LR compatibility with Canon 5D Mark iv raw file format?

[jeffreym95]

will LR be able to read the 5D Mark iv's camera raw file format? at least when it's putting out regular raw files.  I know that an update to LR was necessary for reading the 80D file format

[John Waller · Accepted solution]

will LR be able to read the 5D Mark iv's camera raw file format?

Soon after the camera is released, yes.

We'll have to wait for Adobe to issue an update.

A software update (Camera Raw, DNG converter and Lightroom) is required for every new camera model that comes onto the market. Adobe batches the updates then releases a software update including a few new camera models periodically. We never know which ones will be included in any given update but I assume the Mark IV will be a definite inclusion in the next one given the popularity of the Canon 5D cameras (I have a Mark III).

[Cattleya007]

Update and working  for LR6 and CC Version?

[JP Hess]

Yes, the update will be for Lightroom 6 and Lightroom CC only. There will be no updates for previous versions. However, the DNG converter will be updated to support camera.

[Cattleya007]

DNG converter only ?

RAW for 5d IV in CC AND LR6 ?

[JP Hess]

You can use the DNG converter. Or, you can use the software that comes with the camera to work on the raw images and create TIF images that you can then load into Lightroom. Older versions of Lightroom and Photoshop will not be updated to support that new camera. If it meets your needs, you might consider using Photoshop Elements. The other alternative would be for you to upgrade to Lightroom 6 or Lightroom CC.

[GaryB9539]

I tried to convert to DNG in LR, LR doesn't recognize the file to ever convert it.

[kerryd84717330]

I've tried the same.  So frustrating!

[Abambo]

It's not yet supported. You need to wait. It's like that each time a new camera shows up.

In addition, dualpixel raw files need additional processing. That's a new concept.

I do not expect immediate support.

[TheDigitalDog]

Cattleya007 wrote:

DNG converter only ?

RAW for 5d IV in CC AND LR6 ?

ONLY when it's updated to understand the new proprietary raw. And by that time, the work by Adobe has been done, LR/ACR will have 'native' support soon after.

[Abambo]

thedigitaldog wrote:

ONLY when it's updated to understand the new proprietary raw. And by that time, the work by Adobe has been done, LR/ACR will have 'native' support soon after.

As I understood, you will be able to shoot in 2 RAW formats: Classic and Dual Pixel. Classic should be an easy task, but the dual pixel raw format will be hard, as there are a lot more information, that need to get connected and were not used as this on other cameras.

[ericasisme]

What does this mean?  I'm currently using a 6D with LR 5.  I just import and everything works.  What will happen when I take my camera out of the box and try to import my new pics?  Do I need to add a step to my imports?  What is a DNG and how do I use it?

[Abambo]

ericasisme wrote:

What does this mean? I'm currently using a 6D with LR 5. I just import and everything works. What will happen when I take my camera out of the box and try to import my new pics? Do I need to add a step to my imports? What is a DNG and how do I use it?

LR5 will not and never import native RAW of a 5DM4 and any other newer camera. Ther will be however a version of the ACR program able to convert Canon raw files to DNG. DNG is a universal RAW file format developped by Adobe. Adobe programs can read DNG irrespective from the camera model.

[TheDigitalDog]

John Waller wrote:

A software update (Camera Raw, DNG converter and Lightroom) is required for every new camera model that comes onto the market.     

Such a shame, waste of time and unnecessary. If only the camera manufacturers didn't insist on making tiny changes to each new camera's raw format (which is based on TIFF/EP), just produced the raw like they handle the JPEG (which takes no updating), we'd have camera support before a new camera was released. And this burden on customers and Adobe extends to all 3rd party raw converters. Get the new camera (or a supplied raw), update the tiny changes, test it, build new installers, etc. Again, a waste of time, money and resources for zero reason. Or if the damn cameras just had a 3rd option besides proprietary raw and JPEG: DNG. Big engineering? No. Political meandering by the big camera companies? Yes.

[John Waller]

I suspect Adobe would agree with every point you make.

In part, that's why they launched DNG in 2004. They saw all this update nonsense coming if proprietary Raw remained the norm.

I'm still trying to understand the motives of camera manufacturers who continually neglect to offer shooting to DNG in camera. They're just confusing newbies and inconveniencing everyone else. Do proprietary Raw formats conceal trade secrets or protect IP in some way that DNG cannot?

[TheDigitalDog]

John Waller wrote:

I'm still trying to understand the motives of camera manufacturers who continually neglect to offer shooting to DNG in camera.

Political, not invented here, created by the evil Adobe, etc, etc. It's not to benefit their customers.

[PAWU]

There is no evil, just keeping the control on a format that has been created before DNG got released. Everyone applaudes Adobe for the effort, but nearly nobody uses DNG (not quite correct as all LR users us it at some point).

[ssprengel]

A camera manufacturer supporting DNGs means they support DNG profiles.   

DNG Profiles do not work well in extreme artistic lighting situations such as stage lighting.  How many times have we seen people come back from a show and post side-by-side examples on the forums asking why the colors are so oversaturated and devoid of any detail on the performer's hands and clothing in Adobe software while the camera JPGs look ok?

A camera manufacturer who knows what they're doing--Canon, Nikon, others, has not use for DNG Profiles, so why should they support native raws as well as DNGs just to make Adobe's life easier even if the color-rendering from DNGs is inferior to that from native raws and their proprietary software.

My Samsung Galaxy S6 phone does produce DNGs for the advanced shooting mode as the phone's raw format, but those DNGs look nothing like the phone's JPGs.  It makes sense for a phone that doesn't normally produce raw files to have DNGs as a secondary,  advanced-user format, but it doesn't make sense for a mainstream camera manufacturer to use DNGs if it can produce it's own raw processing software.

[TheDigitalDog]

ssprengel wrote:

A camera manufacturer supporting DNGs means they support DNG profiles.

Really? What camera manufactures raw converter supports DNG profiles?

There were (still are?) camera manufacturers that supported DNG, the file format for their raw data.

And any camera manufacturer can do so; it is openly documented, like the JPEG they have zero issue writing with every new camera.

I don't think this issue has anything to do with DNG camera profiles. That's an attribute of the raw converter. And I can use them in LR or ACR on proprietary raw so I'm confused by your comments.

[ssprengel]

The argument is that camera manufacturers should produce DNGs with already-embedded DNG Profiles so Adobe can support the raws from day one and we don't have to wait for an Adobe release cycle to finish to get raw support for a new camera, right?

But if the camera manufacturer has created better color-rendering that is not supported by DNG Profiles, then they also need to create native raws that have hints about that different color rendering.

Why should the camera manufacturer do double work just to make life easier for Adobe users?

Camera manufacturers that produce DNGs typically don't have good software or don't have any software and are expecting their users to use Adobe software for a reasonable raw conversion experience.

My S6 phone doesn't have any raw processing software.  Leica cameras come bundled with Lightroom.  Some camera backs produce DNGs that aren't even compatible with Adobe software so are basically using the DNG specification to keep from having to design their own "raw format" but aren't sophisticated enough to actually make things work with outside software.

[TheDigitalDog]

ssprengel wrote:

The argument is that camera manufacturers should produce DNGs with already-embedded DNG Profiles so Adobe can support the raws from day one and we don't have to wait for an Adobe release cycle to finish to get raw support for a new camera, right?

Not at all. This has absolutely nothing to do with DNG camera profiles. It has everything to do with creating an in-camera raw file in an openly documented format that can be accessible the day a camera ships. JUST like the JPEG!

As John writes above, it is about the consumer, customer. Not Adobe. Or any of the 3rd party software vendors who create raw converters. It's OUR data. We should have access to it fully, the day a camera ships. JUST like the JPEG.

[ssprengel]

A DNG is worthless without a DNG Profile, right?

[TheDigitalDog]

A DNG is worthless without a DNG Profile, right?

A DNG does not require a DNG profile so wrong! DNG is just a container for, in this case, raw data that is now no longer proprietary.

[ssprengel]

But a DNG without a DNG Profile is worthless for Adobe software so why would a camera manufacturer create a DNG to be helpful to Adobe users but have that DNG also be worthless for Adobe users because of the lack of embedded profile.  Until someone creates a DNG Profile and either packages it with the DNG, itself, or ships that profile with Adobe software the DNG is worthless, right? 

[TheDigitalDog]

ssprengel wrote:

But a DNG without a DNG Profile is worthless for Adobe software so why would a camera manufacturer create a DNG to be helpful to Adobe users but have that DNG also be worthless for Adobe users because of the lack of embedded profile. Until someone creates a DNG Profile and either packages it with the DNG, itself, or ships that profile with Adobe software the DNG is worthless, right?

WRONG.

Again, there's no requirement that a DNG be matted to a DNG camera profile per se. I have several raw converters that work with a DNG and can use a DNG profile or an ICC profile; doesn't matter a lick. When I convert my proprietary raws to DNG, there's no profile. It's a DNG with the data inside.

DNG as a format predates DNG camera profiles.

1.0.0.0, published September, 2004

1.2.0.0, published May 2008 (profiles introduced).

It introduced many new features, especially several new options for color specification under the general heading of "Camera Profiles".

See: A brief history of DNG

There ARE cameras that produce a DNG natively:

Casio supports DNG in their Exilim PRO EX-F1 and Exilim EX-FH25.

DxO supports DNG in their DxO ONE camera (introduced 2015).

Leica's Digital Modul R for the Leica R8 or Leica R9 and the Leica M8 or Leica M9 natively support the DNG format.

MegaVision E Series Monochrome back.

High-end Nokia (now Microsoft) Lumia smartphones like Nokia Lumia Icon, 930, 950, 1020 and 1520, were the first smartphone cameras to support DNG files.

Panoscan MK-3 digital panoramic camera.

Pentax supports DNG in their 645D, K10D, K20D, K200D, K2000, K-7, K-x, K-r, K-5, K-30, K-5II(s), K-50, K-500, K-3 and K-3II DSLR cameras; alongside the K-01, Q, Q10 and Q7 mirrorless cameras.

Ricoh supports DNG in the Ricoh Digital GR, considered a professional compact, and the Ricoh Caplio GX.

Ricoh GXR mirrorless interchangeable lens camera unit use also DNG.[51]

Samsung supports DNG in their Pro815 "prosumer" camera and GX-10 and GX-20 DSLR cameras. Samsungs high-end smartphones like the Galaxy S6 also uses DNG.

Sea&Sea DX‐1G underwater camera.

Seitz Roundshot D3 digital back, used in cameras such as the 6×17.[52]

Silicon Imaging Silicon Imaging Digital Cinema SI-1920HDVR.

Sinar now uses DNG as the raw file standard for their eMotion series of digital backs.

See: Cameras that write DNG