I never hear about DPP upgrades, updates, anything, except here on FM.

This thread prompted me to update my DPP after how many years and I'm really digging the way things are looking with it. Especially the lens correction (although I wish it worked with T/S lenses).

Some of the DPP features are really useful. I realize that it isn't lightroom or Photoshop, but it's free and that counts for something!

The lens correction capability is useful at times. The NR is definately better than much earlier versions, but I don't know if they changed it from version 3.6.x or not. It's not Noiseware though, which is too bad.

I prefer to work my RAW images in DPP before converting to JPG for the final tweaking, but that might be because I'm so familiar with the interface.

They certainly did not sneak in a rotate feature on the trim tool. If there is a difference in noise reduction these old eyes cannot detect it.

I'll have to download it and check it out -- I use DPP for all my conversions these days. Used to use LR when I shot Pentax but after switching to Canon I could never get results as good as using DPP. Sure would be nice if LR had a more open architecture where you could "plug in" alternative raw processors, since the editing, cataloging, print module etc are fantastic.

My eye says the DPP conversion is the best, color, tonal range, sharp, shadows, and I've tried all of the big brands. YMMV

MSC wrote:
My eye says the DPP conversion is the best, color, tonal range, sharp, shadows, and I've tried all of the big brands. YMMV

Correct, 'only' need PS for layers, masks, frames, rotation tool, blending, HDR.

MSC wrote:
My eye says the DPP conversion is the best, color, tonal range, sharp, shadows, and I've tried all of the big brands. YMMV
+1. Dpp + Gimp + Picasa = free image management system good enuff for (cheap) Hobbyists

Installed 3.7.2 on my PC, my laptop, and my wife's PC (yes, we have 3 Canon DSLRs) - all running Windows XP Pro SP3. Runs fine on my PC and laptop, is squirrely on my wife's PC. "Squirrely" is IT technical jargon for sometimes freezes up and requires hard reboot. Maybe a conflict with some other process or driver - it seems to have gotten better after a few weeks.

I think the default NR settings have been changed and I see a distinct difference in the default NR settings on RAW files from Pro1, 5D, and 50D. This may be the cause of what I see as improved NR.

Gochugogi wrote:
Well, Canon doesn't exactly shout about DPP upgrades from the rooftops. Plus it's almost a moot point as 2/3 of Canon shooters probably use Aperture, LR or ACR instead and roll their own NR with plugins.

Right on! Screw that other one third.

The thing that struck me when I started using 3.7.1.1 with RAW files from the 7D is that Canon now applies varying default settings depending on the file's ISO setting. In earlier versions the default was always Luminance 2 and Chrominance 0. I take this as Canon making a recommendation as to what levels to use, and they are quite a bit different than the settings I was using before. My first real shoot yielded images shot at 6400 and cleaned up with DPP's default settings that came out better than the ISO 3200 files from my MkIIn that were cleaned up with Noise Ninja.

WmPat wrote:

Right on! Screw that other one third.

The thing that struck me when I started using 3.7.1.1 with RAW files from the 7D is that Canon now applies varying default settings depending on the file's ISO setting. In earlier versions the default was always Luminance 2 and Chrominance 0. I take this as Canon making a recommendation as to what levels to use, and they are quite a bit different than the settings I was using before. My first real shoot yielded images shot at 6400 and cleaned up with DPP's default settings that came out better than the ISO 3200 files from my MkIIn that were cleaned up with Noise Ninja.



Actually, it did that with the 5D2 also, in version 3.6.x. And it varies with the ISO setting. With my 5D, it's Lum - 2, and Chrom - 0 regardless of ISO setting.

WmPat wrote:
Gochugogi wrote:
Well, Canon doesn't exactly shout about DPP upgrades from the rooftops. Plus it's almost a moot point as 2/3 of Canon shooters probably use Aperture, LR or ACR instead and roll their own NR with plugins.

Right on! Screw that other one third.

The thing that struck me when I started using 3.7.1.1 with RAW files from the 7D is that Canon now applies varying default settings depending on the file's ISO setting. In earlier versions the default was always Luminance 2 and Chrominance 0. I take this as Canon making a recommendation as to what levels to use, and they are quite a bit different than the settings I was using before. My first real shoot yielded images shot at 6400 and cleaned up with DPP's default settings that came out better than the ISO 3200 files from my MkIIn that were cleaned up with Noise Ninja.



What recommended setting? Is that online somewhere? Am curious what they say about this...

MSC wrote:
What recommended setting? Is that online somewhere? Am curious what they say about this...

I am working on compiling the settings but am not sure if there are any other variables that factor into them besides ISO. I think they may correlate to the amounts of in-camera NR that is applied to JPGs when the "High ISO speed noise reduction" (Custom Function II-2) feature is enabled, and therefore may have three differing values equating to the Standard, Low and Strong levels that are available in the Custom Function.

WmPat wrote:
[Well, Canon doesn't exactly shout about DPP upgrades from the rooftops. Plus it's almost a moot point as 2/3 of Canon shooters probably use Aperture, LR or ACR instead and roll their own NR with plugins.]

Right on! Screw that other one third.


I agree, up their noses with a friggen rubber hose brother! Although I must say I rather like DPP and use it all the time. It's rather endearing albeit embarrassing to admit using in public places.