LR5 doesnt recognise new camera files

jpgreenwood

jpgreenwood

Messages
1,695
Name
jason
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a purchased version of LR5 (not purchased by me-someone gave me it) but I have registered my e-mail address with it. It has always worked perfectly well with my Nikon D3200. Ive now purchased a new Nikon D7200 and LR 5 wont recognise the RAW (NEF) FILES from the SD card. Any ideas why? It initially says "no preview available" across the thumbnails and then says an update is required to read the files. Whats the difference between the NEF files from the D3200 and the D7200? Do I need to purchase the latest version of LR and PS?
 
Lightroom 5 does not work with the d7200 as this camera is not supported until Lightroom 6. There is a work round, if you convert the Nikon files to dng files using adobes converter the files are backwards compatible.

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/adobe-dng-converter.html

It is an extra stage in importing your files but will allow you to carry on using your current software.

Mickledore beat me to it :)​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
huffy said:
Lightroom 5 does not work with the d7200 as this camera is not supported until Lightroom 6. There is a work round, if you convert the Nikon files to dng files using adobes converter the files are backwards compatible.

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/adobe-dng-converter.html

It is an extra stage in importing your files but will allow you to carry on using your current software.​
Click to expand...
Huffy, can you change your formatting so that we can read what you have written?

Black on black doesn't work.
 
mickledore said:
Huffy, can you change your formatting so that we can read what you have written?

Black on black doesn't work.
Click to expand...

it's ok - i've done it for them (I use the Night |Theme myself, and also find it slightly annoying - difference is, I can do something about it)
 
Last edited:
I have this problem with ARW sony raw too, the worst thing is it won't import them either,- so an additional manual stage.
Every time you get a message that the files are there but not recognised as image files
Camera raw knows what they are and can work with them.
 
Last edited:
What I cannot understand is why they are not recognised. You can use Faststone Image Viewer - again free - and look at any files from any camera however modern. You don't need to constantly update the programme. So why can they show you the images but you cannot view them in Adobe? It's almost as if Adobe are putting some form of block to prevent you looking at files from new cameras without up grading their products. Would Adobe do that? Answers on a postcard to...
 
mickledore said:
Answers on a postcard to...
Click to expand...

"...Adobe wants a continual revenue stream" .

Adobe's not unique in that - just they're pretty much the de-facto industry standard, so feel that they can push us around a little more.

There's no money in supporting old software that was released in 2013 and superseded 2 years later and is now effectively 2 versions out of date... I'm sure we get that - but it doesn't make it any more palatable :(
 
How strange. My LR 5.17 quite happily imports and recognises the Sony ARW files from both my A33 and A6000 cameras.
 
Is there a difference between the gubbins (sorry for the non technical term) that allows the like of Faststone to show us the images, however new, and the gubbins needed to process the images?

To my untutored mind if you can view the files then you must be able to process them.
 
mickledore said:
Is there a difference between the gubbins (sorry for the non technical term) that allows the like of Faststone to show us the images, however new, and the gubbins needed to process the images?

To my untutored mind if you can view the files then you must be able to process them.
Click to expand...

Quite a few RAW format files will also store a jpg preview within the raw file for this purpose. Most cameras will allow you to enable / disable this option.
 
jpgreenwood said:
I have a purchased version of LR5 (not purchased by me-someone gave me it) but I have registered my e-mail address with it. It has always worked perfectly well with my Nikon D3200. Ive now purchased a new Nikon D7200 and LR 5 wont recognise the RAW (NEF) FILES from the SD card. Any ideas why? It initially says "no preview available" across the thumbnails and then says an update is required to read the files. Whats the difference between the NEF files from the D3200 and the D7200? Do I need to purchase the latest version of LR and PS?
Click to expand...

Another workaround is to get Nikon Capture NX-D (free), which will open D7200 files and then import into Lightroom (but not as RAW, maybe TIFF).
 
gramps said:
Another workaround is to get Nikon Capture NX-D (free), which will open D7200 files and then import into Lightroom (but not as RAW, maybe TIFF).
Click to expand...

Does this degrade the picture or lose any of the editing functions?
 
jpgreenwood said:
Does this degrade the picture or lose any of the editing functions?
Click to expand...

I used it for my D500 files exporting as TIFF to Photoshop CS6 without issues, (it could be argued that Nikon software actually knows the Nikon file better than Adobe).
It will never be a RAW file in Lightroom but you don't have to lose the original RAW file ... IIRC a TIFF or DNG file preserves as much data as possible aside from RAW.
 
Might be just as easy albeit more expensive to buy the upgrade from LR5 to LR6, about fifty quid I believe
 
Thanks for all the advice. For now, I have downloaded the Adobe DNG converter and can continue to use my LR5. I will subscribe to PS and LR eventually.
 
TheBigYin said:
"...Adobe wants a continual revenue stream" .

Adobe's not unique in that - just they're pretty much the de-facto industry standard, so feel that they can push us around a little more.

There's no money in supporting old software that was released in 2013 and superseded 2 years later and is now effectively 2 versions out of date... I'm sure we get that - but it doesn't make it any more palatable :(
Click to expand...

That's definitely true when LR was released on a perpetual licence basis (i.e. versions 1 to 6), but with LR6 being the last stand-alone version to be released (and that's already 3 years old), and Adobe pushing its customer base towards the CC/Classic version, perhaps there's a market for tinkering with LR6 for those who don't feel comfortable going down the cloud route: I mean, how difficult would it be for a 3rd party to design a plug-in for it that works like the outboard DNG converter but within the LR application? I only upgraded to LR6 last year from LR4 (at a cost of £65), largely because of encroaching compatibility issues with Mac OS Sierra/High Sierra, but if it wasn't for these seemingly 'planned obsolescence' issues I'd still be happy to use LR4 even though it's almost six years old. I'm hoping that LR6 will provide me with at least another two years of usability before having no choice but to embrace the CC options, and for a £65 outlay it's not a bad deal: but who knows what spanner Adobe or Apple with through in the works in the near future?
 
I blame Nikon for changing their RAW file specs - If they'd given you the same files as the D3200 then Lightroom 5 would have handled them no bother :nikon:
 
davidy233 said:
I blame Nikon for changing their RAW file specs - If they'd given you the same files as the D3200 then Lightroom 5 would have handled them no bother :nikon:
Click to expand...
But then Nikon would be unable to improve the image quality of new cameras.
 
john.margetts said:
But then Nikon would be unable to improve the image quality of new cameras.
Click to expand...
It still seems to me that it's a Nikon problem rather than Adobe though - when the software was purchased it worked fine with all the current cameras then, expecting software to handle files that have changed over the years is unrealistic. :) Could always shoot jpeg
 
Not certain what the exact sensor is, but you could possibly change the exif to a camera that has the same sensor and LR5 recognises (if there is one...). LR5 could then import. Had to do this with my d7100 when it first came out.
 
Sometimes the differences between raw format versions are trivial, especially when the same sensor is used. But most mainstream raw converters read the 'Model' tag in the raw image metadata first and, if the specific model isn't listed in the software's database, will go no further. This is the 'safe' approach, but leaves cameras unsupported that might otherwise be compatible. Sometimes it's possible to hack this by editing this tag with something like Exiftool to fool the converter into thinking the file was produced by an earlier model it knows about.
 
Retune said:
Sometimes the differences between raw format versions are trivial, especially when the same sensor is used. But most mainstream raw converters read the 'Model' tag in the raw image metadata first and, if the specific model isn't listed in the software's database, will go no further. This is the 'safe' approach, but leaves cameras unsupported that might otherwise be compatible. Sometimes it's possible to hack this by editing this tag with something like Exiftool to fool the converter into thinking the file was produced by an earlier model it knows about.
Click to expand...
I think it'd may have between exiftool I used. But it was around 4 or 5 years ago so my memory fails me!
 
tijuana taxi said:
Yes it is, few places still selling standalone LR6 (which you would require) in some cases at exhorhitant prices.
Afraid it's subscription time for LR these days, couple of options I believe
Click to expand...

Thanks- that sucks but some negative articles about DNG converting has put me off that route. Also used to (and like) LR.
 
Darthchaffinch said:
Thanks- that sucks but some negative articles about DNG converting has put me off that route. Also used to (and like) LR.
Click to expand...
I upgraded from LR3 to LR6 when I bought a new camera, have to say I'm glad I did now.
Bought a new camera end of last year that isn't supported so I now use the raw converter in Photoshop Elements 2018 (which I already had)
It adds another step, but seems to work OK, quite often can make enough adjustments and just use LR for organisation and printing.
If you wanted to go that route your camera requires PSE 15 which is probably quite cheap to buy now.
Works as a plug in from LR so quite easy to integrate, really not keen on getting stuck with subscriptions
 
Last edited:
TheBigYin said:
"...Adobe wants a continual revenue stream" .

Adobe's not unique in that - just they're pretty much the de-facto industry standard, so feel that they can push us around a little more.

There's no money in supporting old software that was released in 2013 and superseded 2 years later and is now effectively 2 versions out of date... I'm sure we get that - but it doesn't make it any more palatable :(
Click to expand...
Its a model that been around for years since there has been decent domestic bandwidth, instead of having a product delivered on a physical medium have SaaS (Software as a service) the same thing with Spotify etc.

It's just the consumer mind set thats been around since the 50s that we need to own and not "rent"
 
jamesev said:
Its a model that been around for years since there has been decent domestic bandwidth, instead of having a product delivered on a physical medium have SaaS (Software as a service) the same thing with Spotify etc.

It's just the consumer mind set thats been around since the 50s that we need to own and not "rent"
Click to expand...


If you also use PS it probably is a good deal at £10 p.m. but bearing in mind the relative prices of the two programs when they were available to purchase if it were possible to "rent" lightroom monthly for a reasonable price I would be happy with that - say £3 per month - even £5.

As it is £10 p.m. for LR is a rip-off.
 
jerry12953 said:
If you also use PS it probably is a good deal at £10 p.m. but bearing in mind the relative prices of the two programs when they were available to purchase if it were possible to "rent" lightroom monthly for a reasonable price I would be happy with that - say £3 per month - even £5.

As it is £10 p.m. for LR is a rip-off.
Click to expand...

You can buy an annual subscription for about £90 usually, which works out cheaper. I got mine for £75 from Amazon as part of their black Friday deals, so it works out at £6.25 a month for LR, PS and all the cloud stuff (which I use lots).
 
jerry12953 said:
If you also use PS it probably is a good deal at £10 p.m. but bearing in mind the relative prices of the two programs when they were available to purchase if it were possible to "rent" lightroom monthly for a reasonable price I would be happy with that - say £3 per month - even £5.

As it is £10 p.m. for LR is a rip-off.
Click to expand...
How is the rip-off threshold evaluated? Yes there is a case to suggest that 50% of the cost goes to profit, which would be probably unreasonable, however having a model where there is a steady and relatively predictable income stream does help reinvestment in further and more incremental development and implementation to the user at a smaller cost rather than wait for 18-24 months for the next big release at a one off large cost.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top