5D Mark III photos processed in 4.1 RC2 look COMPLETELY different in 4.1 final

Processed in 4.1 RC2:
Processed in 4.1 Final:
Settings:
Anyone got an idea what might have happened between these versions to cause this? I saw someone else in the Fred Miranda forms complaining about the exact same thing here.

Could be the same problem as in the other thread http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1016525?tstart=0 but only "in reverse". I noticed that like in the other thread, you used very strong clarity. Strong clarity in pictures with very dark areas (I assume your picture is a crop from a larger area?) had some issues in 4.1 RC2, which have been fixed in 4.1 final. So it is possible that clarity behaves totally different in RC2 and final for such pictures.
Interestingly, your picture becomes much darker in 4.1 final, while in the other thread, it becomes much brighter. Maybe it has something to do with the different highlights/shadows/whites/blacks values.
P.S. I expect that Adobe will say that this is "OK" because one should not rely on a release candidate. But I understand that this can be a real problem though - because a lot of people used the RCs because of the many issues with 4.0.

Similar Messages

Canon 5D Mark III - Raw Processing

For some reason, I have very limited RAW. I just get Boost and Hue Boost available. Is it a camera setting or an Aperture setting?

You mean like this? These controls are not available for all raw formats: See the Aperture User Manual Working with the RAW Fine Tuning Controls:
Note: Some controls in the RAW Fine Tuning area of the Adjustments inspector and the Adjustments pane of the Inspector HUD appear dimmed if these settings are not available for use with images derived from a particular RAW file format. Some camera models can create multiple types of RAW file formats, and different controls may be available for each of these RAW file formats.
Regards
Léonie

5D mark III lens correction problem with dark shots

Just found a new irritating problem with 5D mark III and Lightroom 4 (currently on 4.2). I shot quite a few shots in the dark over the weekend using high ISO (6400-16000), with EF 24-70 f/2.8L. If I enable the lens profile correction on the dark shots, the corners of the images all develop incredibly strong purple haze that renders the image unusable. Not enabling the correction allows me to use the images just fine. Also images that were shot with similar settings but were shot inside, with more light, don't have the purple fringing issue. Makes me wonder if this is some incompatibility between Canon's high iso noise reduction system and Lightroom's RAW processing when it does lens corrections.
Anyone else seen this?

Sulka Haro wrote:
Replicated the shot under a heavy blanket -> yes, the exposure looks the same. Whatever is causing the corner to be noisier than rest of the exposure doesn't seem to be caused by light.
At that very high of ISO you are actually seeing small differences in the sensor chip temperature due to heat from the electronics in the camera. The small amount of increased noise you're seeing in the corner at ISO 25600 is insignificant.
Sulka Haro wrote:
Interestingly enabling long exposure compensation doesn't seem to do very much to really improve the shots at these sensitivities. When enabled, the exaggerated corner noise does disappear, but also it looks like some areas in the middle of the exposure become more noisy with non-uniform noise blotches appearing instead of fairly uniform slightly higher noise pattern.
I haven't needed to use Long Exposure Noise Reduction with my 5D MKII, so have no firsthand experience. My guess is that at very high ISO settings (above 6400) a lot of what your are seeing is random noise or "shot noise," which changes from frame to frame. This causes the dark frame subtraction to "fail" in the way you are seeing. Just a guess.
There is an excellent 5D MKIII review that compares noise reduction with several other high-end camera models. The reviewer also states,
"The 5D Mark III's ISO 51200 and 102400 remain a complete mess even with strong noise reduction applied - You have to be desperate to use these settings. ISO 12800 and 25600 remain very marginal for my uses. I always shoot in the lowest standard ISO setting that will allow me to get my desired shot, but begin to cringe when settings above ISO 3200 must be employed. Your standards and applications may be different."

When moving from LR4 to PSE9 editor my photos look very different

I've recently bought lightroom 4 which I'm using with elements 9 and I know that lightroom 4 will slightly alter the look of photos previously edited in elements which hasn't been a problem so far. My problem is that photos edited in lightroom/develop look completely different - unusably diiferent in fact - when I move them to elements/editor from lightroom. What am I doing wrong? The photos were moved using 'Ctrl +E' or 'Photo/Edit In/Edit in Adobe Photoshop Elements'.
I decided to check the photos that had been edited in lightroom by going into elements/editor via via elements/organiser and they were fine - only slightly different - but then when I opened the lightroom/library again I got a warning exclamation mark 'Error writing metadata' (not the warning exclamation mark 'Update to current Process (2012)' that you get in lightroom develop).
Am I missing something in the 'Edit Photo With Adobe Photoshop Elements' dialog box?
man thanks in advance for any help.

Thanks for the replies - I think I've got it working now
My photos are all RAW but the problem also occurred with jpg and psd files
I've worked my way through all the options in the 'edit in adobe photoshop elements' dialog box and this is what happens when the photos are sent from lightroom to elements:
file format:
I'm using psd - but the same problem occurred with tiffs and jpgs
colour space:
ProPhoto RGB - the colour changes significantly when the photo opens in elements
Adobe RGB (1998) - the colour changes slightly when opened in elements
sRGB - the colour stays virtually the same
bit depth:
16 bit - I can't add layers to the file that opens in elements
8 bit - seems to work fine in elements
I am therefore sending photos to elements as sRGB 8 bit which seems to be working fine - hopefully there's no reason why I shouldn't be using these settings!

RAW Processing problems with Canon 5D Mark iii

I am having problems with the RAW files coming from my new 5D Mark iii in Aperture. I have the latest version of Aperture (and update) installed. Selecting a picture style on the 5D doesn't seem to yield any results because when I import the photo into aperture all the images go very dark. I have to pull the exposure levels up all the way to get a decent exposure. The histogram on my camera looks perfect but when imported into Aperutre the histogram changes. I have my custom picture style set to give me a very flat image (contrast off, sharpening off, saturation -2, color tone 0). The images looks very flat and perfect in my LCD but once imported into aperture the RAW processing makes it very dark. I even tried shooting the exact photo in three completely different picture styles but they all look identical once they are in aperture. What's going on??

Here is a side by side comparison of a RAW image in the latest versions of Aperture and Lightroom. I have never had these issues with the 5D Mark II only the Mark III. As you can see Lightroom produces a nice flat image while Aperture is under-exposing the image. Any thoughts? I really want to continue to use Aperture but with my recent camera upgrade to the Mark III I don't see how this is possible. Anyones help would be much appreciated.

I have CS4 and was using a Canon 5D Mark II with raw photos. I just got the Canon 5D Mark III and CS4 now can not read the raw photos. It has raw version 5.7.0.213 and CS4 version 11.0.2. Can anyone help?

I have CS4 and was using a Canon 5D Mark II with raw photos. I just got the Canon 5D Mark III and CS4 now can not read the raw photos. It has raw version 5.7.0.213 and CS4 version 11.0.2. Can anyone help?

Camera Raw plug-in | Supported cameras
Camera Raw-compatible Adobe applications
EOS 5D Mark II
CR2
5.2
2.2
EOS 5D Mark III
CR2
6.7, 7.1
4.1
Photoshop CS6
7.0
8.3
Photoshop CS5
6.0
6.7
Photoshop CS4
5.0
5.7
The 5D Mark II was first supported by Camera Raw 5.2 which is compatible with CS4+.
The 5D Mark III was first supported by Camera Raw 6.7 and 7.1 which is only compatible with CS5 and CS6.
So the CS4 will never be able to open Raw 5D Mark III files.
Why doesn’t my version of Photoshop or Lightroom support my camera?
Choices:
Purchase CS6 full version (CS4 is too old to qualify for an upgrade)
Join the Cloud
Free option: download the free Adobe DNG converter, convert all 5D Mark III Raw files to DNG format then edit the DNGs in CS4
Photoshop Help | Digital Negative (DNG)

Cannot open photos from Canon EOS D5 Mark III with photoshop elements 10. Could not download patch

I have just updated my camera to a Canon D5 Mark III only to find that my version of Photoshop elements 10 will not open these files (RAW). I have tried to download a patch, but it said the patch was not applicable to me. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Download update from one of these links:
Windows:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5383
Mac
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5382

Canon 5D Mark III - underexposes

Hello,
I've noticed that my Canon 5D Mark III underexposes somewhere between 2/3 stops and one stop.
I've taken a test photo and I've attached the histogram and the exif. I photographed a white sheet of paper
Is this behaviour normal or is there a problem in the camera's metering system?
Thanks,
Catalin
Histogram
Test photo
I have also attached the full exif:
[Image]
Make = Canon
Model = Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
Date Time = 2014-01-20 21:16:29
Artist = Catalin Fuioaga
YCbCr Positioning = co-sited
Copyright = Catalin Fuioaga
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 360
GPS Info IFD Pointer = Offset: 9554
[Camera]
Exposure Time = 1/200"
F Number = F5.6
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 2000
8830 = 2
8832 = 2000
Exif Version = 30, 32, 33, 30
Date Time Original = 2014-01-20 21:16:29
Date Time Digitized = 2014-01-20 21:16:29
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = 7.63 TV
Aperture Value = 5 AV
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 105mm
Maker Note = 8152 Byte
User Comment =
Subsec Time =
Subsec Time Original =
Subsec Time Digitized =
Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
Color Space = sRGB
Exif Image Width = 2880
Exif Image Height = 1920
Interoperability IFD Pointer = Offset: 9326
Focal Plane X Resolution = 1971.253
Focal Plane Y Resolution = 1975.309
Focal Plane Resolution Unit = inch
Custom Rendered = Normal process
Exposure Mode = Auto exposure
White Balance = Manual white balance
Scene Capture Type = Normal
A430 =
A431 = 073024017512
A432 = 24/1, 105/1, 0/1, 0/1
A434 = EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM
A435 = 00001bcf3a
[GPS]
GPS Version ID = 2, 3, 0, 0
[Interoperability]
Interoperability Index = ExifR98
Interoperability Version = Version 1.0
[Thumbnail Info]
Compression = JPEG Compressed (Thumbnail)
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
JPEG Interchange Format = Offset: 11444
JPEG Interchange Format Length = Length: 3320
[Thumbnail]
Thumbnail = 160 x 120

"....Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 105mm..."
You are in partial metering mode, which is fine if you are shooting a plain white piece of paper. However most of the time I'd recommend either Evaluative instead, or if you are more accustomed to it, Center Weighted. Or use Spot Metering in some cases. Partial is sort of like a "Large Spot Metering" mode.
Evaluative has the advantage of putting extra emphasis on the area right around the active AF point, i.e. presumably around your subject. The rest of the image area is considered, too, but more weight is given to the active AF point. Center Weighted metering doesn't do this (it's sort of an "old fashioned" method of metering, but some people are accustomed to it from using older cameras.)
Do a Google search on Expose To The Right (ETTR), which is a common technique used by Canon shooters. Like hsbn mentioned above, I think Canon is a bit conservative about their metering, erring a little toward underexposure to "protect the highlights". This was a good practice back in the days of slide film, but is just the opposite of what you want to do with digital. To minimize noise in images, it's better to slightly overexpose and pull the exposure back down a little in post processing. Not a lot... just +1/3 to +2/3 stop. Here is a link to one of the better descriptions of ETTR I've seen. There are other tutorials and discussions about it other places online, so do a search if you wish.
Oh, and there was an exposure issue with the 5D III early on. The problem was a light leak near the top LCD, that would cause underexposure from additional light reaching the metering array in the viewfinder. Canon did a recall made some changes to fix the problem. Yours would have to be a very early production camera that was never fixed under the recall, to have this problem. The problem would vary, depending upon how strong light was striking the top of the camera whle shooting. Outside on a bright sunny day would cause more error than shooting indoors in low light.
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM

Canon 5D Mark iii RAW images coming in muted

I am shooting on a 5D Mark iii but the images are coming off the camera and into Lightroom 4 muted. I shoot in RAW and when I load them into Lightroom they initially look good but then after it looks like they process for a second they all become muted. Any suggestions? Is this a software thing? I know that images right off the camera for this equipment should be much better.

That's normal Lightroom and third party software behavior. Basically, what you see in the back of your camera LCD screen and when first imported into LR is the embeded JPG of your RAW file. It's a embeded JPG with all the effects, saturation, sharpeness, and many other settings; thus it looks "good". Then LR will give you the "real" version of of your RAW image in which a little lack of contrast, a little wash out, dull and muted. However, if you know how to use LR, you can process your RAW to look even better than the JPG.
Some photographer will disable most of the in-camera setting, lower contrast and saturation to make the JPG photo as close to the RAW as possible in oder to maximize the camera dynamic range.
Weekend Travelers Blog | Eastern Sierra Fall Color Guide

High Noise in 5D Mark III

Hey Everyone,
I'm getting a random issue with my 5D Mark III. I usually shoot in AV mode, RAW at ISO 100. I don't like to increase my ISO because I want to avoid high noise and plus I'm shooting in HDR. In dim lighting conditions when I have to lengthen the shutter speed and then view/process the dng images in Camera Raw, I get a mixed bag of results. Some images at 1/8 sec or 2 sec have the grainiest noise in the shadows, but then I'll have an image at 10 or 15 seconds and the image is smooth and sharp. I'm at my wit's end.
It also helps to know that I just bought a 16 - 35mm 2.8L lens and it's been working fine up until today when the autofocus went bust. Could it be a body issue or lens issue? I'm driving to Canon repair on Monday morning to drop off both lens and body. Any help or insight will help.

No problem. I'm curious too. I dig a little deeper into your Exif data and look at your processing values:
Tint = "+2"
Exposure = "+3.40"
Shadows = "0"
Brightness = "+71"
Contrast = "+19"
Saturation = "0"
Sharpness = "25"
LuminanceSmoothing = "0"
ColorNoiseReduction = "25"
ChromaticAberrationR = "0"
The exposure was pushed by 3.5 stop, and the brightness +71. That's a huge value. Yet Noise Reduction is set at ZERO. Thus, the result should have a lot of noise and banding noise as seen in your photo. I don't think there is something wrong with your camera. You may have development PRESET turn on by default.
Weekend Travelers Blog | Eastern Sierra Fall Color Guide

5d Mark III - Metering Underexposed

So first off, I apologize as I think I've seen a similar thread here but I can't find it anymore!
I purchased a 5d Mark III as an upgrade from my 7d a couple of weeks ago and, although I am happy, there is one main issue that is bothering me.
When I meter a "perfect" exposure, the camera is delivering about a full stop UNDER that.
My normal settings are;
Shoot in M
Center focus point
Spot metering
AI Servo.
I generally shoot 2/3 over anyway, and find that I'm needing to now shoot at least 1 2/3 over to get the same result as my 7d. In addition to that, I'm getting a noticeable vignette in lower (but even/consistent) light situations.
I have tried all the different metering options, including variations on the focus points. I have done a full factory reset and the issue is consistent across all my lenses.
Any ideas?

rjs1981 wrote:
Thanks for the response!
I just did some additional test shots to answer your question more accurately.
I shot a grey card under tungsten light at ISO 4000, 2.8, with a 50mm 1.4. I shot the same image with both cameras set up exactly the same, and the 5dm3 is, in that shot, roughly 2/3rds underexposed.
I'm really baffled.
ps. I notice you use the 60Da. Never spoken to an owner. Do you love it? I am starting to really enjoy astrophotography so that unit is interesting to me. Its pretty much geared towards that one purpose yes?
You don't, by chance, happen to own an incident light meter to determine which camera is actually telling the truth do you?
As you are shooting in "M" according to your post, the exposure compensation is ignored (it's used to P, Tv, or Av modes... but not M). It's the only setting I can think of that would cause the camera to createa a different exposure.
So barring that, it seems one of your cameras is having a problem. I once had someone tell me that their Canon 5D II and Canon 5D III were giving different exposures... but I own two Sekonic incident light meters and three Canon bodies.... so I tested the light with both Sekonic incident meters, then tested my bodies pointed at the same gray card and all agreed on the exposure.
But it sounds like you've done some reasonable testing to make sure the exposures *should* be the same... and yet they aren't. It seems reasonable that it points to a problem with one of the cameras. I can tell you that my own 5D III body (and I also own a 5D II body) are metering accurately so I don't think there's a 5D III metering problem per se, but you may have a individual body with an issue.
As for the 60Da... I'm quite pleased with this camera. So here's the story.
I belong to a fairly large astronomy club in the area. I'm going to guess there are about 160 members. Of those... probably about 20% are fairly seriosu imagers. A few owned the old Canon 20Da (the first astro camera Canon sold). Many members own modified and unmodified Rebel bodies as well. But when Canon released the 60Da, several members took notice and bought one.
So one day I'm at a friend's house and the previous night another club member was at his private observatory with his 60Da and took a photo of the whirlpool galaxy (M51). I was looking at the EXIF data for the exposure. At the time I did not own a 60Da... but I did have the 5D II (I did not yet have the 5D III). I took the _same_ exposure (ISO & shutter time) with my camera using the identical scope in the same observatory for the same object.
At the end of my exposure, I got almost nothing.
I doubled the exposure.
I could see a hint of the galaxy... but mostly nothing.
I tripled the exposure.
Now I was starting to see the hints of the galaxy... but nowhere even remotely close to what the 60Da had captured. (and I'm using a 5D II which blows the doors off the 60D when it comes to ISO performance.)
The following day I ordered a 60Da.
Human eyes are a bit wonky... we are "most" sensitive to greens because they are pretty much smack in the middle of the visible spectrum (which runs from 400nm to 700nm wavelengths). We are less sensitive to blues and reds. Traditional cameras compensate for this in several ways... rather than "truthfully" collecting light, the Bayer mask is already stacked to double the green reception vs. the blue or red. But even the filters inside the camera have a slow ramp up to block the IR. The "IR" filter actually starts to block the spectrum gently even as low as around 500-550nm. It ramps up gradually as it approaches 700nm.
90% of the universe is composed of hydrogen atoms. Atoms give off light at very specific wavelengths as their electrons jump from one shell to anotther. For hydrogen, it's the Ballmer series where the dominant light is at 656.28nm (Hydrogen alpha wavelength), then hydrogen beta, gamma and delta... but those are cyan, and a few shades of violet and safely sharter wavelengths then what a terrerestrial camera IR filter blocks. It's mostly the Ha which is a problem.
The 60Da is at least 3x more sensitive to Ha (and possibly closer to 5x more sensitive) as compared to a non-modified terrestrial DSLR cameras. The result is that not only do you get more reds (the Ha is a fire-engine red color), but overall you get much shorter exposure times to capture the same image.
There are several companies which make high end dedicated astro-imaging CCD cameras... SBIG (Santa Barbara Imaging Group), Finger Lakes, Apogee, etc. These are typically monochrome cameras with peltier cooling systems that can chill the CCD considerable colder than ambient temps (becaue there's a relationship between physical temps and noise), have incredible well-depth (basically a measure of dynamic range), and fitler wheels. Since a monochrome camera does not have a bayer mask, the cameras are much more sensitive to light -- but they can't see "color". To compensate, a filter wheel rotates in a "red" filter, "blue" filter, "green" filter, and usually a "luminance" filter. They may also use special narrowband filters to pick up Ha, Hb, O III, etc. They take numerous images in each part of the spectrum and them merge them to create color image. These cameras tend to be expensive. I sure would love to own an SBIG STX-16803 and filter wheel but it's the better part of $12,000!
The 60Da has been working quite nicely so far - a good workhorse and I've put it to use numerous times capturing images for hours on end.
Here's an image taken by my 60Da. This is based on 16 combined "light" images of 4 minutes each of the Dumbbell nebula (Messier 27). I also took 8 "darks". What I did _not_ take were any "flats" or "bias" images and it shows. You can see the obvious vignetting caused by the telescope ("flat" images would have allowed my software to compensate for this.) The red colors you see in this image are Hydrogen atoms giving off light in Hydrogen alpha wavelength. Without a modified camera, you get red... but not nearly as much.
BTW... in fairness I should mention that I'm getting pretty good at image "acquisition" in astrophotography... but I have a lot of learning to do when it comes to image "processing" for astrophotography. Most of my club members blow me away (even using the same camera that I use) but I am learning quickly.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

How to import Raw files from the Canon 5D Mark III into PSE12? [was: cr2]

I have Photoshop Elements 12 and I can't import Canon 5D Mark III CR2 files.

Not sure what you mean by view the photos? Are they showing in the camera raw dialog when you choose a CR2 file from the menu in expert mode:
File >> Open
What computer and operating system are you using?
Can you try shooting a couple of new CR2 files and then put them into a folder on your hard drive rather than the external drive. Can you import from that location using the Organizer menu:
File >> Get photos & Videos >> From Files & Folders

Camera Raw Camera Calibration Tab and 5D Mark III

I don't think that many people do this in camera raw, but it was kind of an important step in my workflow with the Canon 7D before and is just not working the same way with the 5D Mark III now.
In the Camera Calibration Tab (Third from the right side) I always changed Camera Profile from Adobe Standard to Camera Standard or Camera Portrait. This step made the image automatically look better, contrast was better and the highlights look a lot better that way. Of course the "Camera Portrait" option makes the image a lil bit red, like the Picture Style in the camera does. But it was an easy adjustment with the Hue Slider of the Red Channel. Like I already said - really great improvement of the image on the 7D raw files, beautiful highlights, shiny, contrasty and so on... Same stuff worked with 5D Mark II perfectly, too.
Now with the 5D Mark III the "Camera Portrait" option, my favourite one, gets me pretty bad results. The Image is too strong oversaturated, too much red in the skintones and in the shadows, too! Shadow contrast gets worse and I can't control this settings the way I did before with the hue/saturation sliders of the channels. It's too extreme red or it's too yellow, but not something right between this extremes. And the highlights get some green tint, so it's no real optimization of the image overall quality at all, like with the other cameras. I don't know if the support of the 5DMIII is still not up to date... It is not only my camera, I also have asked other photographers with a 5D Mark III and they have the same issues changing the camera profile. Lightroom has exactly the same effect... It would be great, if an Adobe Employee can forward this issues, so that it gets tweaked with the further updates and 5dm3 will work the same way in camera raw like mark 2 or 7D.
Sorry for my bad english

Yes, white balance is another possible reason for mismatch
These rules apply:
- if you use white balance "as shot", then white balance in ACR will be the same as from camera or DPP (in a sense - what is white color in ACR will be white in DPP also). However, color temperature/tint shown in ACR will be probably slightly different than value recorded in exif of jpeg or raw file. It's because in that case, whitebalancing is performed using some metadata in raw file by both ACR or DPP, while temperature displayed in ACR is calculated from that metadat using color matrices in selected profile, according to a formula from one book (as documented in dng sdk), while DPP is probably using some other formula or slightly different color matrices
- the same will happen if you use WB dropper on exactly the same position in the photo by both ACR and DPP
- but, if you use the same temperature preset in ACR and DPP (for instance 5200 K), then white in ACR and DPP will probably be a bit different, because whitebalancing is performed in oposite direction now (ACR calculates RGB multipliers from that temperature and using color matrices in the profile)
I hope this was understandable, although it's a bit complicated

Canon 5D Mark III -- Lightroom 4.1 - Edit in Adobe Photoshop not working

Hello, I appoligize if this has already been answered, I couldn't find a solution. I have the new Canon 5D Mark III, and I updated to Lightroom 4.1 so I can import the 5D3 RAW image into LR. But when I go to "Edit in Adobe Photoshop CS5" or "Merge to HDR Pro in PhotoShop", PS starts, but it doesn't load any files. I was assuming this is because the PS Camera Raw is out of date. So I downloaded the cameraraw6-7_r1_win_030612, but when try to install it, I get "Some updates failed to install. Update is not applicable".
What am I missing here?

Hi Tim,
Please refer to the link below which says:
Set the camera to Print/PTP. Images don't import when the camera is set to PC Connect.
Source:http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/photos-dont-import-canon-5d.html
Thanks
Mandhir

Lightroom 4.2 will not import from Canon 5D Mark III

When trying to import photos from my Canon 5D Mark III into Lightroom 4.2, the import usually freezes up at some arbitrary point. It will either crash lightroom altogether, or it will have a message saying "could not import all files, files could not be read." (something along those lines.)
I am using a 1 year old iMac with a 1 TB HD. I import directly onto that hard drive. Lightroom has never had an issue importing. My previous camera was a Canon EOS T1i. The problems started when I purchased my 5D Mark III. Images from my T1i, in fact, still import fine with no issues. I am running OS X version 10.7.5. My compact flash card is brand new, a Lexar 1000x. This question/issue may have been answered elsewhere, and if so I apologize, for i could not locate it. I have seen some suggesting it may be a hard drive issue, however, the evidence points to the 5D Mark III not playing well with LR 4.2. (T1i images still import fine.)

Here's a post concerning 5D MKIII file corruption, which may also be due to a camera malfucntion. Yes, there could be something wrong with your camera.
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4882852#4882852
SUGGESTION:
Install the Canon EOS Utility that came with your camera. Also check for an updated version of the EOS Utility after the install. You need to install from the CD first before you can install any updates.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Driver sAndSoftware
If the EOS Utility can download the CR2 files to your hard drive, then your camera is not defective.

5D Mark III photos processed in 4.1 RC2 look COMPLETELY different in 4.1 final

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for