[Breakfastographer]

@ProfessorBuzz, pixel-shift is on my list of things to play with, and for both that and the 645Z, I'd need some all uses permitted files as I can't generate those myself. If I can have at least one basic, reasonably aesthetically pleasing (doesn't need to be award winning, but also not just a bottle of ketchup, please - the K-S2 image, although it was one of the few Pentax images on wesaturate and doesn't cover the colour wheel, turned out to be a reasonably good choice).

I looked at a few HDR programs in my review, and used them for editing single images rather than series, and did not go very deep. HDR programs typically come with five to maybe seven completely different basic algorithms, and that's before you get into presets or manual edits, so they're quite challenging to review. Luminance HDR, for instance, supports nine different algorithms.

[BigMackCam]

@Breakfastographer - further to my original comments re noise reduction for higher ISO files, this might be something you want to consider too. There's considerable difference between the various software's capabilities in this area, especially where colour noise reduction is concerned. Any of the vendors might offer good-to-excellent processing of an ISO 100 - 400 file, but throw an ISO 6400 image from a K-3 at them, and you'll get wildly varying results

[Fcsnt54]

It would be good to know if these converters work with the 645Z, and if they support pixel-shift images, HDR images, etc.

I can contest that 2018, and 2019 ON1 do function with 645z files. One exception, when using pef for ON1 2018 there is a glitch. When the files are on the whiter end of the spectrum, the program shows purple. This is not an issue when shooting in dng. Ill still need to check with the 2019 version.

[Breakfastographer]

I can contest that 2018, and 2019 ON1 do function with 645z files. One exception, when using pef for ON1 2018 there is a glitch. When the files are on the whiter end of the spectrum, the program shows purple. This is not an issue when shooting in dng. Ill still need to check with the 2019 version.

A general PEF vs DNG test is another thing I'm pondering, the main difference being the embedded colour profile in DNG. They should otherwise behave the same, but might be worth checking across a broader range of programs. Seems natural to combine this with a 645Z test if someone can provide files.

[Larrymc]

It would be good to know if these converters work with the 645Z, and if they support pixel-shift images, HDR images, etc.

FYI, PhotoLab2 does support the 645D and 645Z with optics modules. PhotoLab (1) also supports both cameras.

[Digitalis]

was an Adobe user for years, but won’t go subscription.

At work I use lightroom and Phocus. Darktable has been gaining some traction in the professional photography industry, many of my colleagues have been using it, as have I along with Hasselblad phocus.

To hell with Adobe and their "online services" model...rumor has it Microsoft intend to do the same with the windows OS.

[Des]

To hell with Adobe and their "online services" model...rumor has it Microsoft intend to do the same with the windows OS.

Not a good trend for those of us with slow, data-limited and expensive internet connections.

[Breakfastographer]

Just a heads-up, I just published part 2 looking at rendering of fine detail. I think this needed doing as there are some major differences among the field. And the first post was just getting too long, so I had to separate this out into a new page:

23 RAW converters reviewed, part 2: fine detail – breakfastographer

Enjoy!

[BigMackCam]

Just a heads-up, I just published part 2 looking at rendering of fine detail. I think this needed doing as there are some major differences among the field. And the first post was just getting too long, so I had to separate this out into a new page:

23 RAW converters reviewed, part 2: fine detail – breakfastographer

Enjoy!

I suspect a lot of the apparent difference in detail is due to a combination of the colour profile and base tone curve employed by each programme, and the default level (if any) of local contrast...

[kaseki]

I can relate as a post-processing rank novice that Raw Therapee 5.4 in Linux can read 645Z PEF files and infer the needed white balance parameters from the embedded JPEG file. It can convert the PEF file to a TIFF file. At a minimum the TIFF file could then be used with Darktable, I think. I haven't installed a newer Darktable on a sufficiently newish version of Mint yet to see if a newer version can now do PEF files.

[ThorSanchez]

I suspect a lot of the apparent difference in detail is due to a combination of the colour profile and base tone curve employed by each programme, and the default level (if any) of local contrast...

It's going to be a challenge to tease out the capability of the program from the ability and experience of whomever is using it. You'd almost need 15-20 people who're adept at using each piece of software to eliminate that.

I know that if I was comparing output from LR, Darktable, RawTherapee and Silkypix much of the difference would be my inability to get the most out of the software I'm not as familiar with.

[Breakfastographer]

It's going to be a challenge to tease out the capability of the program from the ability and experience of whomever is using it. You'd almost need 15-20 people who're adept at using each piece of software to eliminate that.

I know that if I was comparing output from LR, Darktable, RawTherapee and Silkypix much of the difference would be my inability to get the most out of the software I'm not as familiar with.

That is why default output is shown. There can be no operator error as I did not touch any sliders or change anything else. The only exception was Luminance HDR, because it requires a decision to be made or it will not render anyhing other than the flat picture profile, which is stated in the text, so there should be no confusion. And if that conclusion is needed, I would say that Luminance HDR is actually best used for exposure series rather working with a single image of a scene - no surprise there, of course!

I have been thinking if there should be a subsequent part where I use each software for a couple of minutes, state exactly how long I took, and show the outcome. But this first part would still be somewhat more truthful as you could say that some programs perhaps suit me better personally, while another package might work better for someone else, intuitively.

[ThorSanchez]

That is why default output is shown. There can be no operator error as I did not touch any sliders or change anything else. The only exception was Luminance HDR, because it requires a decision to be made or it will not render anyhing other than the flat picture profile, which is stated in the text, so there should be no confusion. And if that conclusion is needed, I would say that Luminance HDR is actually best used for exposure series rather working with a single image of a scene - no surprise there, of course!

I have been thinking if there should be a subsequent part where I use each software for a couple of minutes, state exactly how long I took, and show the outcome. But this first part would still be somewhat more truthful as you could say that some programs perhaps suit me better personally, while another package might work better for someone else, intuitively.

I do appreciate the effort. It's difficult to baseline software like this.

[jbinpg]

I appreciate the effort made here. But the premise that someone wishing to develop their images will just leave it up to an Auto or "no adjustment" function in their raw converter/editor for the final image is not valid, imo. If you are going to develop raw images, then you must put in the effort to get the most out of every image. Presets and styles get you close but there will still be tweaks needed for each image.

[UncleVanya]

Not a good trend for those of us with slow, data-limited and expensive internet connections.

You install Adobe's creative cloud apps locally.