Official: Canon 1D Mk IV

drisley wrote in post #9541758
Your results are very good now. I used ACR for years and dreaded changing my workflow. Things move much slower now than when I used Bridge/ACR, but I like the output better. The noise is generally lower/more pleasing, detail seems smoother (ie, fewer sharpening artifacts) and I just love the Canon colours, something that ACR still doesn't get quite right imho (at least with the older cameras, but your examples above look really nice).

So you use ZoomBrowser to convert to TIFF?

Yeah, well Raw Image Task actually, which is the Raw converter for Zoombrowser.
I don't even know if ZB/RIT is even suppported by new cameras anymore. I think DPP sort of took over.
DPP with the MkIII and older cams didn't give QUITE the same output as in-camera processing. However, at some point (maybe the 5D MkII?) RIT was dropped in favour of DPP, and it is actually supposed to give superior results over RIT and match in-camera output (with the new cameras).

But your results with ACR are so amazing thus far, I'm not sure how much better DPP could be.

Anyone using a mark IV with Apple's Aperture software? Just curious as to how well it works out.

Timphoto wrote in post #9542310

very funny, timmy, very funny. :o

Hey, I can make fun of grey hair - its all I got left these days.

OTOH, just wait until the Title Fairy sees this thread!

Well, I got a friend who went bald in his early 20's. He makes fun of my grey hair and says he'd rather be bald than grey.

nicksan wrote in post #9541718
Standard, Low, Strong, and Disable.

I have it disabled as I shoot in RAW and use ACR for conversion.

Which leads me back to a question I had earlier.

Is the NR application, in terms of NR strength prioritized as:

Standard = lowest
Low = low
Strong = strongest

-or-

Low = lowest
Standard = low
Strong = strongest

Colin Morey wrote in post #9541851
Anyone using a mark IV with Apple's Aperture software? Just curious as to how well it works out.

I am. It sees RAW files and processes everything just as it always has. Not great, but adequate.

MDJAK wrote in post #9542425
Well, I got a friend who went bald in his early 20's. He makes fun of my grey hair and says he'd rather be bald than grey.

I would take grey over bald any day.

GBRandy wrote in post #9542570
Which leads me back to a question I had earlier.

Is the NR application, in terms of NR strength prioritized as:

To me it sounds like this:

Low = lowest
Standard = low (medium)
Strong = strongest

I just rattled of some shots in RAW to see where it set the NR Slider in DPP. It opened a whole can of worms..... but first the results:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

ISO with two different approaches.....

left is shot as a JPG and STD NR...the right is RAW and processed in DPP with STD NR

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Same JPG on left. The right is RAW conv in DPP at Std NR, RAW Sharp 5; RGB sharp 5....

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Weird! Kinda makes me think about how I've been doing it all these years - unless the intrinsics are just different on this camera.

When I shoot Raw and output from Zoombrowser/RIT, the results are 100% identical to in-camera JPG's.
Obviously things are different with the 1D4/DPP.
Curious, what sort of output from the 1D4 was used in all the online reviews and comparisons?
Beccause GBRandy, that Raw ISO12,800 shot, and the ones shown by Nicksan from Raw, seem MUCH better than what I've seen in most reviews and comparisons.