Jump to content

A7IV firmware 3.0 raw files not recognised in Lightroom


Recommended Posts

Hi all. The title says it all. Ever since the upgrade do 3.0, my ARW files aren’t recognised in Lightroom. I can open them in Photoshop to edit there or convert to DNG and import to Lightroom. 
Tried to modify the EXIG header relative to software version from 3.0 back to 2.1 but it didn’t do anything. 
Has anyone encountered this issue? is there any way this can be escalated or we just have to wait for a new version of Lightroom to come out?
Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

This type of problem has come up in the past, and it has to do with third party vendors having to play catch up  when Sony comes out with something new.  Ask Lightroom when you can expect an update -- if at all.  They may tell you you have to wait for their next update.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same problem over here. I transfer the photos with FTP to my phone. Thsi work perfectly before 3.0. Now I can't open the ARW anylonger.

It is not a lightroom problem, but a Sony problem! 

Please solve this asap!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same problem using Adobe Camera Raw.  Either Sony changed the ARW file without telling Adobe and other people who read ARW or Adobe haven't got round to updating their products yet.  Either way we're stuck.  Can we reset our cameras to v2.0 firmware?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some words of wisdom from another Forum:

Updating Firmware involves making a physical change to the relevant chip: a Programmable ROM. Once the change has been made it cannot be reversed except perhaps in the factory where, almost certainly, it will be easier and cheaper to simply replace the chip. By the same reasoning, if an update fails, then it will be almost impossible to reload the update as the failure may not be a simple omission, but an erroneous irreversible change.

FW updates are a major modification to your camera. This is why the maker's emphasize that you should start with a freshly charged battery as any interruption to the process could be fatal! It is also important to know that a FW update cannot be used to make all the changes that so many photographers seem to want. Some camera functions would need a new chip altogether as modifying the original chip isn't practicable.
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2024 at 5:49 AM, XKAES said:

Here are some words of wisdom from another Forum:

Updating Firmware involves making a physical change to the relevant chip: a Programmable ROM. Once the change has been made it cannot be reversed except perhaps in the factory where, almost certainly, it will be easier and cheaper to simply replace the chip. By the same reasoning, if an update fails, then it will be almost impossible to reload the update as the failure may not be a simple omission, but an erroneous irreversible change.

FW updates are a major modification to your camera. This is why the maker's emphasize that you should start with a freshly charged battery as any interruption to the process could be fatal! It is also important to know that a FW update cannot be used to make all the changes that so many photographers seem to want. Some camera functions would need a new chip altogether as modifying the original chip isn't practicable.

Parts of this are true, but other parts are, at best, a bit misleading.

Yes, the firmware update process rewrites an EEPROM's contents.

However, it is possible to design a programmable device to have the code that loads the EEPROM in a separate memory chip (perhaps a permanent ROM), so that an interrupted update can be repeated. A lot of computer motherboards are designed that way, so a failed firmware update can be retried. A camera could be designed to work that way, too, but it is possible that it is not - perhaps because of the limited size of the main board in the camera. I'd like to hope that there is room for it, but maybe there really isn't.

The other part, about not being able to accommodate everything someone might desire due to the desires depending on other hardware is kind of obvious - we know, for example, that Sony's latest autofocus depends on the infamous "AI" chip - any camera without that chip cannot be updated to the latest autofocus. There are subtler problems, though - the size of an EEPROM is fixed - you cannot load more firmware into it than it can hold, so if your camera has, for example a 1 gigabyte EEPROM, and the additions you want would make the firmware 1.1 gigabytes, then something has to give, and that will, of course, be the feature you wanted the most... Or maybe the camera doesn't have enough RAM, or a fast enough processor, or ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/1/2024 at 7:13 PM, gjvanveen said:

Same problem over here. I transfer the photos with FTP to my phone. Thsi work perfectly before 3.0. Now I can't open the ARW anylonger.

It is not a lightroom problem, but a Sony problem! 

Please solve this asap!

Sony has no control over what other companies do - it cannot order them to change their software. Moreover, it cannot tell them how they should recognise file formats. If they choose a means of recognising a file that changes, that's not Sony's fault.

A little patience and it should be resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep updated yesterday all OK before, all bad immediately after.

Any raw file photo taken after won't work in Lightroom, Photoshop, Snapseed etc etc.

Can't find any information (bar this thread) or fixes anywhere as I guess it's a bit early. Not good for any Pro's trying to work for a living rightnow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Yes, I had the same problem with this new firmware version for Sony, I upgraded from 2.01 to 3.00

ARW (raw) files, created with camera with new firmware didn’t open in Photoshop 2022, Adobe Camera Raw 14.5

Solution was to upgrade Camera Raw onto 16.2, and now it amazingly works 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

How can you use Lightroom with Camera Raw ? Camera Raw is an addon for Photoshop, I have the same problem since I updated my firmware to 3.0 and with my Lightroom version which is 12.4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Any increase in ISO is simply the camera's processor amplifying the signal. Sensors are designed to operate within a certain range, which is their 'Native' ISO. Extended ISO is simply further amplification of the signal beyond the native range, usually at the exponential expense of IQ loss and increased grain. Contrary to popular belief, it does not make the sensor more sensitive to light, nor more able to absorb light. 
    • I'm familiar only with hardware base, analog signal amplification. How how does (if it does) extended ISO make image brighter without resorting to longer exposure times?
    • XKAES, I definitely do appreciate the question.  I had suggested an RX100-series camera for her as a starting point.   Her brand interest is a loyalty based on non-camera products.  I'm not going to knock that; I've got a number of my own brand-biases of my own.  Nikon is out for her because it's not Sony (though, to be fair, it's also because my representation of the Nikon brand is filled with antiquities and ponderously heavy dSLRs).  If I already had mirrorless gear from Fuji or Nikon, the argument might be different. In the end, she wants a system, so she can use it and share use of it with her kids (who are big enough to handle a camera with care, but small enough to be burdened by the bulk of a full dSLR -- for now I've gotten them a pair of waterproof Kodak point and shoots).  I should point out that she is also fairly small; even a small dSLR is probably more than she would want to carry regularly. Since I have nothing to fit her interest, we're going to build a system.  Left to my own devices, I'd be looking at several brands; but Sony is her desire and I've no reason to steer differently.  It's ostensibly for her, but if we're building a system (and I'm learning it to help her learn it) then I have every expectation I'll be using it regularly as well.  It wouldn't make any sense to, say, go on vacation and she's carrying Sony, I'm carrying Nikon, and the eldest daughter is carrying something else entirely...    
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...