OM system's new body OM-1 support

Also. There’s nothing worse than software be released before it is ready, just because the person holding the purse strings says you must release it.

Prem

3 Likes

I got my camera (from B&H) on Thursday. There was a label on the box saying it was built on February 24, 2022 - that was the day I ordered! It must have been a slow ship to the US.

I have done some shooting and like the results (I got one “corrupted” orf file, but everything else was fine). I can look at the raws in Fast Raw Viewer or the OM Workspace (which supports some editing). Most of the time I am happy with the jpegs, which seem to have improved over the E-M5III I had been using. I find the front and rear “dials” harder to use than the dials on the M5III but I can get used to that. The camera handles better than the M5III - I like the larger grip. My one complaint is that the histogram is in the upper left of the viewfinder and hard to see with bright subjects. I got the M5III for the in-camera focus stacking (which the OM-1 supports) - and has a lot more computational photography features. I tried the ND filer option but hadn’t read the manual carefully enough - so the results were not great. DxO should have support soon - I found that Deep Prime and Smart Lighting really helped the M5III raw images,

Aperture worked this way: you could convert your raw files to DNGs and get basic support right away. Then when Apple released optimized support a few weeks or months after the first cameras shipped, you’d get minor changes to the rendering of the images you’d already selected, rated, cropped, adjusted, etc. Really ideal from the point of view of the user.

@mwsilvers No, I don’t think or believe so, really. DxO just reacts very slowly to markets and it’s just my personal problem that I don’t like to be without support from DxO while other companies have their not so good software up to date. There may be thousands of cutomers who don’t care. I do.

@Prem I agree

Hi Mark,

I’m not sure what rationale DXO has for the delay. But yes, Marie made it clear that they do hold back implementation of new camera support:

I’m disappointed by this and have gone back to using LR with my images. I’ve now processed almost 2k OM-1 images in LR in the past month and will likely never use PhotoLab on those I have already distributed or printed. In any case, I’m happy with the results I’m getting.

I expect other RAW processors (i.e. other than LR and C-1) will also soon support the OM-1 because Alex Tutubalin who maintains the widely-used LibRaw database has just integrated a patch to include OM-1 support. (New camera support | LibRaw).

Peter

4 Likes

We all care and we know DxO will eventually support new hardware despite delays. Yes, it can be a bit frustrating, but most of us just don’t waste our time complaining about it.

Mark

1 Like

They do not hold back on camera support, they include new cameras and lenses in planned releases like everyone else. Again, it is not logical to assume they purposely hold things back just because it takes them longer to develop profiles and implement them.

Mark

1 Like

@mwsilvers [quote=“mwsilvers, post:107, topic:24866”]
but most of us just don’t waste our time complaining about it.
[/quote] Maybe you should? If no one tells DxO that their workflow is a bit on the slow side no progress will happen. This is my last comment. Have a pleasant spring time. I hope you will get nice shots.

3 Likes

DxO has been told repeatedly, but to get faster progress, they’d probably need to add testing capabilities (technical equipment, floor space and employees), which will simply raise the price of DxO software and lower the number of users… I’m quite sure that Adobe has a lot more people who work for Photoshop and Lightroom than DxO has in total.

One problem that had been raised is the need to add profiles to the core program creates many of these problems. The data exists and it’s other problems blocking it, a problem that only exists due to this way of adding it.

2 Likes

Agreed, it is this policy decision to delay release of the profiles that are ready to some arbitrary date which is baffling.

3 Likes

Yes, I confused ON1 with Capture One. Capture One does support OM-1, as well as Adobe RAW.

Hi Laurence! I suppose you have already thought of this but could you go back to Lightroom and Topaz denoise (if you have it?)

jerry

Hi Jerry

Thanks for the thought but my version of LR is ancient, v 6.12 Perpetual License so it would not recognise such modern raw files :wink:

As for Topaz I do have the full suite to be used as & when required :slight_smile:

Of note, I have the latest version of OM Workspace installed including their AI NR but for reasons still unclear it is greyed out on my PC :frowning: Oh, I read somewhere that their AI NR is actually Topaz software.

For now I just hope that @Marie and her colleagues will be able to release the OM-1 profile(s) as soon as possible :smiley:

PS so far I have been pleased with the out of camera jpegs but really want to see the sort of benefits I saw with the Mk2, Mk3 and M1X raws when using Prime NR.

Yes, I see what you mean. I was getting my knickers in a twist… :upside_down_face:

Hello everyone, sorry I don’t speak English and I use a translator… for those who want to process Raw OM-1 files with something other than Olympus Workspace… Capture One made the update… :slight_smile: I wish you a nice day. Cordially

1 Like

PL 5.2 contains support for a lot of new cameras but no OM-1 :disappointed:

1 Like

@u-gruetter yes, I see various new additions… = (?) what @Marie said earlier that they batch them together before release. OM-1 soon I hope, please :smiley:

A release of version 5.2 without OM-1 support can hardly be surpassed in ignorance. 5.1 was released 4 months ago. We should now seriously wait until August? I can only hope that Topaz continues to do a good job, then I can finally bury dxo.

1 Like