I'm getting about 600 a7RV 60MP files converted to DNG per minute, so not much of a challenge for processing, and that was without multi-threading enabled.
However, the DNGs a7RVI or V are not processing well in DXO with NR. They are crude and lacking in detail. Maybe it's my DXO being version 8, though it is up to date.
EB-1 wrote:
I'm getting about 600 a7RV 60MP files converted to DNG per minute, so not much of a challenge for processing, and that was without multi-threading enabled.
However, the DNGs a7RVI or V are not processing well in DXO with NR. They are crude and lacking in detail. Maybe it's my DXO being version 8, though it is up to date.
EBH
I use LRC and have always converted to DNG for consistency when I was also capturing Leica Raw files. I have continued ever since, simply to have my library all in the one raw format. Been wondering whether to keep up the habit with my new A7R6. So far there is no obvious problem. Raws taken in compressed HQ seem to convert and process quite well, but I would be interested if people have contrary experiences.
Lightroom seems to be working fine with the first few test shots I've taken with mine.
The only somewhat annoying thing is the lack of camera matching profiles. The A7V has been out for 9(?) months and still no Sony profiles for that one.
n8rv wrote:
Lightroom seems to be working fine with the first few test shots I've taken with mine.
The only somewhat annoying thing is the lack of camera matching profiles. The A7V has been out for 9(?) months and still no Sony profiles for that one.
That's no loss - the only Sony camera profile I ever liked was the Camera Landscape profile, which went away with the A7R IV. The current Sony profiles are terrible, so now I pretty much stick to using the Adobe Landscape profile as the starting point for everything.
rob_ww wrote:
I use LRC and have always converted to DNG for consistency when I was also capturing Leica Raw files. I have continued ever since, simply to have my library all in the one raw format. Been wondering whether to keep up the habit with my new A7R6. So far there is no obvious problem. Raws taken in compressed HQ seem to convert and process quite well, but I would be interested if people have contrary experiences.
I don’t think I’d bother converting to DNG as long as the Adobe apps (or whatever else you use) can work with the Sony raw files. It is an unnecessary step.
The only potential issue that comes to mind would be if there is some time in the far distant future when Adobe (uncharacteristically) decides to stop supporting the native Sony raw files format for you camera (unlikely), you might do a mass conversion at that point.
n8rv wrote:
Lightroom seems to be working fine with the first few test shots I've taken with mine.
The only somewhat annoying thing is the lack of camera matching profiles. The A7V has been out for 9(?) months and still no Sony profiles for that one.
I went straight to the Cobalt profiles for the A7R6. Looks very consistent with the Cobalt profiles for the A7CR and the A7R4 which I used previously. And not expensive if you can live without Spectre. I looked long and hard at Spectre but decided I could live without it although it is no doubt very good judging from their examples. I think I generally get a better starting point from Cobalt, esp. for skin tones on Sony, which I was never happy with when I first made the switch 5 years ago.
Cliff L. wrote:
That's no loss - the only Sony camera profile I ever liked was the Camera Landscape profile, which went away with the A7R IV. The current Sony profiles are terrible, so now I pretty much stick to using the Adobe Landscape profile as the starting point for everything.
Eh, maybe just habit but I liked some of the Sony profiles as starting points with my A7RV. As I said though, I've only found it somewhat annoying. It's not really a dealbreaker to me.
-----------------
rob_ww wrote:
I went straight to the Cobalt profiles for the A7R6. Looks very consistent with the Cobalt profiles for the A7CR and the A7R4 which I used previously. And not expensive if you can live without Spectre. I looked long and hard at Spectre but decided I could live without it although it is no doubt very good judging from their examples. I think I generally get a better starting point from Cobalt, esp. for skin tones on Sony, which I was never happy with when I first made the switch 5 years ago.
Cliff L. wrote:
That's no loss - the only Sony camera profile I ever liked was the Camera Landscape profile, which went away with the A7R IV. The current Sony profiles are terrible
Cliff and @n8rv when you say Sony profile what do you mean? There are Sony profiles built into their own RAW converter (Sony Edit), and then there're Adobe-made "camera-matching profiles" that ship with Lighroom/ACR. They are not the same.
They're supposed to deliver the same result, but the Adobe versions deviate from Sony's and the delta varies between profiles and also between bodies, which is super annoying. For example, Adobe's camera-matching profiles for A7RV are meh, the "portrait" one is borderline ridiculous, but for A1 II they're better and fairly close to Sony's.
Colors are very subjective but I actually like the Adobe Sony camera profiles in Lightroom for the A1 II. If you don't need the various camera or film profiles Cobalt offers I very much like the profiles from Color Fidelity, I'm using these for my A1 II. It looks like they have ones now for the A7R VI.
old-gregg wrote:
Cliff and @n8rv@ when you say Sony profile what do you mean? There are Sony profiles built into their own RAW converter (Sony Edit), and then there're Adobe-made "camera-matching profiles" that ship with Lighroom/ACR. They are not the same.
LightRoom.
I've purchased some Cobalt profiles (for other cameras) and found them to be just a waste of money as they were so close to the standard Adobe profiles it was difficult to see any differences.
rob_ww wrote:
I use LRC and have always converted to DNG for consistency when I was also capturing Leica Raw files. I have continued ever since, simply to have my library all in the one raw format. Been wondering whether to keep up the habit with my new A7R6. So far there is no obvious problem. Raws taken in compressed HQ seem to convert and process quite well, but I would be interested if people have contrary experiences.
Are you using the lossy compressed a7rVI ARWs in DXO 8? The results are quite obviously bad in any AI NR mode. DXO 7/8/9 were all updated to include the a7RVI so I don't understand why they don't like the DNGs created with the latest Adobe converter.
I've purchased some Cobalt profiles (for other cameras) and found them to be just a waste of money as they were so close to the standard Adobe profiles it was difficult to see any differences.
Yeah, as I said, Adobe's "camera matching" profiles are a hit and miss, although I found their Nikon camera matching profiles to be better, at least for the Zf.
Speaking of Cobalt, my undersatnding is that their foundational profiles shouldn't be used alone. Their purpose isn't nicer colors, but to simply eliminate difference across cameras to prepare the environment for the 2nd layer profiles, like their film simulations. DCP profiles can be stacked. I think they're damaging their reputation by letting people buy standalone foundational profiles. Without the second layer, there's no value, just like you said.
