Sensor noise and Denoising software...

[Deleted Member 5045]

With the current state of Denoising software, do people consider sensor noise to be a non existent issue now except for extreme cases?

With even the worst low light performers in the mirrorless world now being regarded as at least good in low light, is sensor noise performance much of a factor in selecting a new body?

 

[iamdlewis]

With the current state of Denoising software, do people consider sensor noise to be a non existent issue now?

No. It is still an issue but not nearly as much of one as it was 5+ years ago. In my film days ISO was a decision you made in a store well before you took any shots. If you had options it would be a selection for the next X number of shots regardless of wat sense it made. When I got into digital ISO was the 3rd most important part of the triangle but at a lower level of the same building as A & S. Now ISO is in a fenced in yard outside the building of A & S.

With even the worst low light performers in the mirrorless world now being regarded as at least good in low light, is sensor noise performance much of a factor in selecting a new body?

It is far enough down the list of concerns that it really isn't part of the decision making process.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

No. It is still an issue but not nearly as much of one as it was 5+ years ago. In my film days ISO was a decision you made in a store well before you took any shots. If you had options it would be a selection for the next X number of shots regardless of wat sense it made. When I got into digital ISO was the 3rd most important part of the triangle but at a lower level of the same building as A & S. Now ISO is in a fenced in yard outside the building of A & S.

It is far enough down the list of concerns that it really isn't part of the decision making process.

I agree mate. Sorry I done a little edit there, I was meaning noise within reason of course. I think once we get upwards of 12800 then certain sensors are going to be more valuable still, but I don't see many people shooting much north of that.

 

[liggy]

I pretty much don't care about noise these days. Topaz Photo AI is excellent for that work. Haven't tried the PS/LR solutions for that job yet.

When I get too old to carry around a full frame camera I might even consider a m4/3 kit since noise is not that much of a thing anymore. Happy to bump the iso to get fast enough shutter speeds for the shot.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I pretty much don't care about noise these days. Topaz Photo AI is excellent for that work. Haven't tried the PS/LR solutions for that job yet.

When I get too old to carry around a full frame camera I might even consider a m4/3 kit since noise is not that much of a thing anymore. Happy to bump the iso to get fast enough shutter speeds for the shot.

So do you have a limit for ISO on your cameras? I'm still stuck in the mentality of 8000, I guess I still can't shake it and not sure why because based on what I get at 8000 I think 16000 would still be no problems at all.

 

[spudhead]

It is still an issue but not to thee extent it was denoising software helps but has it limits as all things do, it can be worse dependent on what subject you shoot and back ground etc. I set a limit on my cameras top end 12800, most of the time, but like to stay well below that when ever possible, but a fiddle of other controls can often help. For what you shoot most of the time I am not sure it is going to be a big issue, and can be ironed out in post most of the time, below I shot this the other day and one image is denoised and the other not and to be honest I only shot it and denoised it to see the difference, I think I would need to check the files to see which was which. But as said before with some back grounds it is not such an issue and I think this is one such case

• ILCE-9
• Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70 mm F4 ZA OSS (SEL2470Z)
• 46.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 10000

• ILCE-9
• Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70 mm F4 ZA OSS (SEL2470Z)
• 46.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 10000

 

[Unframed Dave]

It's an issue to me as I don't use any de noising software.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

It's an issue to me as I don't use any de noising software.

It's an issue to me too. I don't have any of the super-AI stuff: I do not use Win or Mac computers. And I don't think that camera manufacturers should be let off with lesser expectations just because that software exists.

The best de-noising software I have is in the camera! Sony's secret sauce.

My chosen raw editor, darktable, can do a decent job. With this software that is not magic-button stuff, user skill counts, and I am still a beginner.

I do have a paid package, Neat Image, which runs on Linux. I only use it if I have to: post-processing takes long enough already!

 

[zeelandia]

With the current state of Denoising software, do people consider sensor noise to be a non existent issue now except for extreme cases?

With even the worst low light performers in the mirrorless world now being regarded as at least good in low light, is sensor noise performance much of a factor in selecting a new body?

I don't think sensor noise is an issue nowadays unless the noise is from ISO12800! We can still save photos taken at this high iso but no matter what, in my opinion, the saved photos would look unappealing. I don't use denoising software or plugins since I rarely denoise my photos unless it's really necessary like portrait photos (portrait I usually limit to ISO 1000). Noise is good but grain is better so, sometimes I add grain after I remove some noise a bit.
I shoot A7iii and limit my ISO to 2500. Not afraid of high iso noise, it's better to have sharp photos than blurry ones.

 

[liggy]

So do you have a limit for ISO on your cameras? I'm still stuck in the mentality of 8000, I guess I still can't shake it and not sure why because based on what I get at 8000 I think 16000 would still be no problems at all.

Limited only by what is needed to get the shot. I don't have any issues shooting at 12,800 and 25600 has worked in a pinch too.
Clearly the overall quality is diminished - garbage in, garbage out and all that but it's better than missing a shot altogether!

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I used to hate high ISO, but software and also better sensor performance has made it a moot point for me.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

It's an issue to me as I don't use any de noising software.

It's an issue to me too. I don't have any of the super-AI stuff: I do not use Win or Mac computers. And I don't think that camera manufacturers should be let off with lesser expectations just because that software exists.

The best de-noising software I have is in the camera! Sony's secret sauce.

My chosen raw editor, darktable, can do a decent job. With this software that is not magic-button stuff, user skill counts, and I am still a beginner.

I do have a paid package, Neat Image, which runs on Linux. I only use it if I have to: post-processing takes long enough already!

Do you shoot JPEG Dave?

Yeah boys, I'd be quite biased now because I use it but there was a time only up until quite recently where I didn't use it. Do you edit on your phone then Thad?

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

It is still an issue but not to thee extent it was denoising software helps but has it limits as all things do, it can be worse dependent on what subject you shoot and back ground etc. I set a limit on my cameras top end 12800, most of the time, but like to stay well below that when ever possible, but a fiddle of other controls can often help. For what you shoot most of the time I am not sure it is going to be a big issue, and can be ironed out in post most of the time, below I shot this the other day and one image is denoised and the other not and to be honest I only shot it and denoised it to see the difference, I think I would need to check the files to see which was which. But as said before with some back grounds it is not such an issue and I think this is one such caseView attachment 50986View attachment 50987

With these type of images you can get away with noise because of the amount of textured information there. With a lot of landscape images in normal light I won't bother reducing noise on the ground, but I always denoise the sky, there's nothing worse than a noisy sky!

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I don't think sensor noise is an issue nowadays unless the noise is from ISO12800! We can still save photos taken at this high iso but no matter what, in my opinion, the saved photos would look unappealing. I don't use denoising software or plugins since I rarely denoise my photos unless it's really necessary like portrait photos (portrait I usually limit to ISO 1000). Noise is good but grain is better so, sometimes I add grain after I remove some noise a bit.
I shoot A7iii and limit my ISO to 2500. Not afraid of high iso noise, it's better to have sharp photos than blurry ones.

Interesting. I was happy to go a lot higher than 2500 on my A7III without any advanced denoising, that's a very good low light sensor isn't it!

 

[spudhead]

With these type of images you can get away with noise because of the amount of textured information there. With a lot of landscape images in normal light I won't bother reducing noise on the ground, but I always denoise the sky, there's nothing worse than a noisy sky!

exactly the back ground is an issue at times as you know, never really recall seeing noise in shots of yours Clint

 

[Unframed Dave]

Do you shoot JPEG Dave?

Yeah boys, I'd be quite biased now because I use it but there was a time only up until quite recently where I didn't use it. Do you edit on your phone then Thad?

I do. I have too little patience for editing.

To me (and this is personal), photography and editing are different processes. I have all the time in the world for being in the field, but very little at the computer.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I used to hate high ISO, but software and also better sensor performance has made it a moot point for me.

When I first got the A7RV and noticed substantially more noise, it put me on guard a little to be honest. Then I finally started using DXO DeepPrimeXD, went from caring to not caring in about 30 seconds, it was like finding a holy grail..!

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Do you edit on your phone then Thad?

No. Anything "shared" from my phone is ooc jpeg. That's a few pics from every concert I attend.

I edit on a Linux PC. I do everything on a Linux PC. Well, almost everything --- and the rest doesn't involve computers.

photography and editing are different processes

True. Editing is either a chore that I'm putting off, or a creative process that I'm enjoying --- depending on how I feel that day!

I don't think there is a magic iso number. Sometimes 6400 comes out clean and lovely, sometimes 1600 looks awful.

I rarely denoise my photos unless it's really necessary like portrait photos (portrait I usually limit to ISO 1000)

Most of my pics are portraits. I don't mind in the least if the stage backdrop is noisy, but I do mind if the shadow on some skin is. And I also mind if attempts to denoise it turn it out as plastic or blotchy!

Hey ho, I guess it is all part of the process, part of the art.

 

[zeelandia]

Most of my pics are portraits. I don't mind in the least if the stage backdrop is noisy, but I do mind if the shadow on some skin is. And I also mind if attempts to denoise it turn it out as plastic or blotchy!

If it's overdone or way too much then yes It'd look plasticky. When I do, I do it just a bit then add some grains.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Hey ho, I guess it is all part of the process, part of the art.

This is true!

 

[Jeff A]

I purchased the Topaz de noise product as well as the DXO program. Now that Lightroom has denoise built in, it's all I use. It's so easy.

 

[Brownie]

I've spent some time over my 5-day weekend playing with both Topaz AI and DxO Deep Prime. I reprocessed images that I had done before using the Denoise adjustments in Affinity and Darktable, and worked on some A1 and Z8 images that forum folks were kind enough to upload for me. All images were then processed in Darktable for a finished product.

After processing maybe 25-30 images it's clear that both Topaz and DxO generally turn out better NR than I can achieve with my processing programs, and they do it much faster. There were a couple of images I had taken a lot of time on that didn't show significant improvement, but they were few. Most turned out a lot better. Add to it the automation so I can batch a folder full and go do something else while it's working and it's a no brainer. I decided that DxO fits my workflow best and has several features I like, so I took advantage of the Black Friday sale and bought it.

After working on images from 4 different cameras (A7R III, A7 IV, A1, and Z8) with a variety of ISOs from 3200-16000, my thoughts on the OP's question are that sensor noise is not as big an issue as it used to be thanks to these remarkable programs, however it still matters. A better starting point turns out a better ending. If the sensor has a 1/2 stop advantage to begin with, that will translate to a better finished product. It's probably not going to be very noticeable for posting on the internet but will matter when printing.

Also, I went through the same high ISO thing when I came to FF and capped mine at 8000 until I found myself in a situation that needed more and ended up at 16000. With these programs I'll be doing some testing at even higher ISOs. I wouldn't be afraid of ISO 16000 with any of the modern FF sensors, and by modern, I mean all the way back to the original A7 or the later DSLRs.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I purchased the Topaz de noise product as well as the DXO program. Now that Lightroom has denoise built in, it's all I use. It's so easy.

Fully set then hey Jeff! You have the three big boys there!

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I've spent some time over my 5-day weekend playing with both Topaz AI and DxO Deep Prime. I reprocessed images that I had done before using the Denoise adjustments in Affinity and Darktable, and worked on some A1 and Z8 images that forum folks were kind enough to upload for me. All images were then processed in Darktable for a finished product.

After processing maybe 25-30 images it's clear that both Topaz and DxO generally turn out better NR than I can achieve with my processing programs, and they do it much faster. There were a couple of images I had taken a lot of time on that didn't show significant improvement, but they were few. Most turned out a lot better. Add to it the automation so I can batch a folder full and go do something else while it's working and it's a no brainer. I decided that DxO fits my workflow best and has several features I like, so I took advantage of the Black Friday sale and bought it.

After working on images from 4 different cameras (A7R III, A7 IV, A1, and Z8) with a variety of ISOs from 3200-16000, my thoughts on the OP's question are that sensor noise is not as big an issue as it used to be thanks to these remarkable programs, however it still matters. A better starting point turns out a better ending. If the sensor has a 1/2 stop advantage to begin with, that will translate to a better finished product. It's probably not going to be very noticeable for posting on the internet but will matter when printing.

Also, I went through the same high ISO thing when I came to FF and capped mine at 8000 until I found myself in a situation that needed more and ended up at 16000. With these programs I'll be doing some testing at even higher ISOs. I wouldn't be afraid of ISO 16000 with any of the modern FF sensors, and by modern, I mean all the way back to the original A7 or the later DSLRs.

I just seen the deal for DXO right now, that's great! If it increases your workflow whilst delivering the right result then you have to be happy with that.