Jump to content

D-Lux 2 Noise - HELP!!!


ljj

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, can anyone give me help with the noise on my D-LUX 2. I saw a thread about the free "Helicon" filter and downloaded this, and it looks like the noise is nicley solved on the PC screen. Unfotunately when pics are printed (even 6x4), the noise is frankly awful..........

 

I downloaded the trial version of "Noise Ninja" and this seems the way forward, with dramatic noise reduction using their "auto-profiling". There are specific "noise profiles" for the Pansonic version of the camera, but when you try to unzip & download these, Windows XP cannot recognise the file type. As I can't install these, should I just use the "auto profiler" ? i.e. will results be good enough? Or do I need to go through the process of taking pics of their "screen" to make my own profiles ?? If that is the case does Noise Ninja then recognise the ISO used by the camera and automatically use that noise profile ?

 

Any help on these points will be very gratefully received, before I go ahead and buy Noise Ninja.

 

Cheers

Laurence John.

 

PS: Pics in question were taken after dark in dimly lit conditions on only ISO 80, with long shutter speeds (no flash). Beautiful colour rendition, but I have to get rid of the noise somehow !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

Laurence, I've noticed the same thing. Especially with most anything that is shot with this camera indoors...even at ISO 80. Shooting raw and using a program like Noise Ninja are your best options. In many cases, I've also converted my indoor color images to black and white as a way to reduce noise in the color channel. It is one of the difficulties of working with a small sensor.

 

Kurt

Link to post
Share on other sites

LJ,

I am a professional photographer who is never without his D-Lux2. It's a sweet tool in most every situation except the one you describe. As to Noise Ninja, IMHO it's the best game in town. Yes, you can trust the auto-profiling. It works very well and, yes, when you have time and inclination, you can create your own profiles via the provided color chart and then configure NN to recognize your camera and ISO and load the correct profile. As you undoubtely know, one needs to be careful about obsessing on noise to the detriment of sharpness. This is always a compromise and a plastic effect that looks like something in Mme. Tussaud's waxworks is just as bad as too much color noise. Always do your work at 100% magnification.

Regards,

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

i also think you'll find looking at photos from the past that many, many of them are what we now call 'noisy'. this includes the old autochromes which were pure noise and beautiful. also look at many famous black and whites (especially tri-x in lowlight). we've been spoiled in this new era.

wayne

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Having had a Digilux 2 and been very pleased with it, other than the 400 ASA noise and also having seen good reports of the Panasonic FX8 on the Leica user forum (uses a similar but smaller pixel count chip to the the D-Lux2), I bought one for my wife to take on a unique and unrepeatable cycling trip across Rajasthan. Not only did it fail after 10 days, but Panasonic were unhelpful with a replacement to say the least and worst of all, the noise on any shot taken at anything other than 100 ASA was dreadful. I have manged to clean some of them up with Kodak Digital Gem Pro V2, which has similar performance to Noise Ninja.

 

I wanted a small digital to complement the Sony R1, which supplanted the Digilux 2, while it was away in Germany for a guarantee replacement (I sold it on its return, as I am afraid the Sony R1, although not as ergonomic or as well made, took much better images, with its 10.3 Mp CMOS sensor). After my experiences with the FX8, I did not consider another Pansonic Leica but bought a Sony DSC-T9. I am afraid the image quality is of a wholly different league to the FX8. I know the D-Lux will be beautifully made but while they are still being made by and using Panasonic sensors, I will not be in the market for one

 

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Wilson the D-Lux 2 and FX8 do not share a similar sensor. The D-Lux 2 sensor is closer in size to the D2. Sorry your wife had such a bum deal on the FX8. Especially on such a trip. The FX8 is soley a Panasonic project. The D-Lux 2 is a whole differnt beast because Leica works closely with Panasonic during development. The D-Lux 2 is way more camera than the FX8. Was the LX1 available when she went on the trip?

 

As for noise with the D-Lux 2 as someone already pointed out for Laurence that he is using the D-Lux 2 in a situation were the camera is not going to peform at it's best(Any camera really). I would suggest if shooting in such extreme conditions is unavoidable to think in B&W. Experiment to know the strengths in low light to later convert to B&W. Or shoot RAW using the B&W mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Wilson the D-Lux 2 and FX8 do not share a similar sensor. The D-Lux 2 sensor is closer in size to the D2. Sorry your wife had such a bum deal on the FX8. Especially on such a trip. The FX8 is soley a Panasonic project. The D-Lux 2 is a whole differnt beast because Leica works closely with Panasonic during development. The D-Lux 2 is way more camera than the FX8. Was the LX1 available when she went on the trip?

 

As for noise with the D-Lux 2 as someone already pointed out for Laurence that he is using the D-Lux 2 in a situation were the camera is not going to peform at it's best(Any camera really). I would suggest if shooting in such extreme conditions is unavoidable to think in B&W. Experiment to know the strengths in low light to later convert to B&W. Or shoot RAW using the B&W mode.

 

Gepetto,

 

Given my wife's packing requirements, size was the major consideration. The LX1 would have been too big. My choice of the FX8 was based on 1) Leica brand/design lens 2) Image stabilisation for taking photos from bicycles on Rajasthani roads 3) All metal construction 4) Large bright LCD screen 5) SD card, as at that time, all the family's other cameras used SD cards. It had all of those but did not have reliability, the IS is poor and the noise on flash shots is staggering - they look like pointilliste paintings. The replacement FX8 had a slightly better IS but the noise is just as bad.

 

I have been blown away by how good the tiny Sony T9 is. It is so good that I very often take it out rather than my Sony R1. The noise is very low even on higher ASA settings. The IS is excellent. The only downside and it is due to operator error, is that the natural postion my fingers tend to take up, means you take a picture of your finger tip on the top left hand corner of the image and the LCD screen is not quite as bright as the Panasonic.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

if someone need´s Neatimage profiles for the DLux2, please send me an private message. I´ve made profiles for daylight, flashlight an longtime exposure. In the german forum nearly 70 people do use it.

 

Alex.

 

PS: Sorry about my bad english...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson,

 

Very sorry to hear of your difficulties with the FX8.

 

I hope it's just a one-off, as so far we are very pleased with my wife's FX8, which we bought together with my LX1 following good experience with the FX7. The FX7 was our shared family first digital camera, and we soon reached the stage where we weren't prepared to share any more (the whole idea with such handy little cameras is to have them on your person), especially as daughter was hogging it! We've actually found the IS very useful on all of them.

 

Anyway, very good luck with your Sony.

 

Jonathan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...