![]() ![]() There's loads of it shown with my 18-55mm f/2.8 lens, for example, whereas it cannot be seen at all when doing the same conversions in CaptureOne without doing anything special. It's also pretty bad by default at removing chromatic aberrations and purple fringing. The colors are more accurate or more interesting from those other two, and there is some weird color noise / artifacting at times with the DxO conversions that is just not present with my other RAW converters. Mostly got PL5 for the noise reduction.īut I cannot say I prefer it over CaptureOne or PhotoNinja specifically in the tonality department. I did buy DxO PhotoLab 5 Elite and FilmPack 6 Elite because the upgrade bundle came to $113 total or something like that. We already knew that Lightroom is behind pretty much every other RAW converter for XTrans files, so I would compare to other software: CaptureOne, Iridient, PhotoNinja. Has anyone done a comparison between DxO PhotoLab's and Iridient's demosaicing of Fuji files? Ideally, I would replace Iridient's tool with DxO, as I like DeepPRIME on m43 and Fuji APS-C files. However, if necessary, I use Iridient's X-Transformer. Also, PureRAW does not support Fuji files yet, AFAIK. However, PhotoLab has the advantage that it has an LrC plugin. Both have excellent DeepPRIME noise reduction. Please note that DxO PhotoLab and DxO PureRAW are two different apps. Again X100T, F8 with wide-angle converter. ![]() Here now the standard setting "Camera default rendering".Īnd the DxO PL5 RAW conversion doesn't have the mushy impression of LRC irrespective of sharpening. I noticed that it leads sometimes to strong shifts from orange to red as can be seen on the hood of the white car at the right bottom corner. In the processed image above I used in DxO PL5 the rendering setting "Neutral color, factory tonality". I didn't like any of my attempts to process the RAW with LRC or C1. The new DxO PhotoLab 5 release is amazing. But now I am takign another look - and like what I see.įor those times you might need to shoot at high ISO's - the DxO noise reduction is better than anything else I've seen. And since Fuji wasn't supported, it was a no go. Operation is vastly different from LR and C1 - which has made it diufficult for me to switch. Raw devlopment seems better than in LR, on par with C1. Subjective, but I find colors are better reproduced with DoX PhotoLab. Not that I don't have enough film presets, but yet I will try out the demo. Question: does their film pack also support Fuji X? As I mainly use Capture (and less and less LR), I do not need another converter.ĮDIT: Answer is yes according to dpreview article. ![]() Curious why there are no "auto exposure" modes for Fuji.Īny reason why I would prefer this over Capture One ? Of course, may also be my computer (i7 6700K, GTX1080, 16GB RAM, SSD). Speed on my PC is also good, but could be improved further (in particular previews building in a folde with many images). The raw conversion part is very good with excellent colors and sharpness. this file was processed using PureRAW and exported to LR, when the identical adjustments (including default sharpening settings) were made to both file (viewing at 200%). X-H1 XF100-400mmF4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x lens 560mm f/8.0 1/500s 1250 ISO 0.0 EVĭxO seems to not suffer from the same demosaicing artifacts that LR does. still room for improvement, but much better than the results from LR. Initial test shows a nice improvement at ISO 3200 - I will have to look and see if I have anything shot at higher ISO that I actually kept.Ī re-worked X-H1 file, using DxO Photolab5 and PureRAW noise reduction. The m4/3 files respond beautifully to the DxO PureRAW processing, giving really nice, clean results at ISO 6400 and even 12800, but until now the only option for Fuji X-Trans has been Topaz DeNoise A!, which I found to be very disappointing. it should help the Fuji X series catch up to (and hopefully pass) m4/3 in high-ISO noise performance once again. But if I wanted film simulations, I would do in-camera or with Fuji software. No film simulations (or I haven't found them). Auto AWB way better than in LR (which always gives me yellowish results no matter which camera). Colors better than in LR, in particular skin tones. Fingers crossed.įirst impression: Seems stable, fast enough. DxO PhotoLab 5 now with X-Trans support (beta)Įxciting. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |