So there is now NO alternative from Canon for raw processing other than DPP now? For newer bodies that means DPP and XP or a Mac?
Is there a way to keep the older RIT in ZoomB around for use on the images from my 20D? I have RIT in the ZB 6.0.1 currently installed on my antique W2k system.
But I was thinking of installing the software for the 40D and see if it would allow tethered shooting with my 40D. Am guessing that would remove my older ZB??
I find the new DPP version 3.5.1 sharper than RIT. Here's a straight from the camera conversion with sharpening set to 0 in both software, all other settings the same, upsampled to 200 % and it can be clearly seen that DPP is way sharper than RIT. There are more details in that shot.
DPP
RIT
I also noticed a difference in tonality but don't have time to test and see which one yields better results. Your thoughts ?
Rodney O wrote:
So there is now NO alternative from Canon for raw processing other than DPP now? For newer bodies that means DPP and XP or a Mac?
Is there a way to keep the older RIT in ZoomB around for use on the images from my 20D? I have RIT in the ZB 6.0.1 currently installed on my antique W2k system.
But I was thinking of installing the software for the 40D and see if it would allow tethered shooting with my 40D. Am guessing that would remove my older ZB??
I think that the software that came with your 40D is still the older version
of ZoomBrowser that contains Raw Image Task. I'm using ZoomBrowser
6.1.1.21, which still contains Raw Image Task.
trumpet_guy wrote:
I think that the software that came with your 40D is still the older version
of ZoomBrowser that contains Raw Image Task. I'm using ZoomBrowser
6.1.1.21, which still contains Raw Image Task.
Tim
OOps!! I meant to say that I wanted to see if the 40D software would let me run my 50D tethered
since the 40D software runs on W2k. So if it has the RIT great as long as I can run the 50D with it. Granted I'm giving up the handling of any 50D raw files.
ZB 6.2 version does not contain RIT. However, if older versions are upgraded, RIT will be moved to the new version. But if you install it from scratch, you will find no RIT, as I personally discovered when I installed it on a new computer.
The feather detail in the images I posted above seems less now than in the
previous version.
Admittedly, this is an evaluation made on one shot only, but I would think
this is the kind of thing Canon would evaluate each new version on, and
make sure that the conversion quality is at least as good on any new
version, compared with older versions.
I actually tried to recreate your phenomena but came up with completely different results. Again DPP produced better detail and more dynamic range. Images coming from RIT have more pop but also less dynamic range which in turn will yield less details in the shadows and highlights. The following examples were processed with sharpening and contrast set to 0 in both software. All other settings remain the same.
I think you should retry your test but with sharpening set to zero in both software and judge from those results. Maybe RIT has a different sharpening algorithm altogether.
In my opinion DPP is by far the best RAW converter for Canon files as the color and tonality is simply great. Haven't tried Capture One, can't comment on that but it surely is producing better results from the awful PS Camera RAW and lightroom.
I've always been pretty happy with DPP, but I'll need to do some more experimenting
with my egret shots. I have a feeling that the contrast settings in the various
picture styles have a lot to do with my perception of detail in the highlights.
Can you check how DPP and RIT compare with more typical sharpness
values -- say 3 maybe?
Had to dig into my archives, but here is my original image processed in DPP 3.5.1. Seems to have some very subtle changes. Nonetheless, I am resigned to using DPP as all its other aspects (ie. interface, noise, lens correction, etc.) makes it a much better editing tool - not to mention the fact that RIT no longer exists.
Same here Wing Tong. I'm trying to make the best out of DPP, especially that RIT gives me a very limited set of parameters to play with for my 1Ds2. Too bad! I took today some flower shots (for the 1st time of my life ) and DPP seemed to be losing detail in the reds and yellows. I tried RIT with exactly the same settings and the results were way better. But as you said, we better learn how to use DPP since the other is now deceased
I am resurrecting this thread to report some interesting behavior with DPP.
Up until now, I have always selected the "high quality" option for viewing files and writing
JPG/TIF files. This is the recommended setting, so says the DPP dialog box.
If you select the fast mode, instead, it says that it doesn't perform the moire reduction algorithm,
and it appears any noise reduction [didn't someone say DPP applies some NR by default?] is
killed also.
The reason I wondered about this setting is that in the image review tool in DPP you can select
50% or 100% for the zoomed-in option, but that 100% doesn't apply moire reduction. Well, in
scanning through some lens test shots, they looked great at 100% using this review tool, but looked
softer when opened individually in a DPP edit window. Then I experimented by select fast mode
for viewing and conversion and found that my images looked sharper without moire reduction
(and presumably without NR also). I also did a conversion with Raw Image Task (RIT), which resides
in ZoomBrowser. Here are 100% crops of the three conversions:
For my money, I'm convinced that moire reduction should be turned off unless moire is evident in
a specific image or noise reduction is needed. The recommended, default settings for DPP with
my 5D kill sharpness on landscape shots.
Anyone else found this to be true?
Oh, and RIT is clearly inferior to the second DPP conversion in this particular case.
That's not what I was referring to. The fast mode versus high quality mode selection is in the preferences
dialog box, as I recall. I'm not at my home computer at the moment. You'll find it, though.
OK, after a bit more sleuthing, I've determined that it's the default luminance
noise reduction that was being applied that was actually killing the sharpness.
For some reason I don't understand, DPP 3.5.1, when set to apply camera settings
for default noise reduction, is setting the RAW luminance noise reduction to 2
(out of 20). I don't think I've set any noise reduction on my 5D, so this may be a
bug of sorts in DPP.
At any rate, when I instead set all default noise reductions to 0, I get this:
) and DPP seemed to be losing detail in the reds and yellows. I tried RIT with exactly the same settings and the results were way better. But as you said, we better learn how to use DPP since the other is now deceased 