DXO Optics Pro V.9

<p>I primarily shoot a D800 but also use a D300 for times like vacations when I don't want to risk the more valuable camera. Also I like to have the DX option basically as a teleconverter. I don't shoot with the D300 quite as much as I would otherwise because it doesn't handle high iso's as well as the D800.</p>

<p>Recently I read on this forum about DXO Optics Pro V.9's amazing high iso rendering of raw files when in PRIME mode. I tried it out and I was quite amazed. I took some shots in very low light with unexceptable results (to me) and then rendered them through DXO. The results, even at iso 6400 (which is H1 on the D300) were really very good. In my mind, and given my tolerance for noice, this will now allow me to use the D300 at iso 6400, something I never thought I would do.</p>

<p>I am a Lightroom and Photoshop user, and frankly have many many hours invested in learning these programs. I am not really looking to change my workflow but I see that I will have to incorporate DXO into at least the high iso shots from the D300. I haven't quite worked out how I will do this yet.</p>

<p>Anyone else what to share their experience?</p>

<p>I've been a DxO Optics Pro user since 2009 and agree that its high-ISO Raw conversion and noise reduction is one of the very best available. DPReview will often use it when testing cameras to show examples of high-ISO and will have direct comparisons to LR and the maker's own software. DxO almost always wins that comparison. (Check out DPReview's test of your camera, where they compare high-ISO performance).</p>

<p>The last two versions of Optics Pro have added individual sliders for Highlights, Shadows, Midtones and Blacks, along with a Micro Contrast control. These really closed a gap that used to favor LR. Still, missing is a local adjustment tool of any type.</p>

<p>DxO does have an interface to LR and/or PS, if you want to use it for Raw conversion to TIFF and process further in LR.</p>

<p>DxO's digital lens correction is state of the art, offering automatic correction for a huge combination of bodies and lenses. The corrections include geometric distortion, CA, purple fringing, vignetting, softness, at every focal length and ever aperture. This is what original attracted me to DxO. LR and the proprietary software that came with your camera have closed this gap, but DxO still has the largest variety of combinations covered.</p>

<p>One last comment; isn't some of your most important picture taking on your vacations? Why wouldn't you take your very best equipment to get the best shots possible? Insure your equipment and travel with the intent to make a big coffee table vanity book of your travels. Your significant other will love it, I promise.</p>

<p>Optics Pro is my software of choice for serious high ISO noise heavy lifting: I'm perfectly happy (shooting with a Canon 7D) with Photo Ninja or Lightroom up to around 3200 - 4000 ISO, but it's Optics Pro north of that.</p>

<p>And even though the standard NR is very good, PRIME is nothing short of miraculous - 12,800 ISO files are near noiseless at the image level, and the detail retention is astonishing.</p>

<p>I like its <a href="http://www.dxo.com/intl/photography/dxo-optics-pro/features/optical-corrections/lens-softness">Lens Softness</a> tool too - it does a great job of rectifying softness across the lens with profiled lenses.</p>

<p>But Optics Pro's highlight recovery is really pretty cack, or it'd probably be my default converter.</p>

<p>Great info! Could someone post examples of with and without nr applied?</p>

<p>Before</p><div></div>

<p>After</p><div></div>

<p>Both above are 100%, this is the full image resized of course.</p><div></div>

<p>I forgot to mention, D300 1/40th f3.5 iso6400(H1)</p>

<p>cheers Phil, those look great. I've never been too impressed with LR and the Nik one is "okay" but a pain to introduce in a high-volume workflow. I'm going to try the Dx0 trial over the holidays!</p>

<p>One small caveat about PRIME, Eric - it does take a long time to process the files, because of how the new algorithm works. So if you have a lot of files to convert/NR using the new process, batch-run them.</p>

<p>I processed 47-shots with Prime from a pre-dawn shoot of white-tail deer bucks as they jumped a fence. I'm very pleased with the result, but the files did take 5 to 7-minutes each to process. That compares to under 10-sec. each for file processed without Prime.</p>

<p>Here's one shot at ISO 3200 on a Canon 7D and processed with Prime:</p>

<p><a title="Untitled by dcstep, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2851/11375033893_dd0daaff79_c.jpg" alt="Untitled" width="800" height="800" /></a></p>

<p>Click on the image to go to Flickr and view in larger sizes.</p>

<p>Same image with NR and Prime turned off:</p>

<p><a title="_Z5A1788_DxO-NoNR by dcstep, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7348/11375609484_fbea93d45f_c.jpg" alt="_Z5A1788_DxO-NoNR" width="800" height="800" /></a></p>

<p>It's not really bad for a 7D at ISO 3200, showing mainly luminance noise.</p>

<p>David, I'm happy with the standard Optics Pro NR on 3200 ISO 7D files - could you post an example of the deer converted with that NR (at default) too, please? </p>

<p>I've looked into DXO Optics, and it looks really good. The problem for me is that it does not support the DNG format. Unfortunately, I have thousands of photos that are filled in DNG and TIF format. I may want to re-process some of my RAW files (DNG), but I can't do that in DXO. My files have been renamed, and to go back to my original NEF files, I have to look through a lot of NEF files on DVD's, which have different names, trying to find the one I want. It never occurred to me that Adobe would put the screws to us, or I would never have converted to DNG in the first place.</p>

<p>DxO does offer conversion to DNG as part of their processing options. If it can create a DNG it seems like it could read a DNG file. Exactly what do you mean when you say that DxO, "does not support the DNG format?"</p>

<p>A couple of years ago I did create DNG files as part of my PP routine with DxO, but I stopped because I lost faith that DNG was needed (I certainly understand those that want that DNG "insurance"). Anyway, for this thread, I did check to make certain that DxO still offers a DNG option for processing and confirmed that it does.</p>

<p>It doesn't convert DNGs unless they've come natively out of a camera as an alternative to a proprietary Raw format, David. So Optics Pro is useless for people routinely convert their Raws to DNG.</p>

<p>I've just tested this with DNGs converted from 7D CR2s, using Lightroom 5 and Capture One 7 Express as the DNG converters: in each case, Optics Pro doesn't even see the files.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It never occurred to me that Adobe would put the screws to us, or I would never have converted to DNG in the first place.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not an issue, Stanley - Photo Ninja and Capture One 7 (to use just two examples) convert "non-native" DNGs perfectly well.</p>

<p ><a name="00cEjP"></a><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1774085">Keith Reeder</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, asked:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>David, I'm happy with the standard Optics Pro NR on 3200 ISO 7D files - could you post an example of the deer converted with that NR (at default) too, please?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure Keith. It'll be later today, maybe tonight, before I get to it.</p>

 

<p>No rush, David - it's more for the OP than for me, just to demonstrate that the "standard" NR in Optics Pro is bloody good, too.</p>

<p>I'm really confused. I searched for a DNG file sample to download and process in DxO and found this one:</p>

<p>http://kenrockwell.com/leica/m9/sample-photos-3.htm</p>

<p>I downloaded the file, processed it in DxO and converted it to a JPEG. What are you guys trying to do with DNG that you can't do on DxO? BTW, the DNG is from a Leica M9.</p>

<p>That's a DNG that's come straight out of a camera, David - a "native" DNG: Optics Pro won't work with DNGs that are converted from other Raw formats like CR2s, NEFs, etc.</p>

<p>thanks again for the info David and Keith.</p>

<p>Stanley, I feel your pain. I did dng for years as blind faith but recently stopped the dng conversion. I started nearly ten years ago as it made files smaller and was quicker to process on older machines and back up to 700mb cd's.</p>

<p>DNG's from Leica and other manufactures are not the same as converted DNG's</p>

<p>The whole point of DNG is that it's a file formatted to a common, unchanging standard so that it can be converted in the future, even if some old Raw standard cannot be converted. Making DNG files that don't comply with the standard is exactly what's wrong with Raw files. There is no longer a standard and now we're back to proprietary files that are unique to each manufacturer that choses not to follow the standard.</p>

<p>That sounds like something that should not be supported. It's lost track of its original purpose. Native DNG really means Proprietary DNG, which is something to be stamped out, not supported. If my camera generated proprietary DNG files and I wanted real DNG files, I'd immediately make a copy that complied with the Adobe standard and delete the proprietary files in order to avoid future confusion.</p>

<p>So, you're telling me that if I save to disk DNG files out of certain cameras, DxO can't read them? Is that all cameras, or just certain brands? I don't remember having a DNG option on my Canons (5D3 and 7D).</p>

<p>Yep, that's the DNG theory David - as you say, it's explicitly contrary to the principles of DNG that some cameras generate what amounts to proprietary DNGs, and that some software is choosy about which DNGs it will support.</p>

<p>Optics Pro isn't alone in supporting camera-generated DNGs but not DNGs converted from other Raw files - AfterShot Pro (and Bibble before it) is exactly the same.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So, you're telling me that if I save to disk DNG files out of certain cameras, DxO can't read them? Is that all cameras, or just certain brands? I don't remember having a DNG option on my Canons (5D3 and 7D).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, Optics Pro will support <em>out of camera</em> DNGs, but <em>not </em>DNGs generated from CR2s, NEFs, ARWs, or other proprietary Raw formats.</p>

<p>Canon (and Nikon) don't have in-camera DNG; Pentax has, along with its own PEF format; and Leica - IIRC - has only camera-generated DNGs.</p>

<p>So Optics Pro will (or <em>should</em>) play nice with Leica and Pentax DNGs, but if you take a 7D CR2 and DNG it - with the Adobe DNG converter, say - Optics Pro won't even acknowledge its existence.</p>

<p>Earlier discussion on this (that you joined in with) here David: http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00bj5j</p>

<p>AfterShot Pro's (utterly bogus) reason for not supporting converted DNGs is that <em>they say </em>it would mean they'd have to do twice the profiling: one profile for the Raw file, and another profile for the DNG generated from the Raw file. It actually means no such thing, and I've said as much to them for years, but they're still sticking to the same daft story.</p>

<p>Incidentally, you asked in the other thread:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Can DXO DNG files be opened in Adobe?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And the answer's yes - Lightroom and Capture One have both just happily opened a DNG from Optics Pro.<br>

<br /> <em>Photo Ninja can't open it though (it can open Adobe and Capture One-generated DNGs), and neither can Optics Pro - which is just bizarre. </em><br>

<br /> Just to complete the <em>WTF?</em>ness of this whole topic: although Photo Ninja can handle most DNGs thrown at it, it can't <em>produce </em>them...</p>

<p>Okay, I'm thick, but what advantage is there to a proprietary DNG file vs. a proprietary Raw file?</p>