dmcphoto wrote:
I hate to say this but that's because Lightroom is a dog. I have many folders with 3000+ 50MP 5DSR files that I can fly through with other image browsers on a high end but 9 year old PC. That's how I do culling, and I do all processing in ACR and Photoshop with no speed issues at all. It's the DAM and proprietary database manipulation part of LR that is hugely inefficient. But, if you need that then you need a lot more processing power to run it.
IMO
LightRoom appears immune to any increases in processing power. I have an 8th gen i7 with 32 GB of RAM and SSDs and it is no faster than the 2nd gen Core i7 with 16 GB it replaced. Operations like selecting a bunch of images and applying a rating are glacially slow. I recently downloaded a trial of Photo Mechanic and its great. One huge difference is that LR makes you build full sized previews (either all in advance or one at a time - time consuming either way) if you want to view an image at 100% to check focus. PM uses the embedded jpg. Using PM to blast through 1000 shots and find the 50 to import into LR for processing saved me so much time vs doing it all in LR.
If you are using an up to date version of Lightroom and having performance issues, you may always have problems.
I am able to process through tons of Sony A7r IV files on Lightroom on a PC I built in 2011 and it is perfectly fine nowadays and has been for maybe a year or so.
Library module has never been the problem either, and the develop module has gotten way faster after unlocking GPU acceleration.
Mike_5D wrote:
LightRoom appears immune to any increases in processing power. I have an 8th gen i7 with 32 GB of RAM and SSDs and it is no faster than the 2nd gen Core i7 with 16 GB it replaced. Operations like selecting a bunch of images and applying a rating are glacially slow. I recently downloaded a trial of Photo Mechanic and its great. One huge difference is that LR makes you build full sized previews (either all in advance or one at a time - time consuming either way) if you want to view an image at 100% to check focus. PM uses the embedded jpg. Using PM to blast through 1000 shots and find the 50 to import into LR for processing saved me so much time vs doing it all in LR. ...Show more →
I've been using BreezeBrowser, which internally wraps an intuitive user interface around Canon's SDK for RAW conversions. I don't use if for RAW conversions unless I want to do something very quick. 99% of the time I just use it for browsing and culling, which is very fast. Like PM it uses the embedded JPEG.
IMO Canon's software has one of the most terrible user interfaces I've seen. If I was using that I'd greatly prefer BreezeBrowser's much more intuitive UI.
arbitrage wrote:
Was that the feature of being able to shoot at a whopping 3FPS with Tracking Priority in AI Servo?
Didn't Sony Northrup measure it at closer to 2-2.5fps, slower than the original 5D, which was a slug. EOS R is nothing to be proud of and Canon knows it, why do you think the R5 and R6 are such a radical upgrade in every area possible.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Didn't Sony Northrup measure it at closer to 2-2.5fps, slower than the original 5D, which was a slug. EOS R is nothing to be proud of and Canon knows it, why do you think the R5 and R6 are such a radical upgrade in every area possible.
What's your guess on the R5's AI servo fps performance? You think they will deliver the full 12fps?
I also use a new current Imac with a 1TB SSd,64Gb ram and I use separate 2 TB lacie drives for storage of files and LR folders........its about as fast as you can buy and it screams
All my wedding album files got to PS for final adjustments. So, even on the cloud with a fast computer....38MB files are slow
Really dont want 45 Mb files. The 20 Mb 1Dx2 are perfect for weddings and I print 16x24's all day long with them
We shall see what this R5 offers. In my mind I think I could put up with the slowness of the larger files IF THE AF ON THE R5 is good. I think we really need to get this camera in peoples hands and see what canon is going to put in the body
Got to be better than a 5D4 in all departments. Otherwise you are buying a mirrorless camera for R glass use only....I buy cameras for the AF systems......with dual cards......the R glass is the bonus
I think the 5D4 is a good standard to measure this R5 against......Its never going to be a little sister 1Dx3 and Its never going to out perform a 1Dx2.
we all have to wait for the release at WPPI or Photokina or where ever they decide to let it make a debut
slowdad wrote:
I think the 5D4 is a good standard to measure this R5 against......Its never going to be a little sister 1Dx3 and Its never going to out perform a 1Dx2.
we all have to wait for the release at WPPI or Photokina or where ever they decide to let it make a debut
WPPI is right now and there is only a mock-up. Photokina is the end of May. Rumor is that this will ship before the summer Olympics. I doubt anyone is holding out for trade shows since most are being canceled due to the coronavirus contagion.
slowdad wrote:
I think the 5D4 is a good standard to measure this R5 against......Its never going to be a little sister 1Dx3 and Its never going to out perform a 1Dx2.
How do you expect it'll fare as an upgrade compared to the 7D2 (as things remain silent regarding 7D3 or R7) for tracking.
slowdad wrote:
I had the EOS R at 4 weddings this summer....side by side against the 1Dx2 and 5D4...frankly i was surprised it missed like it did but the majority of normal wedding stuff was in focus....However...it struggled in dark reception rooms to get the exact shots the 5D4 captured. And we used the Sigma 85 1.4 on both bodies. Really disagree with your assessment. EOS R is a fine portrait, perched wildlife camera. It struggles when things start to move. Sure your going to get a few shots....But I dont want to click off 10 shots and hope 2 are in focus....a 1Dx2 and a moving subjects...I click off 10 then 9-10 are in focus....a 5D4....probably 6-7-8 of the 10 get in focus....Not so with the EOS R...its clearly missed more than it hit when the subject is moving and when it is dark and it was downright terrible with heavy backlight ....it really jumped to highlights on many staged shots ...Show more →
My post wasn't an "assessment" but a fact from experience in low light at weddings and the redwoods.
If the EOS R and lenses I'm using are not providing the failure rate a few other photographers claim to be experiencing, I would likely place the responsibility on users, not the gear.
Apparently there is untapped potential certain photographers haven't figured out yet. Maybe a different lens, maybe how focus points are selected .. hard to say. But the potential is there.
Mike_5D wrote:
LightRoom appears immune to any increases in processing power. I have an 8th gen i7 with 32 GB of RAM and SSDs and it is no faster than the 2nd gen Core i7 with 16 GB it replaced. Operations like selecting a bunch of images and applying a rating are glacially slow. I recently downloaded a trial of Photo Mechanic and its great. One huge difference is that LR makes you build full sized previews (either all in advance or one at a time - time consuming either way) if you want to view an image at 100% to check focus. PM uses the embedded jpg. Using PM to blast through 1000 shots and find the 50 to import into LR for processing saved me so much time vs doing it all in LR. ...Show more →
If you select "Embedded + Sidecar" at import you can cull the embedded jpeg at 1:1 just as fast as Photomechanic. LR added that feature a year or more ago and it drastically improved my workflow because I never had to build 1:1 previews anymore and didn't have to use an alternative culling program.
dmcphoto wrote:
I hate to say this but that's because Lightroom is a dog. I have many folders with 3000+ 50MP 5DSR files that I can fly through with other image browsers on a high end but 9 year old PC. That's how I do culling, and I do all processing in ACR and Photoshop with no speed issues at all. It's the DAM and proprietary database manipulation part of LR that is hugely inefficient. But, if you need that then you need a lot more processing power to run it.
IMO
I too wish LR was much faster, but these claims are mostly wrong. The database is not proprietary. It is sqlite3, which is very much free & open source and is used by a huge number of programs. And sqlite3 is fast and reliable. (I sure hope Adobe have sent the sqlite3 developers some good amount of money, because there is little chance Adobe could have built LR without sqlite3!)
The slowness you are seeing is from the large number of tools LR has built-in, and from the work that goes on behind the scenes to render a file, involving huge amounts of image data. Noise reduction masking is slow, for example. Image browsers do not even apply noise reduction, let alone masking. Depending on what program you actually use for culling, most of them just load the jpeg preview straight from the CR2 / CR3, which is super fast. One program that does not simply load from jpeg previews, FastRawViewer, has its own highly optimized way of rendering the actual raw data using the GPU, but it's much more limited than what LR can do in terms of the image manipulation done to render the raw data. Such is life.
arbitrage wrote:
If you select "Embedded + Sidecar" at import you can cull the embedded jpeg at 1:1 just as fast as Photomechanic. LR added that feature a year or more ago and it drastically improved my workflow because I never had to build 1:1 previews anymore and didn't have to use an alternative culling program.
But we're still a far cry away from any legitimate rumors on it yet.
I still think it's going to happen sooner or later. Probably not this year but perhaps we'll see it next year when they release a couple RF great whites.
I keep hearing people say Canon won't waist their time on an EOS R cropper because of the M series. But lets move the Canon clock forward another say 3 years and we have the "BIG Three" 400 / 500 & 600 RF lenses out there.
Do people really think wildlife shooters will want to mount their expensive RF supertele's onto a little M series body using an adapter?
I know I wouldn't.
Canon sold a boat load of 7 series bodies over the years with great success, so why wouldn't they want to capitalize on this market again in the RF era. For fear of hurting sales of the M series? NOT!
But we're still a far cry away from any legitimate rumors on it yet.
I still think it's going to happen sooner or later. Probably not this year but perhaps we'll see it next year when they release a couple RF great whites.
I keep hearing people say Canon won't waist their time on an EOS R cropper because of the M series. But lets move the Canon clock forward another say 3 years and we have the "BIG Three" 400 / 500 & 600 RF lenses out there.
Do people really think wildlife shooters will want to mount their expensive RF supertele's onto a little M series body using an adapter?
I know I wouldn't.
Canon sold a boat load of 7 series bodies over the years with great success, so why wouldn't they want to capitalize on this market again in the RF era. For fear of hurting sales of the M series? NOT!
But we're still a far cry away from any legitimate rumors on it yet.
I still think it's going to happen sooner or later. Probably not this year but perhaps we'll see it next year when they release a couple RF great whites.
I keep hearing people say Canon won't waist their time on an EOS R cropper because of the M series. But lets move the Canon clock forward another say 3 years and we have the "BIG Three" 400 / 500 & 600 RF lenses out there.
Do people really think wildlife shooters will want to mount their expensive RF supertele's onto a little M series body using an adapter?
I know I wouldn't.
Canon sold a boat load of 7 series bodies over the years with great success, so why wouldn't they want to capitalize on this market again in the RF era. For fear of hurting sales of the M series? NOT!
I certainly would be happy to see an RF mount R7 cropper. As I've said before, no one cares (or I don't think many would care) if there aren't dedicated APS-C lenses for it as everyone buying that caliber of body will just slap on FF glass either RF or EF.
On the other hand just like I favored my D850 over my D500 I'd probably be perfectly satisfied using the R5 which if 45MP will be almost as many pixels per duck as a 7DII. But I guess the R7 could use the 32MP sensor for even more reach so that would be a consideration then.
arbitrage wrote:
I certainly would be happy to see an RF mount R7 cropper. As I've said before, no one cares (or I don't think many would care) if there aren't dedicated APS-C lenses for it as everyone buying that caliber of body will just slap on FF glass either RF or EF.
On the other hand just like I favored my D850 over my D500 I'd probably be perfectly satisfied using the R5 which if 45MP will be almost as many pixels per duck as a 7DII. But I guess the R7 could use the 32MP sensor for even more reach so that would be a consideration then....Show more →
Agreed on all counts. I haven't bought but one APS-C lens (17-55 f/2.8) and that was years ago. I never use it anymore and it just collects dust. I consider (as most probably do) a crop sensor body to be aimed at (pun intended) wildlife shooting. And as such, I have no need to use anything other than the FF long glass on them.
Slap the 90D sensor into an RF mirroless body and give the AF system a good nudge up and you'd have a decent mirrorless crop body.
So long as the R5 lives up to the rumored specs and has the AF system to go along with it, I'd be very happy with it and would probably wear out the crop mode switch on it.
Speaking of "crop mode switch". How is this currently achieved on bodies that offer this feature? Is it a quick button push or do you have to dive into menus to activate crop mode?
lighthound wrote:
Agreed on all counts. I haven't bought but one APS-C lens (17-55 f/2.8) and that was years ago. I never use it anymore and it just collects dust. I consider (as most probably do) a crop sensor body to be aimed at (pun intended) wildlife shooting. And as such, I have no need to use anything other than the FF long glass on them.
Slap the 90D sensor into an RF mirroless body and give the AF system a good nudge up and you'd have a decent mirrorless crop body.
So long as the R5 lives up to the rumored specs and has the AF system to go along with it, I'd be very happy with it and would probably wear out the crop mode switch on it.
Speaking of "crop mode switch". How is this currently achieved on bodies that offer this feature? Is it a quick button push or do you have to dive into menus to activate crop mode?...Show more →
It's automatic when the body recognizes an EF-S lens has been mounted. No point to "crop mode" when a full format lens is mounted.
RDKirk wrote:
It's automatic when the body recognizes an EF-S lens has been mounted. No point to "crop mode" when a full format lens is mounted.
I thought there was a way to put some current canon bodies (1DXII / 5D4 / R) into crop mode even when FF glass was attached?
I was secretly hoping maybe with the R5 we would get a slight increase in the FPS by using crop mode, but it sounds like that's just a pipe dream. Yes?
