EOS

[WoSoLoo]

DPP3 is much more easy to use, DPP4 too many option and slow

[kvbarkley]

Sorry, it won't. I am pretty sure that Canon is not going to support older cameras on DPP3 - though I have no inside knowledge.

[WoSoLoo]

so bad, do they know DPP4 problem?

[kvbarkley]

Don't know, you are certainly free to call and tell them. But many people use DPP4 just fine.

[Waddizzle]

DPP4 is a decent application for use with consumer cameras.  I think a professional grade camera, like the 1DX2, is worthy of better, and more sophisticated software, like Adobe Lightroom.  Don't you?

[kvbarkley]

I kinda figure it is just early in the development cycle.

[ebiggs1]

"New 1DX2, DPP4 is not good"

If you bought a 1Dx Mk II and are relying on DPP 4 or 3 or whatever number as your editor, you have more problems than it just not working!  

[RobertTheFat]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

DPP4 is a decent application for use with consumer cameras.  I think a professional grade camera, like the 1DX2, is worthy of better, and more sophisticated software, like Adobe Lightroom.  Don't you?

---

In a word, no. It all depends on what you're requirements are. If all you're doing is cropping, rotating, applying lens corrections, and adjusting brightness, contrast, white balance, tone, etc., then DPP 4 is perfectly satisfactory and arguably supports a more straightforward workflow than do PS and LR. But for really elaborate corrections, like rescuing a horribly exposed but mission critical image, PS may be the only thing that can save you.

IMO, many photographers who use Photoshop don't really need it; they're using it because of its reputation, not its functionality. If that doesn't bother them, it certainly doesn't bother me. 

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

DPP4 is a decent application for use with consumer cameras.  I think a professional grade camera, like the 1DX2, is worthy of better, and more sophisticated software, like Adobe Lightroom.  Don't you?

---

In a word, no. It all depends on what you're requirements are. If all you're doing is cropping, rotating, applying lens corrections, and adjusting brightness, contrast, white balance, tone, etc., then DPP 4 is perfectly satisfactory and arguably supports a more straightforward workflow that do PS and LR. But for really elaborate corrections, like rescuing a horribly exposed but mission critical image, PS may be the only thing that can save you.

IMO, many photographers who use Photoshop don't really need it; they're using it because of its reputation, not its functionality. If that doesn't bother them, it certainly doesn't bother me. 

---

I would say that DPP 4 with its adjustable midpoint is as good at rescuing horribly exposed images as any software out there. DPP3 on the other hand, was aweful in that regard.

[TTMartin]

---

@WoSoLoo wrote:

DPP3 is much more easy to use, DPP4 too many option and slow

---

If DPP4 is too slow, it sounds to me like you need a computer upgrade.