Canon 6D Mark II - hands on preview (amateur perspective)

[Maiaibing]

Why in the world someone would use a 3rd party software to read RAW files if they really want to get best quality? I asked them this question and got an answer "because we want consistent comparison" for all camera brands. Which is total BS since they look from Adobe's perspective infested with random bugs.

LOL! I asked them exactly the same question.

I also made the - what I consider a very strong - argument that they should use each producers own software - that is much more "consistent" than what they are doing now. This is the software you buy together with your camera. ACR is a personal choice and an add-on the camera producer has nothing to do with.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Why in the world someone would use a 3rd party software to read RAW files if they really want to get best quality? I asked them this question and got an answer "because we want consistent comparison" for all camera brands. Which is total BS since they look from Adobe's perspective infested with random bugs.

LOL! I asked them exactly the same question.

I also made the - what I consider a very strong - argument that they should use each producers own software - that is much more "consistent" than what they are doing now. This is the software you buy together with your camera. ACR is a personal choice and an add-on the camera producer has nothing to do with.

Falls under the category of, there is none so blind as he who will not see. There are lots of people like that. Then there are those who always knock any company that is most successful.

Jack

 

[BeenThere]

I guess I am in the minority by using ACR in Lightroom to open my raw files. Sounds like you are using Canon's DPP to open your raw files.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Why in the world someone would use a 3rd party software to read RAW files if they really want to get best quality? I asked them this question and got an answer "because we want consistent comparison" for all camera brands. Which is total BS since they look from Adobe's perspective infested with random bugs.

LOL! I asked them exactly the same question.

I also made the - what I consider a very strong - argument that they should use each producers own software - that is much more "consistent" than what they are doing now. This is the software you buy together with your camera. ACR is a personal choice and an add-on the camera producer has nothing to do with.

Falls under the category of, there is none so blind as he who will not see. There are lots of people like that. Then there are those who always knock any company that is most successful.

Jack

Part of the appeal, I assume, is that they can also use the exact same settings for each body (even if the same settings aren't ideal...). There is a risk that they'll be more proficient with one manufacturer's software and the equivalent image on the other side will be processed more poorly through that company's software. Of course, with something like ACR or LR, they can arrive at settings that are ideal for one body and less so for the other, and shrug it off as "same settings, apples-to-apples".

 

[Maiaibing]

Why in the world someone would use a 3rd party software to read RAW files if they really want to get best quality? I asked them this question and got an answer "because we want consistent comparison" for all camera brands. Which is total BS since they look from Adobe's perspective infested with random bugs.

LOL! I asked them exactly the same question.

I also made the - what I consider a very strong - argument that they should use each producers own software - that is much more "consistent" than what they are doing now. This is the software you buy together with your camera. ACR is a personal choice and an add-on the camera producer has nothing to do with.

Falls under the category of, there is none so blind as he who will not see. There are lots of people like that. Then there are those who always knock any company that is most successful.

Jack

Part of the appeal, I assume, is that they can also use the exact same settings for each body (even if the same settings aren't ideal...). There is a risk that they'll be more proficient with one manufacturer's software and the equivalent image on the other side will be processed more poorly through that company's software. Of course, with something like ACR or LR, they can arrive at settings that are ideal for one body and less so for the other, and shrug it off as "same settings, apples-to-apples".

You - correctly - identified the counter argument to why that would not be a good idea. Dpreview uses the term "processed to taste" to underline that their processing is subjective.