Let's make the point at the moment:Breezebrowser (my preferred tool): programmer says 50D is going to be implemented "as soon as possible", but no timeframe yet;Bibble: implementation of 50D not before the release of version 5Photoshop and ACR: supported, but you need to upgrade the software; the version I own (CS2) will never support to 50DLightroom: supported, but you need to upgrade to version 2.x; the version I own (ver.1) will never support the 50DCapture One : unknown statusSo apparently at the moment the only chance to develop 50D's RAWs outside of Canon's DPP (which royally sucks), is to pay for an entire upgrade of either Photoshop or Lightroom.Am I allowed to say that this situation sucks big time?It's more or less one month that the 50D is commercially available, and the only software that supports it, does by requiring a whole software upgrade. Talk about greed.

Moire Onionwrote:Let's make the point at the moment:Breezebrowser (my preferred tool): programmer says 50D is going tobe implemented "as soon as possible", but no timeframe yet;-usually as soon Canon SDK is available (no long waiting is expected)Bibble: implementation of 50D not before the release of version 5-is allready announced (no long waiting is expected)Photoshop and ACR: supported, but you need to upgrade the software;the version I own (CS2) will never support to 50D-you can convert to DNG (allready available for 50D) and work in CS2.Lightroom: supported, but you need to upgrade to version 2.x; theversion I own (ver.1) will never support the 50D-same as for ACR.Capture One : unknown status-haven't followed their status.So apparently at the moment the only chance to develop 50D's RAWs outside of Canon's DPP (which royally sucks), is to pay for an entire upgrade of either Photoshop or Lightroom.As said, you can start developing your photos right now... in month or two you'll have more choices (as always is the case). What was this ranting about?Greetings, Bogdan -- My pictures are my memories http://freeweb.siol.net/hrastni3/

I use aperture, but they don't support it either, yet ... I'm hoping they will soon.

Why can't the camera manufacturers think BEYOND the hardware to how people will actually USE their products?Granted, Nikon seems a little better at working with software manufacturers than Canon (don't shoot me - I'm a Canon guy), but neither is perfect.What would be really great is if they made software integration, or at least their SDKs available AS SOON AS or 2 weeks prior to the camera's release, along with sample files, etc. Better yet, why don't camera manufacturers provide the OPTION of DNG as a native format, then this ENTIRE PROBLEM goes away?I can't understand why any manufacturer would want their customers bitching about their products the day they are released. I should be able to open the box, take my shots, post-process and be DELIGHTED.In Marketing speak, we call this "post-purchase dissonance", and any good Marketer knows that building market momentum is substantially based on minimising its impact.Canon, Nikon ... hello ... Revenue? Market penetration? Anyone ...?

I don't think anyone would question whether DPP can deliver excellent IQ. It ought to, since Canon's RAW format is basically proprietary -- they are clearly the experts. However, the user interface for that software is simply horrible, IMHO. I realize that's very much a matter of personal preference, so if it's your cup of tea, more power to you. However, I very much sympathize with the "sucks" comment, because every time I try to use it, I end up being extremely frustrated with the awkwardness of the user interface and the complete lack of some of the more sophisticated tools that you get within LR or ACR (fill flash, vibrance, etc.). I keep trying it periodically and end up running right back to ACR. Again... YMMV.J.

You do have the option of converting to DNG with Adobe's free converter and then using CS2 or your tool of choice.

based on their answer to my "when" question.Regards,Joe KurkjianGalleries:http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjiaSEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

Your right it does suck. But if you want to use photoshop download the ACR 4.6 and use the DNG converter from that download. You can use the DNG files in CS2 camera raw. Beware if you are shooting at ISO 6400 or higher. As I put in some other threads I have found that ACR converts the 50D images with much more noise than the Canon software.

LR 2.1 beta does support the 50d files.i can read the files also with breezebrowser, but i never do raw conversion with it.janetg

I rarely use CS3 now to convert RAW files as DPP does such a great job. Generally it only needs a few adjustments in DPP and I don't find the 'simple' interface to be a problem or lacking in features.If I screw up taking a shot, I may need to bring it in to CS3 to salvage it, but that is not DPPs fault. If you like playing with sliders, the alternative programs are the way to go. You can spend a long time moving sliders but I yet have to see an improvement over DPP for most of my photos!Moire Onionwrote:Let's make the point at the moment:Breezebrowser (my preferred tool): programmer says 50D is going tobe implemented "as soon as possible", but no timeframe yet;Bibble: implementation of 50D not before the release of version 5Photoshop and ACR: supported, but you need to upgrade the software;the version I own (CS2) will never support to 50DLightroom: supported, but you need to upgrade to version 2.x; theversion I own (ver.1) will never support the 50DCapture One : unknown statusSo apparently at the moment the only chance to develop 50D's RAWs outside of Canon's DPP (which royally sucks), is to pay for an entire upgrade of either Photoshop or Lightroom.Am I allowed to say that this situation sucks big time? It's more or less one month that the 50D is commercially available, and the only software that supports it, does by requiring a whole software upgrade. Talk about greed.

Jovowrote:If I screw up taking a shot, I may need to bring it in to CS3 to salvage it, but that is not DPPs fault. If you like playing with sliders, the alternative programs are the way to go. You can spend a long time moving sliders but I yet have to see an improvement over DPP for most of my photos!You've nailed it. Some are bashing DPP: -because there's no Adobe label visible (what? you don't use Adobe?) -thinking "free" software can't be worth much ('coz you get what you pay for?) -even never installed (& tried seriously to use) Canon software.-Adobe is "guarantee" for good results (because Adobe knows about photo editing), etc.We should realize, that Adobes's (beta) color profiles for cameras are available only for last few months. Before that, ACR was simply unusable (or why do you think, they made these profiles?). Even now they are not perfect, but are much, much closer to results from DPP (don't know about Nikon). In short: if you don't/can't use camera profiles, then your results simply can't be good -if you think opposite, then it's only your imagination.I'm not thinking DPP is perfect -far from that: -noise reduction is far from being "pro", -no partial curve manipulation on raw (thus, no highlight/shadow recovery), -no straightening option, -no metadata editing, etc.Thus, I'm not saying DPP is overall better than ACR (with camera profiles!) -that would be my imaginationIt's just, that in 95%, DPP is enough for my needs. For other 5%, I just use PaintShopPro and dedicated NR software.Just my 2c, Bogdan -- My pictures are my memories http://freeweb.siol.net/hrastni3/

1) Use "Image Capture" to download the camera RAW files (std Mac utility)2) Use Adobe DNG converter v4.6 to convert 50D RAW to DNG RAW (free from Adobe)3) Import DNG files into Aperture....I've been doing this for several days with full size RAW (not SRAW) 50D files and have had no problems. I suspect that when Aperture provides actual 50D compatibility, the conversion will be at least slightly different, but at least I'm not stuck with JPEG.

The idea that a previous poster was peddling that if you don't have the camera profiles that make LR produce coversions that look like DPP you can't get good results is a bit silly.What these profiles do is make conversions look like Canon's JPEG camera styles. There's nothing "accurate" or "correct" about these. You might like them, sure. They are canon's idea of what people do like -- that's why they make em that way. And DPP is designed to be able to reproduce the in-camera JPEG look if that's what you want.But it's down to aesthetics. Adobe's old profiles are probably a bit more accurate in fact, without the zippy (but rather attractive) reds of the canon style.YMMV....

You can use Camera Raw as far back as version 2.4 (with Photoshop CS) to process 50D raw images. You can use any version of Lightroom to process 50D raw images. As noted above, just download the DNG Converter to produce a DNG from the CR2. -- Eric Chan http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html

The Fedex guy just delivered my new 50D 3 hours ago. Took a few shots around the house just to make sure everything is working.I have not used DPP since my early days with the 20D (3-4 years ago). I found version 3.5 just as comparatively slow. Yes, there is the peripheral ill & distortion correction, but I usually don't need it unless it is for critical shots.Even with added DNG conversion time, LR 1.4 is still faster than DPP. I love the variety of controls on LR, such as recovery, fill light, vibrance, masking, etc. I have not tried high ISO yet to see if DPP is any better. I will wait for real 50D support (not the 2.1 RC) before I upgrade LR. -- Peter Kwok http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok

Peter Kwokwrote:The Fedex guy just delivered my new 50D 3 hours ago. Took a few shots around the house just to make sure everything is working. I have not used DPP since my early days with the 20D (3-4 years ago). I found version 3.5 just as comparatively slow. Yes, there is the peripheral ill & distortion correction, but I usually don't need it unless it is for critical shots. Even with added DNG conversion time, LR 1.4 is still faster than DPP. I love the variety of controls on LR, such as recovery, fill light, vibrance, masking, etc. I have not tried high ISO yet to see if DPP is any better. I will wait for real 50D support (not the 2.1 RC) before I upgrade LR. -- Peter Kwok http://www.pbase.com/peterkwokIt´s always a nightmare to be innovative ;-( I run LR2.1RC and ACR4.6 in PSE6.0.It works, but I´m not shure the Adobe RAW-converters get the most out of 50D RAW-files yet.