< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Adobe Lightroom 5 released with Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G lens support

Adobe Lightroom 5

Adobe officially released Lightroom 5 with support for the new 80-400mm Nikkor lens, Coolpix A and P330 cameras. The upgrade prices starts from $79. A full list of supported new lenses and cameras can be found here. Adobe published also a set of FAQ that will help you migrate to LR5. If you run into any problems, some solutions are listed here. More on the new features of LR5 can be found on PhotoRumors.

Adobe Camera Raw 8.1 and DNG Converter 8.1 were also released and can be downloaded from this page.

The new Photoshop CC will be officially released on June 17th.

Retailers will start shipping Lightroom 5 on Tuesday, June 11th, 2013.

This entry was posted in Nikon Software and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • HotDuckZ

    I just brought Lr 4 two mouth ago…

    • Fry

      you ate it ?

  • Sleeper

    Yeah, cos obviously none of people using LR4 would use 80-400mm AF-S lens.

    • Gab

      You can download the lens profile for LR4, it’s not kind of a big deal.

    • AR22

      and the old 80-400 remains unsupported?

  • FDF

    So.. do we buy it as the last version that isn’t subscription-based only or do we start looking for an alternative before it goes subscription-based only?

    • Jorge

      If it goes sub only, I’m going back to Aperture. Unfortunately I may have to re-buy (?) my Nik plugin’s
      Thatt would suck, but screw Adobe

      • hy

        Photomechanic went subscription only and I refuse to upgrade. If Adobe does this then I will be annoyed but will probably just play the game. I guess in the end if it costs the same over x years then what does it really matter?… but I don’t want another monthly expense to track/have.

        • nobody cares

          Huh? I don’t see anything on their site that indicates that you have to pay them every year. Got a link?

          • Calibrator

            You *don’t* have to, *yet*.

            hy wrote “If Adobe does this” – read his posting again with the keyword “if” in mind!

            • Nobody Cares

              Jorge said that photo mechanic is now subscription only and I see nothing on their site that indicates its subscription only.

            • Calibrator

              Sorry – I thought you were referring to LR!

  • neversink

    I have stopped using Aperture and switched to Capture 1 Pro 7. I have the beta Lightroom 5. I originally used PS, but find it too bloated.

    Each of these programs have their problems. Lightroom 5 has great tools, perhaps some of the best, but Lightroom 5′s raw processing is the noisiest, particularly on higher ISOs than the other two. Capture 1 seems to have the nicest raw processing. Aperture is still the easiest to use and understand out of the box. And the raw processing is good, although some might find that it is flat, which is very easy to remedy. Although Lightroom’s histogram tools are the very advanced, the use of them is counter-intuitive. Histogram manipulation is so much easier in Aperture and C1. C1 could use more dynamic tools, but their raw processing seems to be the cleanest.

    I find myself spending more time in Lightroom adjusting photos than I do in either Ap or C1. And I do not enjoy Lightroom’s interface at all. Further, it’s so much easier to get exif info about the photos in C1 and Aperture than it is in Lightroom. Lightroom is a good program with a lousy interface. The raw processing is also a bit unpredictable.

    Personally, I think Capture One 7.x is the software for me most of the time, although it also is not as user friendly as Aperture. Aperture also has the easiest organizing tools. Unfortunately, Apple has been slow in upgrading Aperture; & LR has leaped in front of them. Where Apple was once at the forefront in challenging Adobe’s PS, it has fallen behind both LR and C1.

    Of course, there’s the old bloated PS standby that is now only available in the cloud that Adobe wants us all to be virtually chained to.

    I know there are people who say to use Nikon’s Capture NX. But it is buggy, slow and often will quit unexpectedly or freeze. And it needs a complete overhaul.

    Curious as to what everyone here uses.

    • pan

      “I know there are people who say to use Nikon’s Capture NX. But it is buggy, slow and often will quit unexpectedly or freeze.”

      You are right, that is why we use Capture NX 2 :)

      • neversink

        You knew what I meant ;–}
        Capture NX2 is slow, buggy and still quits unexpectedly or freezes….

        • pan

          :)

          Whith correct settings rarely.

        • groucher

          Never had a problem with freezes, bugs or speed. NX2 isn’t as pretty as LR but it does a far better job.

        • Jorge

          Nope. Not a problem on my Mac(s)

        • knnn

          Capture NX is good if you want to edit 5 images in a month…..

    • Calibrator

      I use LR4.4 and like it very much but I don’t know if I will upgrade to LR5, yet.

      While the few additions to the development module in LR5 are definitely nice they aren’t a must for me (professionals with a speed optimized workflow will see that differently, but YMMV) and I don’t consider them worth $79.

      Now, will I stay with LR or will I abandon it in the near to mid future?
      Not very likely as my entire photo workflow is now centered around Lightroom.

      The loss of catalog & editing data would definitely be very painful (some applications already try to import Lightroom development settings but they are still far from faithful) but I’m even less comfortable with losing the add-ons I collected with time: Perfect Photo Suite from OnOne, the Complete Nik Collection and Photomatix Pro which I use for 32-bit conversions to work on HDRs directly in LR.
      Not all of those work as stand-alones and they are well integrated into LR (except that they of course do their magic on PSD or TIFF exported files and not on the original RAW files).

      In fact, with those add-ons the whole package is on an entirely different level compared to most other products on the market.

      That’s why I’ll likely shift my limited funds into the direction of smaller companies like OnOne that extend the possibilities of LR more than Adobe does (for the same amount of money on my part).
      True, LR + PPS aren’t equal to the mighty Photoshop and probably never will but for my needs they are a very capable combination and save me a lot of money and I like the idea to support smaller companies for a change.

    • Aldo

      the nikon software renders raw files beautifully. I use LR4 too… it all depends what you wanna do to the image.

      • Waldo

        Too bad you can’t shoot good images….

        • Aldo

          it’s fun having fans =]

        • nobody cares

          That’s not true. There are many pros that shoot JPG. I know some photo journalists that shoot only JPG (on pro bodies). There attitude is I’ll get it right when I shoot it. It’s not how I shoot, but I’m not a pro and I make mistakes which I’d rather fix in LR than in Photoshop (or similar app).

          • Aldo

            good point… it really comes down to what you will do with the image… you can plan a lot of things ahead. Not to brag, but just to illustrate my jpegs come withing 1/3 of a stop of ideal exposure and with the color temp setting and manual adjustments I come very close to true colors at the time of shooting. The adjustments I make in LR are very minor. I shoot raws when I know I will need extreme dynamic range or shooting conditions are not very favorable, in which cases I will need every dime I can get out of the sensor.

    • Jorge

      I use LR 4.4 Works great for me. I’ve also been using Capture NX, and as of 2010 Capture NX2 on my Mac and have never, ever had a hiccup, freeze, or crash. And I started using the original NX in 2008 as it came with my Nikon D300. In ’10 I upgraded in order to be able to open/read my D700 files. I use it sparingly, not every image, but after a while it’s pretty easy and you get some amazing results which are saved as TIFF’s. I use this to process my D800 files that are for distrubution as well. Anything personal, not business, it’s LR all the way

    • kj

      How is photoshop too bloated? For all it is capable of doing it is very clean and customizable. I find it far from bloated personally.

  • Martin

    These indirect links not working for me.

  • RamesesThe2nd

    For me LR4 was a must buy to support D800. I don’t really see a strong reason to upgrade to LR5.

    • Jo

      I use the Adobe DNG converter for my D800 files and use LR3 instead. I like it just fine. So even that wasn’t a “must buy.”

    • Mike

      Considering the new computer I needed and bigger hard drives (not complaining) after getting the D800, a $79 LR upgrade is really no big deal. Considering all the BS Adobe is putting people through with PS CC, $79 upgrade for LR is cheap. I just have to brown bag my lunch for a week and I will have made up the difference + a vente macchiato from Starbucks with the left over. Most of the bitching here is because its Adobe. How many of you were upgrading DSLRs every 2 years?

      • Jorge

        +1
        I’m going to upgrade for various reasons, but the primary one is maybe I can use PS even less than I do now which is mostly for the healing brush

        • k

          This is all great but an $80 healing brush?!…. I am torn between that and the biggest, fanciest steak dinner and beer I can find.

  • Dave

    Possible to download it directly from the Adobe store last night (June 9) – I’m a teacher so was able to get the full version for $79. Some good tools added to the new version.

  • preston

    Really annoying that I was forced to upgrade to version 4 to support my new D600, but they intentionally waited to implement tethering support for the camera till version 5 so that we’ll have to upgrade again to get that feature.

    • j

      Apple does this sort of thing all the time. Sometimes I wonder why we all just don’t use pirated versions. If we are willing to be honest customers then they should go a little more easy on us…

    • irek

      I managed to get D600 tethering in LR4 using this trick:
      http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3373383

    • Anto de Chav

      Try Capture one pro instead..

  • photdog

    Still work with LR 3 latest update. I’m fine with the functions. But being forced to steady uprades to cover camera or lens models really ticks me off cause this is plain abitrary.
    Does someone know a workaround or trick to get LR 3 covering D800/E and D7100?

    • Calibrator

      > Does someone know a workaround or trick to get LR 3 covering D800/E and D7100?

      Convert the NEFs of these bodies with the free Adobe DNG converter into DNG format.
      I don’t know if this supports all functions (like lens correction, for example) but you should be able to import those DNGs into LR3.

  • http://jaysonknight.com/ Jayson Knight

    Really not seeing much of a compelling reason to upgrade from 4.4…any “must have” features for this release?

  • LarryC

    I tried LR5 beta for two weeks and stopped because on my install it was prone to memory leaks (just like LR 4 was when it was in beta) and dragged to a stand still when I made moderate to extensive, but normal for me, use of the brushes. That said, I really liked the oval adjustment brush, the new spot healing brush, and the vertical correction feature, though this was never a “I wish they would add this” feature for me. $80 seems pretty cheap to me for by far the the most used piece of software on my computer. I will clean out the beta and try out the free trial and if I do not experience the memory leak problems, I’ll gladly buy it.

    • Jon McGuffin

      A very reasonable comment LarryC.

  • Jorge

    At least they got rid of that hideous box top with those fugly eyelashes.
    Not that this one is any better, but not as frightening

  • dokjh

    I quite like LR4 and it is the best version I have used. I do not like how Adobe neglects any sort of custom or keyboard shortcuts in general.

    Since they neglect to address this for whatever reason, I have been using RPG keys for a few years and while it solves the shortcut problem, it is very pricey (much more than lightroom itself) and while good still a little clumsy. I wish they would just implement shortcuts! They boast about speed etc and they don’t give us the best time saving feature of all.

    I do not know if I like the thought of more features etc… if it means I have to dig around changing settings, brush shapes etc… I am kind of at my limit now and find photoshop far less tedious after I do the “basic” adjustments in lightroom and export the jpegs.

    The new features look ok but I don’t really feel this is a “full” version upgrade. I am probably going to buy it and see but I am sure I could live without.

    In the end it seems like people want to work faster and have more control so maybe this gives us that? or at least fools us into believing it…

  • Guido Fokkema

    Who cares about the 80-400 support. FINALLY tether support for the D600! Man, took that ages… Totally happy now.

  • Ant

    I’ve taken the plunge and updated from LR4 to LR5. So far I think it’s good and well worth the outlay. In my opinion LR has always been good value in comparison with their other creative products. LR5 offers some good features vs. LR4, especially the perspective correction function and healing brush. It makes a PS cloud subscription sometime down the line less and less necessary.

  • nobody cares

    I may upgrade, but I’ve got serious concerns about speed. I almost feel like I need Photomechanic just to cull pictures, simply because LR is so ridiculously slow (even after importing)…or maybe my settings in LR are wrong. I know it was slow even when my i7-860 (8GB) was new.

    • ditto

      Yeah I know what you mean, I had to upgrade my computer to a quad core 16GB RAM just to make sure I had quick processing power. After the upgrade, the program worked way faster and importing pictures take only a few seconds.

  • Back to top