Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 34 Minuten schrieb Photoworks:

LR denoise is the AI version? 

Yes, it is AI based and very strong and excellent IMO. Looks pretty natural, if you do not overdo it. If needed you can go up till ca. 48 from 100 or so IMO. So you can go up to such levels IMO. My personal default is ca. 35 or so. SL3-S DNGs seem to work excellent in combination with LR AI denoise. Myself does not use classic denoise on RAW in LR anymore. Ok, if you want to avoid any AI at all then prob. Adobe is not the software to use anymore?

Edited by mpauliks
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, mpauliks said:

Yes, it is AI based and very strong and excellent IMO. Looks pretty natural, if you do not overdo it. If needed you can go up till ca. 48 from 100 or so IMO. So you can go up to such levels IMO. My impression is, that SL3-S DNGs work excellent in combination with LR AI denoise. Myself does not use classic denoise on RAW anymore. Ok, if you want to avoid any AI at all then prob. Adobe is not the software to use anymore?

I was asking because I don't think it would reflect what the camera can do, more what AI does.

Personally in the red car image, I see too many different textures that it does not look natural anymore.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 10 Minuten schrieb Photoworks:

I was asking because I don't think it would reflect what the camera can do, more what AI does.

Personally in the red car image, I see too many different textures that it does not look natural anymore.

Get you! However Iso 40k! Imagine please, what we got out of such high ISO just a few years ago. In order to see, what the camera does at highest ISO we should not use any denoise here. This would show the real differences IMO.

This is SL3-S handheld on SL 50 at ISO 50.000 w/o any denoise and SOOC (Flickr Link for further Exif): 

 

Edited by mpauliks
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 12 Minuten schrieb Photoworks:

Just differentiate when it is "Denoise" and "AI Denoise".

Raw files need Denoise and sharpening. JPG in camera gets the same treatment.

For compare reasons, I would like to recommend for this great thread, we can process the images but should avoid to use any denoise at all on RAW. Elsewise it just comes back to a compare of the denoise algorithms and not a compare of the cams at high ISO IMO? JPG should get posted SOOC? Just my 2 cents please. @MRJohn

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

6 hours ago, mpauliks said:

For compare reasons, I would like to recommend for this great thread, we can process the images but should avoid to use any denoise at all on RAW. Elsewise it just comes back to a compare of the denoise algorithms and not a compare of the cams at high ISO IMO? JPG should get posted SOOC? Just my 2 cents please. @MRJohn

I am not sure about it, it's about the final image, and how one got there is not so important IMO. But it needs to be disclosed to learn and one could post a with and without. It would show what is possible with state of the art (by those skilled in the art) software processing. - quite interesting what got posted so far. Historically, I stopped at 6400 since I was not too happy with the DR and noise or effects of noise reduction with my cameras (also film stops at 3200 and while it can be pushed a couple of stops that is what we are historically used to seeing on this end). But seems like one can really push it further now digitally. Definitely one can create "usable" images at higher ISO. But to create an image with an aesthetic wow factor  (which is mostly subjective) at high ISO still seems difficult. What are the use cases for high ISO? I can think of better event shots in dimly lit clubs, or Todd Hido -like House Hunting shots, more depth of field when shooting in the pretty dark, less unwanted motion blur, shorter exposure when needed... maybe a high ISO photo competition would be a good idea. - thanks for all the posts so far

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 8 Minuten schrieb MRJohn:

I am not sure about it, it's about the final image, and how one got there is not so important IMO. But it needs to be disclosed to learn and one could post a with and without. It would show what is possible with state of the art (by those skilled in the art) software processing. - quite interesting what got posted so far. Historically, I stopped at 6400 since I was not too happy with the DR and noise or effects of noise reduction with my cameras (also film stops at 3200 and while it can be pushed a couple of stops that is what we are historically used to seeing on this end). But seems like one can really push it further now digitally. Definitely one can create "usable" images at higher ISO. But to create an image with an aesthetic wow factor  (which is mostly subjective) at high ISO still seems difficult. What are the use cases for high ISO? I can think of better event shots in dimly lit clubs, or Todd Hido -like House Hunting shots, more depth of field when shooting in the pretty dark, less unwanted motion blur, shorter exposure when needed... maybe a high ISO photo competition would be a good idea. - thanks for all the posts so far

Thank you :) Then let´s go on on this route! Posting cool images :) Yes, I think too super high ISO is very rarely required. However, we have a night animal house here in Berlin! So stay tuned for Plumploris with wide open eyes! 🥰 Curious to see, if AF of SL3-S will manage this too next to super high ISO :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

SL3 at ISO 6400. Should be SL 24-90 (handheld) ƒ/4.5 1/4s 87mm Prob. denoised classic + In total darkness! :) 

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 mpauliks
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

SL3 with Sigma 500/5.6, 1/320, f5.6, ISO 6400, LR, no noise reduction.

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 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, mschuette said:

SL3 with Sigma 500/5.6, 1/320, f5.6, ISO 6400, LR, no noise reduction.

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!

Nice one, - would be curious what the higher resolution of the SL3 made out of the flies which are in focus

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

SL3-S Jpg SOOC ISO 50k SL 24-90  ƒ/3.8 64.0 mm 1/125 handheld no denoise

 

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

SL3-S on SL 24-90 ISO 20k

  • Æ’/3.6 48.0 mm 1/160s handheld + no denoise

 

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

The high ISO quality is really impressive!
Is the SL2-S similar or is the SL3-S considerable superior?
I love to do nigh shots and i feel my SL2 does not really so well with high ISO and in this moment used SL2-S are affordable as second body.

Chris

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, mpauliks said:

SL3-S Jpg SOOC ISO 50k SL 24-90  ƒ/3.8 64.0 mm 1/125 handheld no denoise

 

It's a nice composition and an interesting look, you might be able to do this at 1/30th handheld with IBIS and get the ISO down to 12500 or 6400. Would be interesting to compare. Did you apply a Leica Look to this?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 11 Stunden schrieb MRJohn:

It's a nice composition and an interesting look, you might be able to do this at 1/30th handheld with IBIS and get the ISO down to 12500 or 6400. Would be interesting to compare. Did you apply a Leica Look to this?

Thank you! Yes, this is the Leica Look "Eternal". Use it as default for jpg. At the moment checking out Automatic mode, when letting run SL3-S up to ISO 50k max :) 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 23 Stunden schrieb PhotoCruiser:

The high ISO quality is really impressive!
Is the SL2-S similar or is the SL3-S considerable superior?
I love to do nigh shots and i feel my SL2 does not really so well with high ISO and in this moment used SL2-S are affordable as second body.

Chris

For me personally too early to say right now. SL2-S and SL3 normally I had running in automatic only up to ISO 6400, SL3 finally up to ISO 12.500. First time I try much higher auto  ISO on SL3-S. I think, we have to wait for lab measurements to compare?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

SL2-S set at ISO 50.000. SL APO 50. f/3.2 1/160s (SOOC DNG converted to JPG). No Denoise.

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 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

SL3 at ISO 12500 (auto set max) Lumix S 85. f/1.8 1/30s handheld (SOOC DNG converted to JPG). No Denoise.

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 mpauliks
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

SL3S the same image shot with Apo 90-280, 6400 iso, tripod mounted at 1/4 Sec

One without Adobe Noise Reduction and one with Denoise applied. The NR slider was a tad over 50%.

I like the noise structure of the SL3S, it's not far off the SL3 camera from my initial observations. Some exposures do not require NR so I always check the test window before applying the treatment. In viewing the NR image here, in hindsight I would reduce the amount of NR applied in LR.

Just a side note about the pairing of the SL3 and SL3S that its much easier with identical functions and similar image quality when comparing the pairing between the SL3 and SL2S. It makes good sense to pair the SL3 and SL3S to make use of their capabilities.    

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!

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 54 Minuten schrieb Ken Abrahams:

The NR slider was a tad over 50%.

Ken, do not go over ca. 48 please. Over 50 is not good IMO. Thank you for sharing!

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!

 

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...