The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

MFDB Performance at higher ISOs

J

jmvdigital

Guest
I have to agree. After shunning C1 in favor of the LR workflow for a while, I've done some more indepth comparison's with C1 and LR with my P30+. The differences are significant and remarkable. Bar none, C1 produces far better results with the 30+ files, high ISO or not. The pixel structure, noise/sharpening, and color rendition are all far superior with C1.

I have made the consolation to use C1 for processing my 30+ files, while continuing to use LR for asset management and editing of all image collection as a whole.
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
Which version of LR? Adobe claims to have improved image quality since the earlier versions. Just curious. It always helps to mention the versions.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I know 1.1 and the Beta version 2 for sure after that I quit LR and actually going to take it off my machines
 
J

jmvdigital

Guest
Graham, I'm running LR 2.1 (latest and greatest). Are y'all interested in a direct comparison? I can provide that if anyone wants to see instead of read about the differences.
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
Here are some samples. The first shot is the full scene, selected not for its artistic merit (none!) but its very high dynamic range. Exposure was 1/2500 at f8 at ISO 800, the highest ISO for the P45+.

The second is a 100% selection of the shadow area processed in C1 4.5.1. It was processed at C1 defaults with no other manipulation. (C1 does have different automatic defaults for each back and ISO, so it was presumably doing its very best!)

The third is the same but processed in LR 2.1. It too was at LR defaults except I tried to get it looking better by moving the noise sliders. They made very little difference.

The attached jpgs may not do the pic justice, but in a glossy print there is no noise visible in the C1 photo. For this sort of well-lit scene, ISO 800 is eminently usable, tho' you'd only need it if you forgot your tripod!

Bill
 
Last edited:

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Have to agree with C1 being the best current converter for *my* files, the P45+ and M8, however this does not mean it will be the best for *all* cameras. Nonetheless, like Guy I have removed LightRoom from my systems. If I should ever need/want the base Adobe converter, I have it available in CS4/Bridge.

Cheers,
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Excellent example Bill, the difference in noise on the water and hull of the ship is quite remarkable.
 

Clawery

New member
Graham, I'm running LR 2.1 (latest and greatest). Are y'all interested in a direct comparison? I can provide that if anyone wants to see instead of read about the differences.
Justin,

I would love to see the differences between LR and C1 and how your files look.
Do you mind posting them?

Chris Lawery
Sales Manager
[email protected]
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer of the Year

877-217-9870 | National Atlanta / Miami
404-234-5195 | Cell
Sign up for our Newsletter | Read Our Latest Newsletter
 
J

jmvdigital

Guest
ISO 1600 on screen comparison. Be sure to notice the detail and shadows. The difference here is signficant. These are both adjusted in their respective programs to look good and match each other as best as possible.
http://jmvdigital.com/temp/C1_LR.jpg

ISO 100 for both below... notice the backpack fabric detail and color.

Capture One (all defaults):
http://jmvdigital.com/temp/C1.jpg

Lightroom (required exposure adjustment to match, default noise/sharpening):
http://jmvdigital.com/temp/LR.jpg
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yup and you guy's thought I was just pulling your leg. LR just stinks with Phase files compared to C1.
 
J

jmvdigital

Guest
Indeed Guy. I can post more, just say the word. I am shocked at the default differences. My split-screen comparison at 1600 shows the absolute best I could do at LR in terms of detail and noise reduction without making things ugly. It's the closest I could get to C1.

The 100 shot is less dramatic, but I still feel the difference is there, especially with color. I have a more extreme example of color rendition I just remembered. Will post later. That will knock your socks off.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Post all you would like Justin. You have all the server space you could possibly imagine. LOL

I really gave up on LR and it is a nice software package just not for the Phase backs and hate to say it compared to C1 with the M8, DMR and my old Nikons D300 , C1 still does a nicer job. My Oly 520 files also look very nice. I hate to give C1 such a plug and seems bias but they been doing this longer than almost anyone with raw processing and there engineers in Denmark you just have to respect there talent when it comes to the final result. How you get there some folks don't like the program as far as workflow and that I do understand but once you get going after awhile with it than it becomes second nature. This was one of the top 5 reasons why I bought a Phase back and that is the software and folks need to consider software as part of there buying decision be it Phocus, C1, Leaf capture and whatever Sinar uses you have to look at this end of it.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Post all you would like Justin. You have all the server space you could possibly imagine. LOL

I really gave up on LR and it is a nice software package just not for the Phase backs and hate to say it compared to C1 with the M8, DMR and my old Nikons D300 , C1 still does a nicer job. My Oly 520 files also look very nice. I hate to give C1 such a plug and seems bias but they been doing this longer than almost anyone with raw processing and there engineers in Denmark you just have to respect there talent when it comes to the final result. How you get there some folks don't like the program as far as workflow and that I do understand but once you get going after awhile with it than it becomes second nature. This was one of the top 5 reasons why I bought a Phase back and that is the software and folks need to consider software as part of there buying decision be it Phocus, C1, Leaf capture and whatever Sinar uses you have to look at this end of it.
 
J

jmvdigital

Guest
Which one looks like a real pumpkin? That's C1 for you. Straight out of the box for both LR and C1. No amount of tweaking or color correction could get me the proper tones as seen in the default C1. And no, none of the channels are clipped. (ISO 200 on P30+, if it matters)
 
Last edited:
Top