I thought that with Capture One 23 I already had the best RAW developer currently available for my photos. But I was wrong! DxO PureRAW is simply far better. And it changes my workflow forever. That might be the end of the story, but in this article I’ll show you how I came to this clear verdict.

If that’s enough for you and you want to try DxO PureRAW for free for 30 days, click on this link to go to the DxO website.

What is a RAW converter and why do I need it?

Everyone who takes photos with a digital camera uses a RAW converter at some point. A RAW converter is a program that converts the raw data from the camera sensor into a photo that can be displayed on the computer. Such a program is already built into the camera and converts photos into JPG format if you have set this as the storage format.

However, if you edit your photos yourself, it is better to use a RAW converter on the computer, as these often offer more options for optimizing the photo and thus getting the best out of the image information. Especially in challenging lighting situations, but also for colorful landscapes and portraits, you can achieve much better results.

After the raw data conversion, the photo is then saved in a format with less information, which can then no longer be retrieved. The RAW converter should therefore be as good as possible. This does not only apply to professional photographers.

T

ip: For photographers who value good image quality, it is definitely worth switching the camera to RAW and developing the photos on the computer. The photos require a little more storage space on the card, but the better result makes up for it.

Comparison test with examples from Capture One 23 and DxO PureRAW 3

Here are some examples of photos that I developed with Capture One 23 and DxO PureRAW and resized for the web. The photos are otherwise unprocessed.

Capture One 23Foto entwickelt mit DxO PureRAW 3
Foto entwickelt mit Capture One 23Foto entwickelt mit DxO PureRAW 3

Insights from the DxO PureRAW test

What you can already see in these two examples was then confirmed in all my tests:

  • Optical distortion was automatically corrected (especially for wide-angle shots, as in the first image – but also the light fall-off towards the edge in the second image)
  • Significantly better sharpness throughout the photo, even at the edges
  • Significantly better tonal reproduction
  • More natural skin tones

To be fair, it must be said that Capture One also offers the option of getting more out of the photo by using the various setting controls for optical correction, tonal values and sharpness. But you would have to do this again for each photo or save presets for each camera with certain lenses. That would be quite tedious. And actually Capture One already knows my camera, because until recently there was even a special edition of Capture One for Fuji cameras.

How does DxO PureRAW work?

Using DxO PureRAW couldn’t be easier: You open the program and drag and drop the RAW photos you want to convert from the Finder or Windows Explorer. Or you can open the corresponding directory using the plus button. There is also a plugin for Lightroom so that you can convert the photos directly from there.

When you open the images, DxO PureRAW checks which camera/lens combination was used to take the photos. If a new combination is found, the corresponding profile is downloaded. This prevents you from cluttering up your computer with thousands of camera profiles that you will never use.

You can then view the photos first and make a selection. There is also a large image view for this.

If you then click on “Develop now”, you can select the quality and scope of the development. The best quality and full scope will take longer to process than if you select less. But for me, only “all” was an option at first.

You also select the storage location and the file format, and then you can sit back and wait for the finished photos. I

I can imagine that DxO PureRAW is simply the only image editing program that many photographers who have been shooting in the analog era need.

Click on the screenshots to enlarge

Why is DxO PureRAW so good at RAW conversion?

In the last paragraph I already pointed out the problem that you have with other raw converters – it is necessary to compensate for the optical characteristics of each lens on each camera with the correct settings. And that’s exactly what DxO PureRAW does.

And the manufacturer has not simply programmed a calculation method to do this, but has measured all possible camera-lens combinations in the laboratory and developed the appropriate profiles for them, which are stored in the software.

According to DxO, there are now more than 81,000 combinations of cameras and lenses. In the latest version, 351 current profiles have been added, including for the Nikon Z system, as well as new cameras and lenses from Canon, Sigma and Panasonic.

Quote from a DxO press release:

These correction profiles outperform profiles from other software manufacturers and deliver significantly better images, regardless of whether photographers are shooting with the most expensive equipment or entry-level models. The DxO optical modules ensure the true quality of a photographer’s camera-lens combination.

This has been confirmed in my tests. However, the corrections were even more visible with cheaper lenses. Especially with my zoom lenses.

In the following gallery you can see some screenshots with 1:1 image sections for comparison.

How much does DxO PureRAW 3 cost?

The program costs 129,- EUR (one-off).

To find out whether the purchase is worthwhile, I highly recommend trying out the free trial version for 30 days. After that, I had no more doubts.

DxO PureRAW 3 kostenlos testen

My review of DxO PureRAW 3

I’m almost a little embarrassed that I’ve only now come across DxO PureRAW. The results are worlds better and so easy to achieve. After converting with DxO PureRAW, I can concentrate on the actual image processing – or just leave the photo as it is.

My workflow will change. At least for my more demanding projects.

Why not for all of them? Because the conversion is another step, albeit a small one, and the converted photos take up more disk space. I would have to think about deleting the original RAWs. But what if DxO PureRAW 4 is even better…?

Feel free to write a comment below on what you think…