DPReview news: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10032 ... update.asp

Please note the support for tethered shooting with a select number of Nikon and Canon cameras here. No support for Sony A850/900 even although I understand tethered shooting is possible with these cameras. Adobe bias because not enough Sony users present to make the effort worthwhile?

We have had the announcement up from 00.01 on the day of release (should have been 00.80 hrs but Adobe failed to get back to me stating the time for the embargo).

It is possible that Sony simply does not release the SDK for tethered operation, as they provide the utility free themselves for both Mac and PC. No bias, just not being provided with the correct resources.

David

Why are the RawTherapee high-ISO conversions almost infinitely better than any version of any Adobe product?!

I've been playing about with LR3 and I'm pretty impressed, ISO 1600-3200 on the 5d is impressive in raw. I was not happy with previous versions, poor at removing colour..and a built in NR that you could not bypass. However they look to have addressed these issues.

I read on the Adobe forums that they have no bias towards Sony but they cannot provide tethered support if the maker does not release the code to them. So basically it's a problem Sony's end.

I've been playing around with it too and the high-ISO conversions from my Alpha 350 don't look any better than the Beta1 ones, which are just as grainy as previous Adobe product conversions.

Raw Therapee just rocks its world, IMO, for high-ISO work. . .

For some reason I'm not getting great results from A200 raw conversions either, but I am with the MRW ones. Must be something wrong under the hood I would think. I've seen a few posts from some Canon users saying they are getting seriously noisy shots aka really OTT. Some A200 ones are like that..but not in Raw Threrapee. The result sometimes looks like mega noise with tons or sharpening..and at times the luminance control has no effect either.

I'd say a bug or something least I hope so

Take a look at this:

http://www.dphotoexpert.com/2010/03/26/ ... underkind/

Sorry but Canon results with Beta 2, versus ACR, are a total transformation at high ISO. I do not see the same big difference with Sony files but they are still improved a bit. I will be doing a few more tests before posting anything photoclubalpha.

David

I'm seeing some odd things on "some" A200 raw files. But all the MRW ones are significantly better.
Not sure it's just settings either..for some reason sometimes a file appears ultra noisy.

Really impressed with the results I am getting. This is now my favourite RAW-developer. One thing that bothered me about DXO and what kept me from buying it was that it didnt get rid of the colour spots.. something LR3B2 has no problems with. So basically DXO required two passes of NR, one in DXO itself and then another in PhotoShop with NoiseNinja. Thats how I did it anyway.

I hope DXO can step up, or maybe they already have? I havent been keeping up on the DXO front lately.

I wonder if its my inborn laziness of using software. I have been using LR3 ever since its release...and looking back, I barely used LR1 purchased. I wonder the newer LR2.7 will be close to that of LR3

I doubt it, as it will interfere with the non-beta LR3 sales.