Adobe Lightroom ISO Specific Noise Reduction Pre-Sets

Since my post (HERE) and podcast (HERE) discussing the differences in RAW renderings from Lightroom and DPP I have had several people contact me to ask if I would send them the Canon EOS 1DXMK3 ISO specific noise pre-sets I discussed making at some point in the future. Originally, I was planning to make these just for my own use, but decided if I was going to invest the time and do this properly that it would be worthwhile making them available for those that are interested. If you would like a copy of these finished and optimised pre-sets (includes the test RAW files) you can purchase them through my store Melrakki Publishing for just $10. If you have travelled with me on a workshop or expedition and would like a copy of these pre-sets please contact me directly and I will make them available to you for free.

Before I sat down to make these pre-sets I actually reached out to a close colleague and engineer at Adobe who is heavily involved in the coding of Lightroom and who shed some fantastic additional light on what some of the sliders are doing ‘under the hood’. I have been using Lightroom since its beta days and have a better than average grasp and understanding of what is going on under the hood with most sliders. However, I was able to learn a thing or two that has helped me greatly optimise these pre-sets and I want to share this information as it is critical to understanding how to set the Noise sliders properly and how they have been applied in the pre-sets I have created. Even if you don’t own a Canon EOS 1DXMK3 this information will be relevant and useful to you.

Detail Panel Settings: Before I get into the methodology I want to make the critical point that both the Detail panel sharpness and noise reduction sliders in Lightroom are interactive. Adjusting one slider is not enough in most instances and significant back-and-forth play between the sliders is required to set the sliders optimally.

Methodology: Over the last few days I have done very extensive testing and analysis in the creation of these ISO specific noise pre-sets for the Canon EOS 1DXMK3. To create them I photographed a large X-Rite Color Checker (A4 video version) in a D6500 light controlled Graphic light workstation with the Canon EOS 1DXMK3 and an 85mm f1.4 L series lens at f5.6 at every single full stop ISO from 50 to 102,400. Technically, you can push the EOS 1DXMK3 to H1 ISO 204,800, H2 ISO 409,600, and an incredible H3 ISO 819,200 but these extreme ISO ranges break down so badly that they are little more than a marketing gimmick. Thankfully these extreme ISO ranges are disabled by default in the EOS 1DXMK3 and that is how I suggest you leave them – permanently.

1/3rd stops were not used as these are ‘push’ or ‘pull’ ISO stops that use in camera software ‘under the hood’ to adjust the exposure +/- 1/3rd of a stop accordingly. As such I never use 1/3rd stop ISO increments and have both my EOS 1DXMK3 cameras set to full stop ISO only. I also find when I am shooting in the field that I prefer one click to go from ISO 400 to 800 for example instead of having to make multiple clicks to gain a stop of light.

Aperture priority was used, meter as read (no exposure compensation) and only the ISO and shutter speed were varied. The X-Rite Color Checker was used as it enabled me to carefully monitor and check for noise in the shadows and because I wanted to be able to check for individual colour shifts and bleeding at each specific ISO in very specific colours. It should be said that any differences in colour shift would in all likelihood not be visible in normal photographic scenes; but using the X-Rite Colour Checker makes it far easier to visually detect shifts or bleed in colour and thus makes it far easier to apply optimal noise reduction in Lightroom.

The RAW files were then imported into Lightroom with the Adobe Color Profile and very carefully analysed at 100%, 200% 400% and 800% magnification. Unlike sharpening which must be gauged at 1:1 100% magnification, Noise Reduction really requires additional zooming and with some of the noise control sliders it is necessary to zoom in significantly to see the differences as you adjust the sliders. I probably spent the better part of two days just staring at these RAW files at different magnifications and visually comparing them to each other side by side as I tweaked the settings in the detail panel for each ISO. The goal was never to make ISO 102,400 look as good as ISO 100 (that simply is not possible); rather ISO100 was used as a reference point to which all other ISO RAW files were initially compared. Then the sliders were adjusted for each full stop of ISO difference. In other words, the goal was to make ISO 200 look as close as possible to ISO100, ISO 400 as close as possible to ISO200 etc. all the way up to making ISO102,400 look as close as possible to ISO 51,200. Once this was done and checked I then went back and compared the results two full ISO stops difference and then three full stops difference and tweaked further. Finally, I rechecked my settings and results over a period of three days to satisfy myself that I could not optimise them further. It is worth noting that ISO 102,400 in particular looks very different (horrible) to ISO 51,200 and is the most difficult ISO to make look ‘good’. Hence it has the highest degree of tweaking in the pre-set. Even with this optimised pre-set for ISO102,400 I would strongly encourage you to avoid this ISO at all cost. In real practical terms I would actually recommend you set a virtual ceiling of ISO 12,800 and only exceed that when you have no other choice. Above ISO 12,800 things begin to break down and by ISO 25,600 start to become quite nasty. In real world practical use I personally try not to exceed ISO 12,800 and have a preference to shoot at ISO400 as my baseline (I used to use 800 but have adjusted post this testing). I will happily go to ISO 3200 and even ISO 6400 before I start worrying too much about noise with ISO 12,800 being my ceiling.

To make the visual analysis of the RAW files I used two different high end displays. I used the BenQ SW271C I reviewed HERE and an Eizo Colour Edge CG318. Both displays are Adobe RGB, 4K (although the Eizo is DCI4K so slightly higher resolution) and were optimally calibrated to D6500K with a setting of 80 candelas; which is an appropriate setting for the light levels in my viewing studio.

Noise Reduction and ETTR: When setting the sliders in the Detail panel for sharpness and noise reduction I erred on the side of caution and was very deliberately cautious and judicious in the amount being applied. The primary reason for this is I did not want overly aggressive noise reduction in these pre-sets. Since exposing to the right (ETTR) is optimal in the field (without clipping the highlights) and then tweaking the exposure down in Lightroom during post production results in lower levels of noise than under exposing or even exposing ‘meter as read’. In other words, the pre-sets are optimised for RAW files that were optimally exposed in the field. If you are applying these pre-sets to an under exposed photograph that you are ‘brightening’ considerably in Lightroom you may well need to apply additional noise reduction. Thus the pre-sets will work optimally when you have exposed optimally in the field.

Problem Files: If you have a particularly noisy and problematic file you may be better off using a third party Noise Reduction program in addition to the ISO specific pre-sets I have created. Personally, I am currently using Topaz De-Noise for any file that is particularly problematic in addition to the ISO specific pre-set. Think of the ISO specific pre-set as a starting point for problem files. Don’t try and apply them to a file you have already processed and expect a magical result.

Camera Profiles: I am told Adobe ran into some difficulties with the process of building camera specific profiles for the recent Canon models (including the EOS 1DXMK3 and R series cameras) because of the switch over to the new CR3 file format.  They are working on it and I am informed that they have made good progress recently. They are hopeful they may resume offering camera specific profiles later this year. For these pre-sets I used the Adobe Color profile. If I get time in the next few days I may make my own and compare it to the Adobe defaults.

Sharpening Amount: The pre-sets do obviously vary from ISO to ISO, and some of the ISO pre-sets include a component of Sharpening above the default setting of 40. Since Sharpening and Noise Reduction are interactive and affect each other (thats why they appear together in the Detail panel of Lightroom) it is necessary at some higher ISO settings to add additional sharpening to counter the ‘digital smoothing’ of the RAW file that results from higher amounts of Noise Reduction. This additional sharpening kicks in from ISO800 in the pre-sets. The sharpening amounts applied in the pre-sets are a cautious baseline. In other words, where sharpening has been applied at a given ISO pre-set it is only enough to counter the digital smoothing applied by the noise reduction algorithm. You will still need to add additional capture sharpening to your file. The amount of additional capture sharpening you will need to apply will vary depending on the quality of your lens, the sharpness of the capture and the atmospheric conditions at time of capture.

Sharpening Radius: None of the pre-sets alter the Radius, since the correct Radius setting will vary depending your particular capture. Photographs with a lot of high frequency information will generally want a lower Radius (less than 1) and photographs with mostly low frequency (think portraits) will necessitate a higher Radius. The default setting of 1 is a good general setting and thus is not touched in the pre-sets.

Sharpening Detail: Sharpening detail is quite a complicated slider so it requires a little more explanation. When adjusted to the left toward 0 the Detail Slider applies halo suppression that limits how strong the halos are in your amount settings. Moving the slider past 25 (the default) causes the slider to change its behaviour and apply a type of deconvolution sharpening similar to the de-blur tool in Photoshop. Deconvolution sharpening attempts to de-blur an image based on what type of blur it detects in an image. The thing to keep in mind is that excessive use of the sharpening detail slider will substantially increase the sharpening of the noise. Generally speaking, if you set the amount and radius correctly there is little need to change the detail slider and the default setting of 25 is appropriate.

Sharpening Masking: None of the ISO specific pre-sets include any component of masking. Sine masking is image specific you will need to apply this based on the requirements of your specific image.

Luminance Noise Reduction: Lightroom applies no Luminance Noise Reduction by default, so the pre-sets mostly optimise the Luminance, Detail and Contrast sliders. There is no luminance noise reduction applied below ISO 800 in the pre-sets. It simply is not required in 1DXMK3 RAW files.

Luminance Noise Detail: This control sets the noise threshold. Dragging the slider to the right will preserve more detail; however it does cause some noise to be incorrectly detected as detail and therefore will not be ‘smoothed’. Decreasing the slider will increase ‘smoothing’ but does cause some detail to be incorrectly detected as noise and smoothed out. The Luminance Noise Detail slider is only activated when some Luminance Noise reduction is applied. The default value once activated is 50 and setting this slider optimally for high ISO images is a bit of a balancing act. Luminance Detail kicks in at ISO6400 in the pre-sets. A lot of testing and a lot of care went into the amount applied in the pre-sets. This is where a lot of high magnification zooming (up to 800%) was used to discern differences in the settings.

Luminance Contrast: Like the Luminance Noise Detail slider, the Luminance Contrast slider is only activated when some Luminance Noise reduction is applied. Dragging this slider to the right preserves image texture and contrast but does result in the potential for mottling in high ISO images and re-introduction of noise. Leaving it at the default setting of 0 helps with fine-grained smooth results. Like the Luminance Noise Detail slider, setting this slider optimally at higher ISO images is a bit of a balancing act between adding contrast, enhancing surface texture and avoiding mottling and more noise. Luminance Contrast kicks in at ISO3200 in the pre-sets. Because of the tendency for mottling and additional noise at higher ISO’s the Luminance Contrast is actually used more sparingly at the extreme high ISO’s. Again, a lot of testing and a lot of care went into the amount applied in the pre-sets.

Colour Noise Reduction: Lightroom does apply a default Color noise reduction of ’25’. What is critical to understand is that the default of 25 for RAW files is a baseline of colour noise reduction. You should think of the value of 25 not in an absolute sense, but in an ISO-normalised sense.  What this means is that for a very clean image, like an ISO 100 RAW file from the Canon EOS 1DXMK3, the Colour Noise Reduction slider in general is doing very little, because the image is so clean to begin with.  On an ISO 6400 image from the same camera, though, Color Noise Reduction of 25 is going to do quite a bit more.  In other words, how much work goes on under the hood for “Color Noise reduction = 25” depends both on the camera model and the ISO, because Adobe calibrate each camera model and ISO, and the Color Noise Reduction slider is “aware” of this. This means that even on a very clean image like ISO 100 from a Canon EOS 1DXMK3, you don’t have to worry about damaging the image quality by leaving Color Noise Reduction at 25, because Colour Noise Reduction will do very little in this case. Since the Colour Noise slider at its default setting of 25 is applying adaptive noise reduction that is both camera and ISO specific it is not altered in any of the pre-sets from its default setting. I did spend quite a lot of time trying to tweak this slider at various ISO settings, but came to the visual conclusion that the results are optimal at the default setting of 25 (Adobe have done excellent work in this area). Applying more than 25 very quickly results in colour bleeding that is sub optimal. Be very careful if you start tweaking this slider.

Colour Detail: The colour detail slider is most useful for extremely noisy images. It allows you to refine colour noise reduction for thin, detailed colour edges. In essence at very high settings of 75+ Lightroom tries to retain colour edges but at the expense of colour speckles. At lower settings the slider works to suppress colour speckles but thin features may become desaturated (colour bleeding). In order to see the effect it is really necessary to zoom into at least 200% or 400%. Colour Detail kicks in from ISO 12,800 in the pre-sets.

Colour Smoothness: The colour smoothness slider defaults at 50 and at moderate settings above 50 can be used to suppress colour blotching or colour mottling. At very high settings it may cause some desaturation of colour at the edges and thus a lot of care needs to be taken when setting this slider. Colour smoothing kicks in only from ISO 51,200 in the pre-sets.

Lens Corrections: No lens corrections are applied in any of the ISO specific noise pre-sets.

Canon EOS 1DX MK3 Comments: With the ISO specific noise reduction pre-sets applied; between ISO 50 and ISO 800 there is no appreciable difference in noise in real world RAW files – they are identical. Between ISO 800 and ISO 3200 there is only the faintest hint of difference barely discernible at 200% in the ultra finest surface texture (You would never ever notice this in real world captures). By ISO 6400 the tiniest ultra fine surface textures are just starting to disappear from the RAW file when viewed at 100% or more on screen (again, you will never notice this in real world captures). At ISO 12,800 the finest surface textures continue to disappear and ultra fine detail is starting to disappear. Fine hairs are still clearly visible and look good, but the finest minute detail is now obscured. Again, you would likely not notice this in real world RAW captures (You really have to look for it in a test image at 100% or more magnification). Nevertheless, my recommendation is that ISO 12,800 is a realistic workable limit. Above ISO 12,800 both texture and detail continue to disappear as the ISO increases. At ISO 25,600 the finest surface textures are all but gone. Fine hairs are still clearly visible, but are starting to break down with the increased grain structure. By ISO 51,200 we have lost the fine surface texture and the fine hairs are continuing to break down. At the top end at ISO 102,400 we have lost all surface texture and almost all fine hair detail. ISO 102,400 is an absolute last resort and to be avoided at all cost.

Demonstrable Visual Results: In case you are wondering why I have not dotted this long post with visual examples comparing various ISO’s pre and post ISO specific noise pre-sets it is because the images, once converted to jpeg and resized for the web are not representative of the RAW file results. Conversion to jpeg and downsizing to something suitable for the web has a very significant effect on the visual noise in an image. Downsizing removes visible noise and thus distorts the visual results significantly. However; I have included a copy of all 12 RAW files I photographed of the X-Rite Color Checker in the creation of these pre-sets from ISO 50 to ISO 102,400; so you can visually see the differences yourself. Just import the RAW files into Lightroom, apply the pre-sets and do a before/after comparison. You may need to zoom in to 200%, 400% or even 800% to see differences.

Conclusion: Taking the time to create these ISO specific noise reduction pre-sets for the Canon EOS 1DXMK3 was absolutely a worth while investment in time and energy. It has been very educational (although time consuming) and It should considerably speed up anyones workflow who is shooting with this camera as the pre-sets can be applied on import. As they are ISO specific Lightroom will then apply them correctly to each different ISO file you import. Since significant time and effort went into optimising these pre-sets you will not have to worry about wether you are setting your noise reduction optimally. Just make sure you expose optimally in the field, apply the pre-set on import into Lightroom and you can then focus on processing your photograph. Just remember, you still need to apply an appropriate level of capture sharpening for your RAW file in addition to the ISO specific sharpening that may be being applied in the pre-set. Happy processing!

Ellesmere Island 2022 Expedition Search for the White Wolf Sold Out

My 2022 Winter expedition to Ellesmere Island with friend and fellow photographer David Gibbon to find and photograph the incredible white Arctic Wolf is now sold out. In addition to the white Arctic Wolf, we will also search for Arctic Fox, Arctic Hare, Musk Ox and Polar Bears. We are currently considering a future expedition for 2023 and like our 2022 expedition, participant numbers will be extremely limited. Winter temperatures on Ellesmere at this time of year frequently dip to -40º Celsius and below, and as such participants must be physically fit and capable of withstanding extreme cold for extended periods. As such all applications are screened for suitability and experience. If you feel you have the ‘right-stuff’ and if you are looking for a unique and special experience to photograph the incredible animals that survive in the Arctic winter then drop me an email to register your interest. No obligation at this point.

Adobe Lightroom Classic vs Canon Digital Photo Professional 2021

Recent weeks and months have seen more than a smattering of forum comments across the web that Canon’s Digital Photo Professional software does a better job than Adobe Lightroom when converting RAW files. Not being one to take these things at face value I decided to test this for myself (FOMO) and put the latest version of Adobe Lightroom Classic (LRC) version 10.3 head-to-head against Canons latest DPP software (DPP), version 4.15. As you will read below, the results were quite enlightening.

Camera Profiles and Picture Styles: All of my testing was done with Canon EOS 1DX MK3 files (since that is my primary camera that I shoot the majority of my photographs with). Results will vary from camera model to camera model; so I suggest you test this yourself if you are shooting something other than a 1DX MK3. Before we go any further though, it is important to understand that RAW files in Adobe Lightroom Classic have a camera profile attached to them that determines how the colours are rendered and thus how they look on screen. The profile you select has a significant impact on the colour rendering you will see. You can test this easily yourself in the Develop module by selecting different profiles and watching the colour rendering change as you shift between profiles. Adobe provides quite a few different profiles to choose from and you can of course make your own. The profiles Adobe provides are created by its engineers using sample cameras supplied to them by the camera manufacturers. If you have an X-Rite colour checker passport and the time and patience then you can create camera profiles for your specific camera in different lighting situations, import them into Lightroom and have something custom to your camera and lighting conditions. Honestly, I almost never bother to create my own profile as I am constantly photographing outdoors in different lighting conditions and it just isn’t necessary or meaningful. What is necessary though in a comparison between LRC and DPP is transparency on what profile was used in LRC and for all these tests I used ‘Adobe Color’ (which is the default) profile.

In Canon’s Digital Photo Professional software camera profiles are not used and instead DPP applies what Canon call ‘Picture Styles’. Picture Styles have a very similar effect on colour as Adobes camera profiles and shifting between Picture Styles significantly alters the colour rendering on screen (hue, luminance and saturation are all affected). For all these tests I used the Neutral Picture style; since this is the same picture style I apply to my RAW files in the 1DX MK3 camera. My choice of Neutral provides the most accurate histogram on the back of the camera; hence it is my preference.

White Balance: White balance is also a big factor in the colour rendering in both LRC and DPP. I like to shoot in Auto white balance and then tweak it later in post production, so for this test I left the setting to ‘as-shot’ in both LRC and DPP. Just as an aside, I find the Auto white balance setting in the 1DX MK3 to be about as good as I have ever seen in a camera. I rarely need to do more than tweak the white balance and gently season to taste.

Default Values: The next caveat to note is that both LRC and DPP have certain default values that they apply to the RAW file. In LRC Adobe set a default sharpening value of 40 with a Radius of 1 and a Detail of 25. LRC applies no Luminance noise reduction by default, but does apply 25 points of colour noise reduction. By comparison DPP sets no default sharpening, but does automatically apply a varying level of noise reduction that is ISO dependant. In order to make the playing field as level as possible when comparing RAW file renderings it is necessary to manually set all these values to zero. I have seen many forum comments that LRC RAW conversions are far noisier than DPP and the above explains why. DPP is applying ISO specific noise reduction by default, where as LRC is applying no luminance noise reduction and only a small amount (25) of colour noise reduction. Of course, in LRC you can set up an ISO specific noise reduction pre-set for your specific camera if you wish to take the time to do so. This is not something I have done to date, but I am considering taking the time to create a series of pre-sets for this specific to the 1DX MK3.

Colour Space and a Level Playing Field: By now you should be getting the distinct impression that it is quite difficult to level the playing field when making direct comparisons between LRC and DPP. Even with all of the above checked and set things are not wholly equal as LRC and DPP effectively operate in different colour spaces. LRC effectively operates in the Pro Photo Colour Space and DPP uses Wide Gamut RGB. These colour spaces are similar but are not the same. Wide Gamut RGB is slightly smaller than Pro Photo; although it is unlikely you would ever see any differences in real world applications when switching between the two. Nevertheless, there is a distinction and it is important to note that the playing field is not entirely level. Yes, it would be possible to set DPP to Adobe RGB and to output Adobe RGB from LRC but since I like to operate in the largest colour space possible it seems counter productive to use a smaller space.

Once all of the default settings in LRC and DPP have been neutralised and returned to zero a comparison can be made between the RAW renderings. To do this I exported a 16 Bit 300 DPI Tiff file from both LRC and DPP and then opened them up side-by-side in Adobe Photoshop to visually compare them. The LRC Tiff was exported in Pro Photo Colour Space and the DPP Tiff in Wide Gamut RGB. Of course, I checked my working space in Adobe Photoshop to ensure no contamination or profile conversion.

Colour Renderings: The first thing to note is that there are significant differences in colour between the RAW renderings. These differences can be directly attributed to the camera profile in LRC and the picture style in DPP. Wether one is better than another is totally subjective, but what is important is that they are different and can be altered simply through the selection of a different camera profile or picture style. If you don’t like one result, simply change the profile or picture style and you will have a different rendering. Trying to judge if one rendering is better is simply impossible because you can always change the profile or picture style for a different result. In blind tests its absolutely impossible to pick which is which without knowing which colour profile or picture style was applied.

Even the jpeg screen shots below show the clear differences in colour renderings between LRC and DPP with Adobe Color profile and DPP Neutral Picture Style. Changing the LRC Profile or the DPP Picture Style will vary the results again.

Lightroom Colour Rendering with Adobe Color Profile
Digital Photo Professional Colour Rendering with Neutral Picture Style

Sharpness and Noise: Since comparing colour renderings is a waste of time the only thing left to compare between the LRC and DPP RAW renderings is noise and sharpness. Before we make those comparisons though it should be noted that both Noise Reduction and Sharpening are interlinked and affect each other (thats why they appear together in the Detail panel of LRC). In the digital arena noise reduction works by effectively softening the image. By contrast, sharpening works by darkening the dark side of an edge and lightening the light side. The radius determines how many pixels either side of that edge get darkened or lightened and the combination of amount and radius increases the perceived sharpness. Sharpening an image therefore adds noise to a photograph where as applying noise reduction effectively softens it. This is why a photograph that has had meaningful noise reduction applied to it will need more sharpening than one that did not require noise reduction.

Just as an aside, if you are wondering what the Detail slider does in LRC then you are probably not alone as its one of the most miss-understood tools in the Develop module. Effectively the detail slider in LRC is both a halo suppression tool and a sort of deconvolution sharpening. At its default setting of 25 it is acting as halo suppression. Halos are the white jaggies you see on edges from over sharpening. However, as you ramp up the slider it starts to act more as a form of deconvolution sharpening much like the de-blur tool in Adobe Photoshop.

Before I talk about the results it should be noted that there is no point trying to show the results visually in this post as any resizing of the photographs and conversion to jpeg reduces noise and thus visually distorts the results. If you want to see the results yourself you will have to take the time to test it yourself. Otherwise read on for a discussion of the results.

Rendering out an ISO12800 file from DPP without resetting the noise reduction to zero shows a marked difference in noise compared to the rendered LRC file. The DPP file looks a lot better! Keep in mind though, DPP is applying ISO specific noise reduction and LRC is applying no luminance noise reduction by default (only 25 points of colour noise reduction). Once you reset both the the DPP Noise values to zero and the LRC values to zero the differences between the two rendered files are negligible. It is necessary to go to 200% magnification to see any differences and even then any difference is a quibble at best. Leaving the DPP ISO specific noise reduction at its default and applying appropriate noise reduction to the LRC rendering results in a very similar result. Depending on how much noise reduction you apply you can actually make the two look virtually identical (even at 200% magnification).

Conclusion: The take-away and conclusion from the comparison between LRC and DPP is that at default (without changing anything) DPP does a much better job than LRC on noisy RAW files because it applies significant ISO specific noise reduction. However, once you level the playing field and re-set DPP’s ISO specific noise reduction to zero (or apply appropriate noise reduction in LRC) then there is no meaningful difference between the two RAW converters. In other words, it doesn’t make any difference which RAW converter you choose to use, provided you understand when and how to set the knobs and dials. And in fact, once you start to twist those knobs and dials all bets are off as either RAW converter can be made to look better than the other.

Workflow: So which should you use; LRC or DPP? Quite honestly, it took me less than a minute in DPP to realise that the clunky workflow it offers compared to LRC simply does not work for me. I also found DPP much slower than LRC which quite surprised me. Adobe has worked wonders with the speed of LRC in recent updates and although it still is not as fast as the industry reference Photo Mechanic, it is now certainly fast enough. Ultimately, which RAW converter you choose to use should come down to your workflow preference for managing, cataloging and processing your RAW files. Whichever one you choose you absolutely must make sure you learn how to set your noise reduction and sharpness settings optimally and that is the key take away from this comparison – educating yourself on how best to apply noise reduction and sharpening will yield you far better results than worrying wether one RAW converter is better than another. Likewise, understanding that camera profiles and picture styles are the fundamental factor in colour rendering is far more important than worrying wether you should process your RAW file in LRC or DPP.

Canon EOS 1DX MK3 Firmware 1.5 July 2021

Canon has released a major firmware update for the EOS 1DX MK3. The update is mostly for videographers who will be very pleased with the new features including Canon Log 3.


Firmware Version 1.5.0 incorporates the following enhancements and fix:
1. Adds [Canon Log 3] to [Canon Log settings]. 
• Support for RAW movies shot with Canon Log 3 and RAW (Light) will be available in a future version of Cinema RAW Development and in Digital Photo Professional software.
• Support for the processing of RAW movies shot with Canon Log 3 and the application of Viewing LUT will be available in a future version of Digital Photo Professional software.
2. Simultaneous movie recording on card 1 and card 2 has been added, however RAW movies and RAW(Light) movies cannot be recorded simultaneously on card 1 and card 2.
3. Support for the VPG 400(Video Performance Guarantee Profile), a standard based on the CFexpress 2.0 specification, has been added.
4. Fixes an issue in which there are rare instances where the shooting settings for Still Photo mode are retained when a user switches to Movie mode.

Firmware Version 1.5.0 is for cameras with firmware up to Version 1.4.0. If the camera’s firmware is already Version 1.5.0, it is not necessary to update the firmware.