add something to them unless it is as good, or better, than what already exists. (But let's not debate that.)"

You would lose, for the fact that many other apps have some unique or better tools in some areas, and certainly many examples of much better implementations of user interface, a thing that is archaic, at best, with Photoshop.. Being an industry standard can make a company lazy and unwilling to do the things they should in the market they wish to continue dominating. Adobe is a good example of that. So is Microsoft, who you mention at the end of your post.

"What would be the results of Adobe adding half-arsed support for Merrill (and now Quattro)?"

I'm not suggesting they add anything in such a manner.
"To do it right, the cost is definitely not insignificant for a company like Adobe."

Sorry, I just don't buy that considering the Iridient example. We will just have to agree to disagree

Nov 20, 2014*permalink

Robert Soderlund

Any idea whether current version supports Sigma 18-200mm C model?

Nov 19, 2014permalink

mrc4nl

Panasonic gm1s?

i thought it was an older model, and i dont recall a S version of it

Nov 19, 2014permalink

BJN

It's the new model with some features added that it shares with the GM5.

Nov 19, 2014permalink

Revenant

It's only available in Japan.

Nov 21, 2014permalink

BJN

I saw it at the Panasonic online shop when I ordered my GM5. Yep, it's there in three colors. $600 special on the kit with 12-32mm.

Nov 22, 2014permalink

Canasonic

Hopefully now we'll be able to see some RAW samples from NX1. I've held off buying a 7D2 until we have some actual RAW images from a production firmware NX1

Nov 19, 2014permalink