Raw converters - editors

[RuleOfThirds]

Before switching from Fujifilm to Panasonic I used both Capture One 2022 and DXO Photolab 7. I had to get dxo because of the Ricoh GR3x because C1 did not have a profile for it at all.

I did like the rendering from dxo on my fuji-files also, but C1 was better. When swirching to S5Ii I knew dxo elite had profiles for the body and lenses.

But I don’t like how dxo renders the S5ii raw files. I do have an open ticket with them about my concerns.

Anyway I am on the fence about what to do. Downloaded C1 2023 demo and love the rendering out of the box way better then dxo 7. Do have a 60% off coupon.

But the terms for upgrades when buying a perpetual license are unclear to me. And what I don’t like is that of you buy a new body or new lens and it’s not supported yet you have to buy a very expensive upgrade. Or you have to get a subscription which is very expensive for c1.

Tomorrow or next week I Will try the Lightroom subscription, but I hate the Idea that if you want to get out you lose your edits. For my fuji files I can still use my C1 2022 for example.

Anyway, I was wondering which software you are using.

Hardware:
For personal stuff I use a MacBook Pro M1 with 16GB ram and 512GB ssd, and an iMac 2019 with ssd and 24GB ram and 580x radeon card.

 

[dirk]

I moved your thread over here so it gets more attention.

With the subscription models this is difficult. Since Adobe offers subscription only, I did not buy any new version after LR6 anymore.

I have C1 and DXO in their current version, but have not tested them really. Never had the time and motivation to do atm.

I think most raw converters are very good nowadays. I still like my results with LR6. To be honest, I would rather have a 5% "worse" raw converter then to go the subscription route. I am a little bit stubbern on this

My decision will be between C1 and DXO. Both have pro and cons, independent of the payment model. I do not think that other brands are as capable as these two (and Adobe)

For selecting quick images I use PhotoMechanic. Great software. Best for for selections of the keepers. Many Pros use it.

My family is happy enough with Jpegs, especially Lumix jpegs. Lumix colors are really good. Both in MFT and L-Mount.

But I am sure others can step in here and share their experience with the different raw converters.

 

[AlanC]

I use two applications:

RAW Power by Gentlemen Coders

If you ever used Apple's Aperture and liked it then you'll probably like this. The developer, Nik Bhatt, worked for Apple for 18 years and was Senior Director of Engineering and Chief Technical Officer of Apple's Photo Apps Group so he really knows how to get the best out of Apple's RAW processing engine. It's my preferred application for S5 files.

Iridient Developer by Iridient Digital

This currently doesn't have support for the S5ii since it's reliant on the open source LibRAW to decode RAW files, but it's the best application for processing Fujifilm files that I've found and it also works extremely well for my Sigma fp L files, producing far better colour than any other application I've tried. Fair warning: it's not the easiest to use, and it's a pure RAW processor with no form of asset management.

 

[CharlesH]

Personally I don't have issues with Adobe's subscription model. I come from the corporate world where almost all good software is subscription, and I think it is a better business model to sustain a software company. Lightroom, Lightroom Classic, and Photoshop have made great strides since they adopted this approach. But if you don't like the image results when you try the subscription, that's what really matters. I'd say try it and see what results you get.

 

[Photographer]

I moved from Aperture, when it was being discontinued, to Capture One many years ago and I've been happy with it. I'm not an Adobe fan, although I used their apps for design, web, and publishing back in the day, but I no longer have a commercial need for that. I have a perpetual license for C1, although I almost always updated yearly, so a subscription would have been almost the same in my case. I haven't switched to subscription yet. As my needs change - if they do - I might switch. but the perpetual does let me choose when I want to upgrade, so there might still be a slight saving.

Frankly, cost is not how I make the decision on something like Capture One that is so central to my photography. I want to have the kind of control and processing capabilities that Capture One offers, along with the DAM features for cataloging and finding images, that make taking and processing images so interesting and rewarding. I'm not wealthy, but a good processing and cataloging app is an absolute requirement for me and I'lll pay to have one. Capture One is my preferred choice and is easily adequate for my requirements.

Choosing an app is, of course, highly personal, since most of the candidates can do the basic - and then some - jobs. Find what you like that does what you need and suits your style and then relax, learn it well, and enjoy - regardless of the business model.

I have a Lumix S5 with 20-60, 70-300. and Sigma 300-600. I find the generic lens profiles in Capture One just fine for my landscape and wildlife photography, although I would welcome custom profiles if Capture One ever does them.

 

[pdk42]

Tomorrow or next week I Will try the Lightroom subscription, but I hate the Idea that if you want to get out you lose your edits. For my fuji files I can still use my C1 2022 for example.

I'm a big fan of the Adobe photography pack. LR and PS for the price of three coffees a month I reckon is a good deal.

Worth mentioning that you won't lose your edits if you later cancel the subscription. The tools revert to read-only and all your old edits remain in place and you can re-export images with them. What you can't do is any new edits or change the existing ones.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

This afternoon I tried the normal Lightroom without Photoshop and 1TB of cloud storage and it provides me indeed with enough edit possibilities in the RAW department for my needs. Don’t need photoshop.

Only noise seems a bit more and the vignette tool is verryy sensitive. Think that I still like the default rendering from C1 2023, but that one is now out of the question. It’s a hobby, not work.

 

[Pete_W]

Anyway, I was wondering which software you are using.

I have been using DxO for years and have been happy with it.

What are the issues you feel that make it not good with the S5M2?

 

[Pete_W]

For selecting quick images I use PhotoMechanic.

Are you happy with PhotoMechanic, Dirk? I've been looking for a photo manager as DxO is a bit weak in that department.

 

[dirk]

Are you happy with PhotoMechanic, Dirk? I've been looking for a photo manager as DxO is a bit weak in that department.

I have the "full suite" of PhotoMechanic. With the Asset Manager included. I do not know anymore how it is called exactly.

But I never tested the asset managing functionality. I will do that once I have the time to move my LR6 library to something else. Either PM or C1 or DXO. I try to prolongue that day as far as possible in the hope that in the future it will be easier and better than now. I also want to see first in which direction the alternatives will move. C1 is a disappointment in this regard already with their new licence. But we will see.

For screening and selecting the "keepers", I find PM the best out there. It is extremely fast. Very basic, but this is all I want for this step. Ratings are recognized in LR6. So if I import the keepers into LR6 later, the data is not lost.

If the asset management part would be fast enough, reliable and supports not only keywords but also searching/filtering by exif data, this would be perfect. I do not need more in the asset management area. Keep it simple.

But PM has nothing to do with real in depth photo editing. That you have to be aware of.

PM was invented for sports/event photographers, who do not have time and need to select as fast as possible the keepers, add metadata, copyright etc and send these during the event to someone else.

PM does this job perfectly. This is why it is the industry standard for this process. Noone will use Adobe et alii for this.

Regarding photo editing/ raw conversion. I think the time will play for us. Jpegs ooc will become better over the years and the benefits of dealing with raw will decrease. Only in extreme situations or with extreme requirements RAW will give us an advantage. Compare the Jpegs of today or the future to slides.

See what Fuji achieved already with their jepgs. Not many Fuji users use raw.

For me the most important criteria for selecting a software is that I can keep my edits and can do whatever I want to also after cancelling the subscription. I do not need all the features they add year over year.

The software companies know this. This is the reason why they try to push us into subscriptons. We shall pay for features we do not need or asked for. When I buy a licence and own it forever, I only pay for the next upgrade, if I really need it. Therefore the software company has to deliver first, proove the benefit of a feature for my use case and only then I decide.

But I get off topic. PM is great. PM is expensive. But for me it was worth it to save time. Time is my main problem. If time is not an issue for you, you can do the same with every other software.

Like all photo editing software, PM has a 30 day free trial. You need to test it. Do not rely on opinions on the net. Everyone is different and has different needs/experiences/background.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

I have been using DxO for years and have been happy with it.

What are the issues you feel that make it not good with the S5M2?

If converted with only optical corrections on, the micro contrast is still way high, and I also had to apply -10 to red. Pictures which were perfectly rendered by the adobe dng converter, and C1 2023. Regarding Microcontrast, I have given DxO a raw file and the default renders from the above converters as jpgs. Around the eye on the dxo file it was way to dark. And that was the case with other darkish scenes as well, where e.g. a rock on dxo it became black without detail. The info was there, when I applied -10 microcontrast it became a bit normal. But if applied the -10 red and -10 microcontrast and save it in a default preset, then other pictures became ugly. The default dxo presets where also unusable due to in almost all presets the lens sharpness correction was applied with +1. That was making ugly halo's around fine detail (leafs, hair etc.). In the beginning I selected all photos and set that particular setting to -1. Which of course was also not working for all files...

I think I started to notice these things already when I still had my GR3x (I exchanged it to a GR3 later because 40mm was to tight for me on that camera, 28mm is my favourite fl). Think after an update they did on Photolab 6 in September or so. Then on Black Friday I got the 7 version cheap hoping it would be better... but unfortunately not. Maybe it is just user error from my side, but if that was the case, DxO would have closed my case already. They are working on it for weeks now.

I don't do a lot of editing on my raw files... shadows/highlights, levelling, maybe some (micro)contrast and vibrance adjustment and white balance. That's it. But if I have to do color corrections and sharpness corrections on a per picture level, than it gets quite frustrating very soon.

Sometimes I am 2nd guessing if my switch to Panasonic was the right one for me, but after seeing the C1 2023 renders I think it is a software issue for me.

Got my Panasonic end of oktober and there where only one or 2 weekends I could go out with the camera and then I had a major health issue where I'm still recovering from. So yesterday I was out with my daughter to a petting zoo and took the s5ii with 85/1.8 with me, and the Ricoh GR. And some of the pictures look like if they where the perfect storm for ugly bokeh ... and wished I still had my X-T4 and XF90/2.0. The transition from in focus to out of focus is very very harsh. Especially when look at a 43" 4K monitor (sfull screen, not zooming). If I look at it on my 13.3" MacBook screen it is still okahish....

2 100% crops and the full picture, has nothing to do with the original post about dxo, these are exports from Lightroom.

• Panasonic - DC-S5M2
• LUMIX S 85/F1.8
• 85.0 mm
• ƒ/2
• 1/400 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 100

 

[RuleOfThirds]

It is not all horrible And the pictures of my daughter where nice too, and my daughter is not a donkey

• Panasonic - DC-S5M2
• LUMIX S 85/F1.8
• 85.0 mm
• ƒ/2
• 1/8000 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 100

 

[AlanC]

And some of the pictures look like if they where the perfect storm for ugly bokeh ... and wished I still had my X-T4 and XF90/2.0. The transition from in focus to out of focus is very very harsh.

You might want to take a look at the Sigma i-series primes which are considered to produce smooth bokeh while still being very sharp. Check the "Rendering" sections of Fred Miranda's reviews:

Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN
Sigma 45mm f/2.8 DG DN
Sigma 65mm f/2 DG DN

 

[Pete_W]

If converted with only optical corrections on, the micro contrast is still way high, and I also had to apply -10 to red. Pictures which were perfectly rendered by the adobe dng converter, and C1 2023. Regarding Microcontrast, I have given DxO a raw file and the default renders from the above converters as jpgs. Around the eye on the dxo file it was way to dark. And that was the case with other darkish scenes as well, where e.g. a rock on dxo it became black without detail. The info was there, when I applied -10 microcontrast it became a bit normal. But if applied the -10 red and -10 microcontrast and save it in a default preset, then other pictures became ugly. The default dxo presets where also unusable due to in almost all presets the lens sharpness correction was applied with +1. That was making ugly halo's around fine detail (leafs, hair etc.). In the beginning I selected all photos and set that particular setting to -1. Which of course was also not working for all files...

I think I started to notice these things already when I still had my GR3x (I exchanged it to a GR3 later because 40mm was to tight for me on that camera, 28mm is my favourite fl). Think after an update they did on Photolab 6 in September or so. Then on Black Friday I got the 7 version cheap hoping it would be better... but unfortunately not. Maybe it is just user error from my side, but if that was the case, DxO would have closed my case already. They are working on it for weeks now.

I don't do a lot of editing on my raw files... shadows/highlights, levelling, maybe some (micro)contrast and vibrance adjustment and white balance. That's it. But if I have to do color corrections and sharpness corrections on a per picture level, than it gets quite frustrating very soon.

Sometimes I am 2nd guessing if my switch to Panasonic was the right one for me, but after seeing the C1 2023 renders I think it is a software issue for me.

Got my Panasonic end of oktober and there where only one or 2 weekends I could go out with the camera and then I had a major health issue where I'm still recovering from. So yesterday I was out with my daughter to a petting zoo and took the s5ii with 85/1.8 with me, and the Ricoh GR. And some of the pictures look like if they where the perfect storm for ugly bokeh ... and wished I still had my X-T4 and XF90/2.0. The transition from in focus to out of focus is very very harsh. Especially when look at a 43" 4K monitor (sfull screen, not zooming). If I look at it on my 13.3" MacBook screen it is still okahish....

2 100% crops and the full picture, has nothing to do with the original post about dxo, these are exports from Lightroom.

Thanks for your response.

Given that you are shooting almost wide open, the depth of field for the 85mm lens will be quite short, so that's possibly why the tail of the bird is out of focus. You may need to close down the aperture a bit to increase the DOF.

I haven't had colour or micro-contrast issues with DxO as my raw converter. But then I am not shooting such bright objects as some of the colourful birds you are shooting.

 

[Pete_W]

But I get off topic. PM is great. PM is expensive. But for me it was worth it to save time. Time is my main problem. If time is not an issue for you, you can do the same with every other software.

Like all photo editing software, PM has a 30 day free trial. You need to test it. Do not rely on opinions on the net. Everyone is different and has different needs/experiences/background.

Thanks Dirk. I will download the trial and give it a spin. My main need is organisation, and I like the idea of quickly assessing a small burst of images to select the ones I want to keep for processing. I would also like to be able to analyse my images, e.g. just simple things like number of shots taken with each lens, the focal length, etc. DxO has almost no organisation other than rating images.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

Thanks for your response.

Given that you are shooting almost wide open, the depth of field for the 85mm lens will be quite short, so that's possibly why the tail of the bird is out of focus. You may need to close down the aperture a bit to increase the DOF.

I haven't had colour or micro-contrast issues with DxO as my raw converter. But then I am not shooting such bright objects as some of the colourful birds you are shooting.

It had nothing te do with he converter... I should have put the last paragraph and the pictures in another topic. I do have the Sigma 45/2.8 I-series, and like it a lot.
But that picture made kind a wish to have my x-t4 and XF90/2 back... That the birds-tale is out of focus is perfectly fine, I was seeking / testing the lens a bit. But the transition of in and out of focus in that particular case, with strong light (low sun) from the front-right, the hay lit by the sun also, created this perfect storm for the lens. And very ugly.

But you are right, should have used F4 in this case at least.

But also the 20-60 doesn't particularly like strong light near the edge of the picture. Saw a YouTube from Chris Nichols from PetaPixel about the 28-200 (which I think I want) also commenting on flaring and ghosting issues with his sample. Where my Fuji lenses were perfectly fine in this regard.

@dirk @Pete_W I also looked at PhotoMechanic, and be aware that they are going to have a subscription model as wel. The version they have now is not optimised for Apple Silicon at the moment, and they will not support the software once a non-compatible OS update/upgrade comes out. At that point you are forced to choose to run an outdated OS with working PhotoMechanic, or keep your OS up to date, and buy a subscription.

 

[dirk]

I would also like to be able to analyse my images, e.g. just simple things like number of shots taken with each lens, the focal length, etc

This is also what I love to do, but I have not tested yet whether this is possible with the AM features of PM.

In LR6 this is very convenient and it helps a lot to find out what lenses are keepers and which lenses or camera systems have to go because I do not use them at all

 

[dirk]

You might want to take a look at the Sigma i-series primes which are considered to produce smooth bokeh while still being very sharp. Check the "Rendering" sections of Fred Miranda's reviews:

Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN
Sigma 45mm f/2.8 DG DN
Sigma 65mm f/2 DG DN

The 65mm is extremely sharp, but mor on the clinical side and 65mm is not ideal for background blurr unless you are very close.

I like the bokeh of the Sigma 90/2.8 better. And it is lighter.

The absolut hit for portrait & bokeh seems to be the new Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN Art. But I never used that one.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

I like the bokeh of the Sigma 90/2.8 better. And it is lighter.

The absolut hit for portrait & bokeh seems to be the new Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN Art. But I never used that one.

It's too big for me. Even bigger than the XF90 I mentioned. Initially I intended to go for I-Series 35 and 90, but then heard about AF issues etc. and there was a very good deal on both the 35/1.8 and 85/1.8. Which both have also had great reviews. Weight was not an issue 295 vs 350. The I-series 90 was bit harder to find in stock, and priced around +€275 vs the restocked 85/1.8

 

[dirk]

It's too big for me. Even bigger than the XF90 I mentioned. Initially I intended to go for I-Series 35 and 90, but then heard about AF issues etc. and there was a very good deal on both the 35/1.8 and 85/1.8. Which both have also had great reviews. Weight was not an issue 295 vs 350. The I-series 90 was bit harder to find in stock, and priced around +€275 vs the restocked 85/1.8

Look at the new designed DG DN version, not at the HSM version. It is around 630g and significantly smaller than the HSM version and optically better

85mm F1.4 DG DN | Art | Lenses | SIGMA Corporation

Basic information for 85mm F1.4 DG DN | Art.

www.sigma-global.com