Wile we betatesters tested prime and Deepprime quite thorough and on default number “40” we got the conclusion that Deepprime vs prime on equal bases was around 25-40.Ģ5 was still better in detail then prime 40 with the same denoisinglevel and the diverence was visible to 80-100. In certain cases, I might even consider reducing the lumimance setting to leave a small amount of noise to create the illusion of sharpness I tested DeepPRIME on some of my RX100 low light images, and I’m getting a lot less luminance noise overall, and slightly better color saturation in places. I saw a thread a while back about noise reduction for Sony RX100 images. It’s very rarely that I can hold a camera steady enough at 1/15s that lens sharpness will actually improve the image, so I’m not gaining resolution by using it. Again, DeepPRIME does a much better job.Īs a side note, I have found that turning off lens sharpness for high ISO cases helps with noise reduction. Also, as in some of Peter’s examples above, Prime sometimes would create ghosts around small bright areas like lights. Prime was not managing, but DeepPRIME does a much better job. The resulting noise levels are bad - the corners particularly so because of lens correction and vignetting. I have some night shots at high ISO that were also deliberately unrexposed by about 2EV. PRIME does well in most instances, but DeepPRIME does a better job on hard cases. I’ll add my vote for DeepPRIME being a great step forward.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |