X-twitter Facebook Envelope
Advertisement
SNAPCLOUDBack up every photoUnlimited RAW storage, 30 days freeTry freeSample ad
Advertisement
Advertisement

New Lightroom update 4.2 adds support for NEX-5R,NEX-6,A99 and RX100. First A99 samples!

Adobe just added support for the new NEX-5R,NEX-6,A99 and RX100 cameras. You can download the updates by using these links:

Adobe released Lightroom 4.2
Mac update (Click here)
Windows update (Click here)

Camera Raw 7.2 and DNG converter 7.2
Mac update (Click here)
Windows update (Click here)

Our reader Joe (fotosiamo.com and SLRLounge.com) already tested the Sony A99 RAW files on Adobe and wrote: “the RAW files look way better once brought in to Bridge or Lightroom. Thank goodness.” You can download some A99 RAW file at fil.io (via Quesabesde).

Enjoy the testing and let us know what you think about the A99 RAW image quality!!!

—
Sony preorder list:
A99 body Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Jessops, Wex UK, Wex Germany, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH and more links at Alphacameradeals.
A99 with kit lens links Alphacameradeals.
RX1 Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK ,Wex Germany and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-6 body Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Wex Germany Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-6 with kit lens Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Jessops, Wex Uk ,Wex Germany and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-VG900 Amazon, BHphoto, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, Wex Uk and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-VG30 Adorama, Amazon, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals.
Sony E-mount 16-50mm Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals .
Sony E-mount 35mm Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals.
Sony E-mount 10-18mm Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals.
Sony A-mount 300mm f/2.8 Amazon, BHphoto, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH.

Share this story
Community

Join the discussion

68 Responses

    1. You need to be a member @http://www.dslr-forum.de to see the pictures, so I think you should upload those pictures somewhere else!?

      Reply

    2. Windows 2000 was better but the past is the past. Running a modern PC on anything other than Windows 7 is just foolish.

      LR4.2 finally seems to have fixed the performance problems. Shame it’s taken 6 months and 3 versions to get it to the state 4.0 should have been at release.

      Reply

      1. Win 8 is going to rock!
        Already running Win8 on a SSD with 6GB RAM w/i7 processor on a HP business laptop. From a cold start system will POST/boot to windows/login/show desktop in ~20-24seconds. So far, VERY happy with it. Win8 may be what takes market share back that was lost to Apple. I think this will be what either makes or breaks Microsoft. The way Win8 metro interface works with their phones, tablets, and desktops is going to be great.

        Reply

          2. most of that time is the HP POST. And the time for me to type my password. From password to desktop is prob 3-5 seconds

      2. For me LR 4.x performance problems went away after switching to an AMD CPU… I had an Intel Quadcore Q9450 but the mainboard died some months ago. As Murphy’s law dictated it died on saturday night and on sunday a shooting was coming. Only replacement to get on saturday night was a spare PC out of the office of a friend – equipped with a nearly equally rated AMD CPU 945X4 and the same amount of RAM. Switched this board into my PC – and LR4.0 ran faster than LR2 or LR3 ever has run before!

        Now I’ve an octocore “Bulldozer” FX8150 in my PC…

        In the mean time I saw some benchmarks for Photoshop CS6 indicationg that those AMD CPUs are outclassing more than twice as expensive Intel CPUs with CS6. From a technical view it looks like CS6 and LR4.x are using heavily integer calculations where AMD is quite strong while Intel is much more perfomant on floating point calculations.

        Reply

  6. I did try the new raw files. Well…as usual, the jpegs do nothing but tarnish Sony’s sensor performance reputation that only Nikon seems to wipe clean earlier because they happen to be the first ones to show what can these sensors achieve.

    From the Raw files in Qusabesde, the only high ISO one is the one of the cooks (ISO 2000) and it looks very good. Lots of detail are preserved. However, a lot of people here will say that the details are not there (I can see it coming) The reason why you may not see every eyelash in the man’s eyes is because of the poor quality of light (bounced light). but I can see this as an ISO 3200 image (all else being equal) and getting more harshness from a slightly overexposed photo and thus more details to work with.

    Nice one Sony. Now we know how the RX1 will be! (the mirror does not take THAT much out!…see a77 vs NEX 7 by dxomark)

    Reply

    2. I think in iso2000 image is some blur either because of camera shake or cook movement as it always happens on ship.

      Reply

      1. I agree. There’s some sort of motion blur going on with the cook. Gotta see more high ISO photos to pass judgment, though.

        Thank goodness there are no chroma noise around, though!

        Reply

  7. Great news! Did not use my RX100 RAW files before. I am very curious to see how those will look in LR/PS compared to the already pretty good JPG files.

    Reply

      1. Did not really use it no. It probably does a great job for what it is, but I am so used to LR/PS that IDC seemed too limited for me.

        Reply

          1. but just about none of the sony lenses are supported in LR. whereas canon nikon leica have a long list of lenses corrections

  8. Those files are ok, but view as very “Sony looking” in some way. In other news, I have insider info that this sensor has already scored VERY well at DXO and they are waiting for the ok the release the data. Camera masturbators, errr…measurebaters will certainly be thrilled.

    Reply

    1. Well each camera maker does tend to have its own image signature.

      I was flipping through the photostream of a Sony Alpha photographer I enjoy on Flickr the other day and as I neared the end of his stream the photos all of a sudden looked much different to my eye. Colors had a red cast and weren’t as vibrant. I looked closer and noticed he sold his Alpha gear and switched to a Nikon D800. The change was so easily recognized and I fear his work did not improve with new gear.

      Reply

      1. Yeah, some call it red, some orange (that’s often how I spot them). Either way, I’ve never been the fan of the Nikon colour handwriting, Jpeg or RAW (based on NX and ACR/LR conversions at least).

        Reply

        1. Ron Martinsen put the D600 up against the 5D3 with 24-70’s in JPG mode and the 5D3 whipped the D600’s behind. All things considered, the Canon 24-70 was brand new and the RAW output may be different, but the Nikon JPG engine is lacking for the power of the Sony Sensor.

          ronmartblog.com

          Reply

    2. Based on past performance with slt & Nikon cameras using the same sensor (the A99 uses the same sensor as the D600), I estimate that the A99 will score around 88-89 on the DXO Sensor tests, putting it right up there with such cameras as the D3x, the D4, and several Phase One MF digital backs. But I’m hoping that Sony will show us some technological wizardry that will push the score into the 90s.

      In any case, on the evidence of the evidence from the scores as well as the actual photographs we are beginning to see, it is pretty clear already that what we have here is a great sensor.

      Reply

      1. I have a feeling the A99 Translucent is more transparent than it’s predecessors. If the EVF and Translucent is supposed to save money, but the A99 is the same price as the A900, I have a feeling some of the cost was the R&D of the new Translucent.

        Reply

        1. I tend to agree. I also believe the on-sensor PDAF plus probably a more sensitive PDAF module (although the same number of actual points as A77) are likely to be in place, bringing the difference back a bit to negligible.

          I actually believe the A99 will score very very closely with the D600, possibly even exceeding it. The RX1 will be close if not the top scorer overall. Interested to see if DXO will test the VG900 as well. I suspect the D600 uses a lower rate version of the sensor, to Nikon’s specs so that it doesn’t outperform the D800.

          Reply

  9. The Quesabesde files are about as close as we can get to real world shooting for the “average” photographer, so as such, I think they are a good baseline. Are the exposures good? Hell no, but even so, I was very pleased with how well the files reacted to edits. In particular, the shot through the boat window that dramatically underexposed the interior was recovered almost effortlessly in LR. I was extremely satisfied with how balanced the lighting was after recovering shadows.

    And questions about sharpness are not to be answered with these samples. Yes, there is excellent detail and sharpness in the profile shot of the girl with the red jacket but the other samples suffer to some extent for one reason or another. My take is that with the right lens, exposure and technique, the sensor will meet or exceed expectations in regard to detail.

    Overall, I think this camera is what it makes out to be – a migration to EVF and SLT tech that provides improved still IQ (over the A900) and class leading video performance. Those expecting something else will be disappointed.

    Reply

    1. Great comments Chad.

      I think the A99 will be a real step up in IQ from the A77. Even Sony cannot have failed to see the comments regarding noise. I also have a friend who has traded a Sony A700 for the D800. From his pics I am totally convinced that low noise is achieved by reduced contrast. His images definitely appear less punchy and more washed out than before. Is that an acceptable trade-off? I’m not so sure. Fingers crossed the A99 will live up to expectations!

      Cheers,
      Dave.

      Reply

      1. Thanks Dave.

        I don’t think there is any doubt there will be a considerable improvement over the A77, especially in high ISO.

        As an A900 shooter, I was most worried that there would be some SLT penalty in detail (I have faith that High ISO is improved) but based on a comparison I saw today between an A900 and A99, my fears have been allayed.

        Reply

      1. look at the original jpeg files and then @ my files i´v worked out in lightroom from the original raw files und you will see the difference (size is big enough) in quality

        raw codec for the alpha 99 wasnt supported before so no one could edit the raw files which deliver MUCH better quality

        Reply

    1. Ermmm… a quick comparison on DPReview reveals the 5d3 doesn’t even kick the 4 year old a900 butt. Really… just go and call up the comparison RAW page and load a900, 5d3, and D800. There is no discernible difference between the cameras. Some portions actually look better on a900.

      Reply

        1. Why was that shot at ISO 12,800? You clearly obviously needed ISO 12,800 to take a shot like this… Now I know why everyone is always going on and on and on about high ISO performance… It’s because they have no idea what they are doing! Also, even at this incredibly low resolution sample this has heaps of noise in it, I hope your clients are happy with this work and SO happy your camera has ISO 12,800.

          Reply

          1. LOL….exactly, learn how to use light and fast lenses, maybe ISO 12800 shots of that quality are good enough for 5cm webshots but not for publication!!

      2. The 5D3 has the worst dynamic range I have ever seen in a FF camera period.
        It is so bad in fact, that the Pentax K-5 and Nikon D7000 (which are crop sensors btw) put it to shame.

        I have no idea what Canon is doing with their sensors but they are making fools out of themselves with performance specs like that.

        PS. I have nothing against Canon or any other brand, but I think this needs to be said.

        Reply

    2. Yeah, I don’t know about that Kevin. We will see soon enough when DPR gets the A99 loaded. I personally think all these new cameras (A99, 5dMIII, D800, D600) are on or near the same level when it comes to high ISO performance. At this point you pick your platform for other reasons.

      Nice troll though! 🙂

      Reply

      1. Well Chad before you go and call people names you might want to ask a question or two… I own both Sony and Canon So I think I can make a very educated statement.. Facts are in real life compared to the 8000 iso from the a99 compared to the 5d3 the Sony is not even close, I know I have shot the 5d3 at that iso.. Have you ?

        Reply

        1. Hi Kevin, sorry but I don’t actually believe you as what you are saying simply isn’t true! I’m lucky enough to shoot with an A850 professionally along with a D700, my colleague shoots two 5D mark III’s so I get to process a multitude of high iso images from weddings from these cameras every week. The 5D III does NOT kick the butt of the A850, in fact up to ISO 800 the A850 retains more detail than the canon, has no more noise and has significantly improved dynamic range and better separation of skin tones. I only need look at a similair shot on the sony where the sky will be maintain perfect exposure in relation to the subject, where it would be blown out on the 5D III. Now don’t get me wrong, over ISO 1600 the Canon does start to pull away which is to be expected for a 4 year newer camera, however the D700 again ageing keeps pace with it up to about 4000ISO. As for the A99 from what I have seen from a handful of amateurish RAW files floating around it seems to be on par noise wise with the 5D III (no better no worse) and a good half stop improvement at low ISO’s over the A850/900 with the gap widening to nearly a full stop or more over ISO 3200. We know from the D600 scores (but bearing in mind the D600 has been deliberately crippled so it doesn’t outperform the D800 – check the read noise at ISO 100) that the A99 will destroy the 5D III for dynamic range and color performance both separation and depth, as for noise the SLT mirror will have a negative impact of approximately 1/3eV over the same sensor without the SLT. With the D600 scoring 2980 (although probably would have achieved 3200 without the cripling) when you factor in that loss ISO score should be at least 2300… Ok so stop spouting bullshit Kevin and wait for the facts to surface.

          Reply

          1. Sorry but I have shot both myself and I have shot a lot of low light High ISo concerts and the a850 could not be pushed beyond 1600 with out falling apart. I think at lower iso’s the sony is very good, that is not my point..

            here is a sample at 12800 low light !!
            http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8013/6971484010_533b796f14_b.jpg

            No way would the a850/900 come close to this.. Did you take a look at the 8000 iso of the A99 ? Look I want Sony to come out with a great high iso camera but if you are honest you have to admit they have missed it.. Maybe in the final release they will do something to make it better.. But so far.. no way !!

            Spouting Bull&^%$… and you call yourself a professional !! WOW…

          2. Nice capture Kevin. But I don’t see the point in bragging over high iso images at web resolution. What you show is possible with a 6mp camera and noise ninja.

            Look, I’m glad the Canon works the way you want to work. If what you’re displaying justifies claims of “kicking butt”, then… well I don’t know, whatever works for you. Keep up the good photography.

    1. Learn how to process your RAW files Kevin, you’ll be amazed by what you can achieve. Oh and about that last childish comment, I don’t call myself a professional, I make my full time living from photography therefore I am simple as that. The A99 will keep pace with the 5D III just wait and see!

      Reply

    2. Kevin that’s a terrible ISO12800 shot 🙁
      There are crop sensor camera’s that delivery far better high ISO output than this tbh.

      Reply

  13. Well,

    First of all, DxO is not able to make neither proper color rendering nor noise reduction on Sony raw files. It is yet more useless than poor Sony’s own IDC. I doubt then their rankings are worth anything.

    Once I thought I’ll have to change my Alpha 700 for Nikon D700 like camera because of poor high ISO quality, until I realised that simply using Adobe raw software I can go two full stops further having ISO 6400 perfect for A4 prints:

    http://dfv.pl/gallery/members/jakubh.html?g2_itemId=2765527

    For Alpha 900, similar quality should be achieved at ISO 12800 (available as ISO 6400 ZONE +2). If you carefully develop raw files, Sony cameras retain enough details to keep up with Canons even at high ISO.

    Reply

    1. Two things have kept me interested in Sony Camera’s, their color and you have more room to work with raw files, From the samplesI have seen of the new a99 they do not compare to not only Canon but Nikon as well. This is a 6400 iso no noise reduction (it was shot in raw and converted in dpp to jpg).

      http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7272/6973036202_6d5e68a659_b.jpg

      I don’t believe the the samples of the a99 we see are on par with the current crop of cameras. With it’s release I hope it does well (I was planning on buying one)… Time will tell

      Reply

      1. Kevin… Jim just displayed an a700 12mp 6400iso image with less noise than the Canon images you’re promoting as “kicking butt”.

        Reply

        1. Try again.. That is not low light !! Now you can honestly say the
          6400 a700 looks better than the 12800 iso low light.. WOW..
          what you clam to be high iso is not even close in the light condition of my examples… (note: I did nothing other than convert to .jpg and re-sized the 6400 iso shot)

          I believe in brand loyalty too but some of you here have become blinded to a fair and open debate, amazing that I make show an example of LOW LIGHT and you came back with well lite high iso shots to refute me…

          As I stated I wanted to come back to Sony but due to what I shoot they do not produce a camera that can handle those conditions as of yet…. I HOPE THE A99 DOES !!!!!!!!!! But until then I will wait and see, what I have seen is not compelling…

          And CTP… your in-tilted to be wrong… Just as you say I don’t know the light of Jim’s picture you don’t know the exact lighting condition I was in.. So you have no point other than being wrong.. must be a liberal.. don’t allow direct reply…

          Reply

          1. Kevin… Aside from you not knowing what kind of light Jim’s photo was taken under, you’re missing the point. Point being, that your web resolution image isn’t the best example for high iso bragging rights. At least not enough to claim “kicking butt”… especially when a 12mp a700 is showing less noise than your example. DPReview shows 100% comparisons side by side. There is no discernible difference in any of the new or old high mp cameras for real world publishing. Stop acting like it makes a huge difference when it doesn’t.

            As far as brand loyalty goes… nobody is bragging about the Sony. We’re simply challenging your bragging about the Canon “kicking” proverbial “butt”. It doesn’t.

  14. Adobe updates Lightroom
    Beyond bug fixes, Adobe has added support for new cameras as well as new lens profiles.

    Newly Supported Cameras

    ■Canon EOS 650D / Rebel T4i
    ■Canon EOS M

    Newly Supported Cameras for <<<<<>>>>>>>>
    ■Canon EOS Kiss X5
    ■Canon EOS Kiss REBEL T3i
    ■Canon EOS 600D
    ■Canon EOS Kiss X50
    ■Canon EOS REBEL T3
    ■Canon EOS 1100D
    ■Canon EOS 5D Mark III
    ■Canon EOS 1D X

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search

Search
Advertisement
SNAPCLOUDBack up everyphotoTry freeSample ad

Explore topics

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.

Advertisement
SNAPCLOUDBack up everyphotoTry freeSample ad
Advertisement
Advertisement