Another update to DPP has been released and it appears to have corrected some of the slowdown issues of the previous release. It also provides additional NR processing for the 1DX III via Canon's cloud based system. I will shot some high ISO files with my 1DX III and try them later, currently the 1DX III files I am processing were shot during a soccer scrimmage and there was no lack of sunlight.
I've never used DPP; only ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) in either Lightroom or Photoshop.
Due to DPP of course being software built by Canon to work with their RAW format, it should thus be the best for ensuring maximum quality. But, how does it compare to Adobe? Does it say get you that last few percentage points? Or is the difference more night and day?
I use both DPP and the Adobe suite and I think Adobe does a very good job with their RAW converter but both companies tweak their software on an ongoing basis so at any point in time one might have a slight advantage over the other but nothing I would consider night and day. Canon clearly has the advantage for a time after new releases as other companies reverse engineer and tweak their RAW conversion to tailor it to the advances and quirks of a new sensor and its supporting in camera processing hardware.
I use DPP quite a lot because it provides a fast and simple workflow when I am going through a lot of photos from a sports event. When I need to do additional editing to fix some problems with specific images, I will use Adobe but for much of what I do DPP is all that I need. I use a very fast workstation for processing and the prior version of DPP had some issues with slowing down at times but those seem to have been corrected in 126.96.36.199. I shot 300 images between three camera bodies at a soccer practice and scrimmage last night and DPP allowed me to go through them very quickly without any glitches.
Photoshop tools can do a lot for an image but I am somewhat of a purist and tend to stay pretty close to the original image adjusting characteristics like contrast and exposure but I avoid adding or deleting elements although it certainly is tempting at times when I have the otherwise perfect image except the ball is just out of frame 🙂 Other times, light and shadowing can create some interesting effects and earlier this week one of our most attractive players was strongly side illuminated while wearing a hooded warmup causing her face to be in deep shadow but her nose appeared to have a spotlight aimed at it. The contrast was so high that the underexposure alert was triggered on her face while her nose triggered the overexposure clipping alert AND the shadows plus light made her nose look huge and hooked. Fortunately I had some other very good captures of her because otherwise I would have resorted to photoshop to try to salvage something from that travesty of a capture.
Between consulting and helping coach my daughter's high school soccer team I haven't had a chance to see how Canon's cloud NR processing works with the 1DX III but I will make time to do that over the weekend.
I have a DPP4 installed on my computer. I have always had whatever DPP version Canon offered installed on my computer. I almost never use it. Almost! Of course, I have been retired for over 15 years but when I was working I knew of no pro shop or company that used DPP of any version. They all use Photoshop and/or Lightroom. All of them! You use what you know so that is probably why I remain a PS/LR user.
The big problem that still remains with DPP4 is most likely you will still need to use PS to finish your edits. Not every single case for sure but if it is why not just start with PS? To me that alone renders DPP4 moot. Just a curiosity.