Upgrades, and pricing

If I have PL3 and did not upgrade to PL4. Am I able to Upgrade to PL5 by paying an upgrade fee, or do I have to buy a new license.

A person on another forum has stated that one can skip PL versions and still just pay upgrade fee.

To me this does not make financial sense for DXO


You can answer your own question. Just log into your account on DxO’s site and see how much it would cost to upgrade.


1 Like

So, are you saying that DxO are being too generous? That is not something that some people would agree with, complaining that DxO should virtually give away their software.

It is so nice to find someone who believes that the years of time and effort that is needed to bring such amazing products to the market should be rewarded. There are those people who come up with “it’s only a small change” and have absolutely no idea how much it takes to write code.



I’ve upgraded when each version becomes available. My question was (hypothetical) related to a comment made in another forum where the user was complaining that he had to buy each version of that software in order to participate in upgrade discount, whereas he said with DXO he could skip a version and still get upgrade discount.
I’m sure this is wrong, but I wanted to check before I comment.

I remember when one could buy LR, there was no discount when an upgrade was skipped, you had to buy a “new full license”. This is normal practice.


I believe that it is possible to upgrade from up to two versions behind but, since like you I already have the previous version on my account, I have no way of checking.

I think your best reply would be to repeat Mark’s advice in your other forum.

Actually, in my account, I can upgrade from PL v3 to v5 at current discounted price.

So it looks like the rumours I heard are true, which is very generous of DxO :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

Too generous! One version I can understand. This does not give people incentive to increment.

For me, the biggest incentive is the new features like Control Lines in PL5. I wouldn’t have cared how much the upgrade cost, it was worth every centime, just for that alone :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:


Yes you can.
I didn’t upgrade from PL3 to 4 for reasons unrelated to value or whatever but because I fell out of love with photography (tbh this happened not long after buying PL3).

When I purchased my Fujifilm X-T4 earlier this year I was unable to use PL3 due to no X-Trans support and began using other software.
When PL5 launched with X-Trans support I was straight on it and prepared to pay full but I was still offered the discounted upgrade and believe as others have said you do get the option to miss one upgrade which I think tbh is a good thing.
I’ve obviously no experience of PL4 but assuming the major difference between 4 & 5 is the Fuji support then I can understand others being reluctant to upgrade beyond having the newest all the time.

To me it does. You were skipping one version, but already bought at least one full version before. If PL4 was not making sense to you or you were too busy with other things - why should DxO punish already existing clients? It’s not that you get that much more features out of PL5 than PL4 has aboard. Like Joanna said, the control lines might be worth to pay the upgrade but besides that?

I think that the policy that allows an existing customer to skip a version and still receive upgrade pricing is financially sound. The full price for Photolab(especially the full suite) is justifiably very expensive. An existing customer who has skipped a version might be reluctant(experiencing hard feelings) or financially unable to pay full price for the new version. This policy will keep this customer onboard.


I agree, skipping one and allowing upgrade makes sense. However, skipping two…?

I think many people will agree, DxO’s marketing policy is a deep mystery.

I had PL3 and did not upgrade to PL4. When PL5 came out I was offered it at the upgrade price.

Initially that price was discounted, because PL5 was launched at a discount price. However I did not buy PL5 during the launch offer. Instead, I took the risk that DxO would, as they’d done in previous years, put PL5 on sale at an even bigger discount over the Black Friday weekend. My risk paid off, I was able to buy my PL5 upgrade at an even better price than that on offer when PL5 was first launched.

By now though, while the offer to upgrade rather than repurchase should still be available to you (check by logging into your account at shop.dxo.com), the additional discounts that were on offer at launch and over Black Friday will not be available.

If you skip 2 upgrades that would mean that you have purchased nothing in 3 years. IMO(and please note that I don’t speak for DXO) you are not a very good customer and should be on your own. Full price if you want the newest version.


I think that would be better said if you added, “from DxO’s perspective”, ahead of, “you are not…”. Since, from the customer’s perspective, it is perfectly legitimate for them to choose not to spend their money on something they have concluded is not what they want. What the customer must accept though that the consequence of their decision is that they have no right to expect DxO to offer a discount if they do choose to upgrade at some point in the future.

Although perhaps he could have phrased it a little differently, I believe @rrblint was implying from DxO’s perspective.


1 Like

Yea I agree, and your wording is much better than mine.

I will point out however that I did state:

I was simply giving my opinion and not in any way implying that DXO should or would agree with me.

I do stand by that opinion.

1 Like

Yes, I did see your “IMO etc.” and if I was selling software I’d probably agree with you.

My point, which I think you’ve grasped, is that, as a customer, choosing not to spend money isn’t ‘bad’, it might be the best / good thing for me to do. ‘Bad’ is when I then whinge and gripe when I find the price is not to my liking if/when I do decide to buy. Too many people want something for nothing :smile:

1 Like

Yes, I was speaking from the point of view “as if I were selling the software”. That’s the reason that I included the disclaimer that I don’t speak for DXO. My wording should have been clearer. Thanks for the correction. :grinning: