Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Leica M240 with Apo-Summicron-M 75mm asph, ISO 6400

Original full frame shot, as edited in 2015

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

100% crop, no NR or sharpening

LR manual noise reduction and sharpening (as edited in 2015, but I can't improve on it much now)

Topaz Denoise AI. Severe Noise setting (subjectively the best option), no masking

LR AI NR, default settings

 

So, yes, LR AI NR does a much better job than the old manual noise reduction. It is slightly better than Topaz at noise reduction, though Topaz adds a bit of contrast and detail (a default setting, which I could have eliminated).

Conclusion: it's good for old M240 files.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

And a last set, from the M9 in 2012, Summilux-M 35mm FLE, ISO 2500

First the original full frame scene, original edits

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

100% crop, original LR noise reduction (very high settings!)

No noise reduction

Topaz Denoise AI, Low Light setting, no detail recovery or colour noise reduction (neither of which made a significant difference)

LR AI NR, default settings

 

So no obvious winner between Topaz and Lightroom AI, though perhaps Topaz is a bit more plasticky - something that could probably be easily compensated for by 'amount' sliders.  

Edit: I missed the Topaz 'fail' with the inside of the hat on the left. LR does a much better job.

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 20 Stunden schrieb LocalHero1953:

I suspect my Topaz subscription will lapse soon. It's not just the better performance, but ending up with a DNG in Lightroom is better for workflow than a TIFF.

Thank you. Great comparison. It matches my tests.

What I did not do yet is working on the Topas sliders. But anyway: Lightroom does extremely well. 

I would like to see a sharpening AI function coming into Lightroom Classic as well.

Edited by M11 for me
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, sometimesmaybe said:

i dont have LR... does AI de-noising make the older cameras like the 240 more viable for higher ISO work? 

So, although I no longer have a M9 or M240 to try at higher ISOs than I used to, the signs are good that they would be worth shooting higher. 

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, M11 for me said:

Thank you. Great comparison. It matches my tests.

What I did not do yet is working on the Topas sliders. But anyway: Lightroom does extremely well. 

I would like to see a sharpening AI function coming into Lightroom Classic as well.

Choices depend on your workflow. I do a lot of theatre photography, and I will come home this afternoon with towards 400 images in poor lighting. I will try to cut those down to 200 for the team to choose from for publicity. Batch processing in a non destructive workflow is important for me, and AI means that each image gets individual treatment, even if not by a human. I would much rather deal with everything in DNG and within LR than jump out of LR. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just found out that DXO provides lens corrections in four strengths. In this image it made an oval sun round.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I just found out that DXO provides lens corrections in four strengths. In this image it made an oval sun round.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Was a round sun correct, though? At the horizon the sun is typically distorted by the atmosphere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I like the new features in LR, NR is welcome for my Q2 when I’ve been shabby with exposure (wanted to buy dxo for this), but curves on masks is what I missed from c1, as I used that a lot.

Looks like my subscription on c1 won’t be prolonged…

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since DXO Deep Prime v2 came out, I have happily included it in my workflow. 

  1. Download + culling w/ Photo Mechanic 
  2. Create a new dng from the original M10 keepers
  3. import in LrC and editing
  4. export high res files.
  5. Original files remain on the SD for a while; then bye-bye!

When I saw the news of the LR update, I did it on my 2017 Imac. I did some tests. My take... If I didn't have the Deep Prime, I probably wouldn't have bought it in the first place because Lr's new denoise feature does a fantastic job. But... When I use Deep Prime, I usually apply a slight global sharpening which is very welcome and always looks great. No artifacts. I re-did very few files in hundreds of M10 files. For my needs, it works 99% of the time.

And the result is always better than the original.

See a few samples below.

Shot at 12500 iso. SOOC.

Then compare the Enhanced NR of Lr with the original and Deep Prime (DP) versions. Click on the picture to see high resolution.

PS... Thanks to this AI denoise technology and a perpetual $100 license, passionate shooters can save money and avoid buying a new camera. Especially for people like me: I'm delighted with my M10 and will use it for years to come. Happy except (a bit) for the iso performance, which I don't enjoy very much. No intention (and budget) to upgrade precisely when, with denoising, I gain up to two stops 🙂 Does it make sense what I'm saying?

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Both AI compared

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The differences in size

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

As you can see, I was doing my tests three days ago 🙂

Edited by Dennis
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shot a theatrical rehearsal this afternoon. In Act I we had the stage lights on and I shot at ISO 2000-10000  without to much trouble. In Act II the lights went off, and I was shooting by the auditorium lights. This is shot at the back of the stage. To the naked eye, the stage was poorly lit.
SL2-S, 24-90SL zoom, ISO 25000.
The colours are all Leica's but the noise reduction is Lightroom's. OK, it has a bit of that plastic perfection you get with smartphones and portrait-enhancing software, but I still find this highly impressive, and far better than I am used to. It will make life much easier for this sort of work. For 'proper' portraits I would expect to have full lighting, so it wouldn't be needed of course.

The first is the full frame (slightly straightened); the second is a 100% crop. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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