Originally Posted by Overfocused So a little feedback after 4 1/2 months of real world use... For the last 4 months I've used Canon's fixed DPP software, and now I've just purchased the CS6 upgrade after using the trial for 2 weeks. I must say objectively that for workflow and image adjustment, Canons DPP is no contest vs. CS6 CR7. It really doesn't handle tones and dynamic range nearly as neatly and as quickly, and while I was very used to DPP by 2 weeks ago, after moving back to CS6, I feel the workflow of DPP frankly just sucks. CR7 is so much better for recovering shadows and highlights that I'm actually deleting some old converted TIFFs processed with DPP and restarting in PS CR7. Yes DPP has curves etc, but it gets sloppy, slow, and inefficient comparing to CR7.

IMHO, DPP *always* sucked. I haven't yet seen a single piece of a decent software made by the hardware manufacturer...
PS/ACR all the way!

Originally Posted by Nikolai IMHO, DPP *always* sucked. I haven't yet seen a single piece of a decent software made by the hardware manufacturer... PS/ACR all the way!

I felt that way too the last time I tried DPP. But that was years ago, maybe on my old 20D. After seeing Josh Martinez's work near the beginning of this thread, which he processes in DPP, I'm starting to wonder if it's worth taking another look. In particular, he raves about the auto-light-optimizer (ALO) feature of the camera that DPP can take advantage of, and that ACR knows nothing about. The UI may suck, but it's pretty certain that Canon can add support for specialized features to their RAW converter a lot faster than Adobe can if ever.

Originally Posted by Overfocused So a little feedback after 4 1/2 months of real world use... For the last 4 months I've used Canon's fixed DPP software, and now I've just purchased the CS6 upgrade after using the trial for 2 weeks. I must say objectively that for workflow and image adjustment, Canons DPP is no contest vs. CS6 CR7. It really doesn't handle tones and dynamic range nearly as neatly and as quickly, and while I was very used to DPP by 2 weeks ago, after moving back to CS6, I feel the workflow of DPP frankly just sucks. CR7 is so much better for recovering shadows and highlights that I'm actually deleting some old converted TIFFs processed with DPP and restarting in PS CR7. Yes DPP has curves etc, but it gets sloppy, slow, and inefficient comparing to CR7.

IMHO, for a software that is free, it does decent job.

Originally Posted by Nikolai IMHO, DPP *always* sucked. I haven't yet seen a single piece of a decent software made by the hardware manufacturer... PS/ACR all the way!

Nikon View NX 2 is the absolute best culling program I have ever used. Imagine Lightroom Library and Grid mode, with instant previews both standard and 1:1, ...but without any rendering time whatsoever.

That, and you get your in-camera editing back, which to me is an art form sometimes. I love throwing my camera in B&W and getting a shot that really rocks with zero editing...

=Matt=

Originally Posted by kdog I felt that way too the last time I tried DPP. But that was years ago, maybe on my old 20D. After seeing Josh Martinez's work near the beginning of this thread, which he processes in DPP, I'm starting to wonder if it's worth taking another look. In particular, he raves about the auto-light-optimizer (ALO) feature of the camera that DPP can take advantage of, and that ACR knows nothing about. The UI may suck, but it's pretty certain that Canon can add support for specialized features to their RAW converter a lot faster than Adobe can if ever.

I love DPP. It does not suck. Another valuable feature of it is the Dynamic Lens Optimizer. I did a little demonstration here:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=219478

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft I love DPP. It does not suck. Another valuable feature of it is the Dynamic Lens Optimizer. I did a little demonstration here: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=219478

FWIW, ACR had been using lens profiles for a while. You just allow it to do it (once), and it will pick the correct lens profile automatically from now on. The difference is huge, I agree. I was able to redo some old RAW pics from 20D just by opening them in ACR 7...
As for the which software to use - every man's to his taste. There is no right or wrong, there is only what works for you and what doesn't. DPP doesn't work for me, ACR does. YMMV...

I'm just saying relative ease of use and workflow/efficiency. DPP is fantastic for the price, but all things equal with no price tag involved, its not a choice I'd stick with.

Its always a good option to fall back on in a pinch, though, if you need to use a computer that's not yours or PS licensing goes kaplooey for a weird reason (its happened to me before)

Originally Posted by Sam Now the question is do I sell my 5D II or the 7D? Sam

I sold my 5D2 and kept the 7D. The 7Ds autofocus system was what made me lust after the 5D3 in the first palce. I'm not disappointed.

Testing is subjective and I think we all can agree that the new cameras released by both nikon and canon have been quite stellar.

If it works for what you need it to do, it doesn't get better than that!

How does the 5D Mark III do with shooting sports? Is the autofocus fast and accurate? How about the FPS? I have the 5D Mark II and find it slower with focusing for sports than my eos 1D. Looking to upgrade my eos 1d and appreciate your thoughts. The new EOS 1dX looks very nice and fast but I am seeing if I can get great, fast results with the 5d Mark III.

Originally Posted by dwphotoski How does the 5D Mark III do with shooting sports? Is the autofocus fast and accurate? How about the FPS? I have the 5D Mark II and find it slower with focusing for sports than my eos 1D. Looking to upgrade my eos 1d and appreciate your thoughts. The new EOS 1dX looks very nice and fast but I am seeing if I can get great, fast results with the 5d Mark III.

Rent both for a weekend and decide for yourself. Too many fine points that can be totally specific for what *you* are shooting.

Originally Posted by dwphotoski How does the 5D Mark III do with shooting sports? Is the autofocus fast and accurate? How about the FPS? I have the 5D Mark II and find it slower with focusing for sports than my eos 1D. Looking to upgrade my eos 1d and appreciate your thoughts. The new EOS 1dX looks very nice and fast but I am seeing if I can get great, fast results with the 5d Mark III.

I've seen plenty of nice sports pics on FM, POTN, etc. in the 5D3 section. Of course a 1DX would be better but at over $6K it's out of my league

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft I love DPP. It does not suck. Another valuable feature of it is the Dynamic Lens Optimizer. I did a little demonstration here: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=219478

I had eliminated DPP from my workflow, but things like DLO are forcing me to reconsider. I still don't like the idea of having to work with a TIFF in Lightroom, though, but it does allow considerable adjustment.

I don't know why Canon doesn't work with Adobe to make these features available in ACR. Seems to me Canon is much better off if their images look better in the industry standard tools. After all, Canon sells cameras, not software. Someone needs to remind their management of that!

Originally Posted by billythek I had eliminated DPP from my workflow, but things like DLO are forcing me to reconsider. I still don't like the idea of having to work with a TIFF in Lightroom, though, but it does allow considerable adjustment. I don't know why Canon doesn't work with Adobe to make these features available in ACR. Seems to me Canon is much better off if their images look better in the industry standard tools. After all, Canon sells cameras, not software. Someone needs to remind their management of that!

Yeah that would seem reasonable, wouldn't it. I can't imagine anyone is swayed to Canon or Nikon by the bundled software.

However I really like DPP and I really DO NOT like Lightroom. I know the output is fine, and maybe even better in some cases, but I've tried LR a few times and I find it 100% unintuitive. I feel like I need to take a class on it, and I am a friggen whiz on the computer, normally. I'll be bummed if DPP goes away.

Originally Posted by dwphotoski How does the 5D Mark III do with shooting sports? Is the autofocus fast and accurate? How about the FPS? I have the 5D Mark II and find it slower with focusing for sports than my eos 1D. Looking to upgrade my eos 1d and appreciate your thoughts. The new EOS 1dX looks very nice and fast but I am seeing if I can get great, fast results with the 5d Mark III.

5D3 is AWESOME for sports. The AF rules. 6fps is on the slow side, but 8fps on the 7D isn't that much better, so the only other Canons worth considering are the 1D4 or 1DX. I don't find the FPS to be a big deal, I get more satisfaction out of timing my shots anyway, rather than just "spraying and praying".

The only issue with the 5D3 is that suddenly your 70-200 becomes rather short. But if you just wait for the action to come to you, you can get some really striking results. In everyday shooting I don't always see the Full Frame magic happening, but in sports I think it really makes a difference. I'm hesitant to get a 1.4x TC, because f/2.8 on FF is really something special.

I owned both the 5d3 and the 800e I just sent my 3rd 800e purchased (10/7) back to crutchfield for focus issues. When using anything but the center point the focus was very soft left or right with the center point images were tack sharp . Observations with both cameras, I shoot a lot of sunrises its what I like to do The 5d3 colors are wonderful right out of the Camera it was a lot of work with the Nikon to get what I call a golden look to the photos they looked very yellow to me but that is just my taste, I am not fond of shooting in Raw I have one day off a week Sunday that I can go out and shoot and I don't like post processing images. I did buy Capture Nx and it is a wonderful product. Low Light focus with both cameras when shooting sunrises it is a low light situation obviously and the Nikon had trouble locking on low contrast objects in low light the 5d3 did not, I mean very dark just before the dawn. Love the shutter sound of the Nikon, Had trouble removing the battery on the Nikon both have a very solid feel . Go out and try both before you buy these are just my opinions based on using both. One thing though why Nikon still has 800s that in October are suffering from the focus issue is a little disturbing.I used both cameras with 24-70 2.8s from Canon and Nikon I also had the 70- 200mm vr 2.8 on the Nikon . I just ordered the new 24-70 version 2 Canon but had to pay a premium to find one in stock from digatalrev. Cant wait to use it. Mac