-= Canon EOS R7 owners unite! Post photos and discuss.

@greyswan if you let me know what kind of image you're looking for, I'd be happy to send a few raw files your way so you can play with noise reduction on your own.

Thanks Anton. I have edited the r7 images when it launched, so have some limited experience with them. I'm just curious as to your opinion of editing those files compared to the full-frame R. Do you find them easier to edit or limited by the ISO range, which I understand is slightly less usable in range than the R. So that's my question, how are they overall, compared to the R?

greyswan wrote in post #19555733
Thanks Anton. I have edited the r7 images when it launched, so have some limited experience with them. I'm just curious as to your opinion of editing those files compared to the full-frame R. Do you find them easier to edit or limited by the ISO range, which I understand is slightly less usable in range than the R. So that's my question, how are they overall, compared to the R?

I have both but use them for different purposes, which is not good for comparison. That said, I can't really tell the difference.

My feeling is that if the image is properly exposed, high ISO images are very usable.

greyswan wrote in post #19555733
Thanks Anton. I have edited the r7 images when it launched, so have some limited experience with them. I'm just curious as to your opinion of editing those files compared to the full-frame R. Do you find them easier to edit or limited by the ISO range, which I understand is slightly less usable in range than the R. So that's my question, how are they overall, compared to the R?

I don't have the R. I had a 7D2 until a month or two ago, but for the moment I'm just rocking the R7. This sad situation should end in a day or two, though.

I mostly shoot sports and I try to stop shooting when I get to about ISO 16,000. I will probably buy Topaz Photo AI soon, but for now all of my NR is in DPP.

@TeamSpeed has done a lot of great work with NR. I think he made a tutorial on it some time ago.

Thanks for the replies, guys.

C Scott IV wrote in post #19555757
I have both but use them for different purposes, which is not good for comparison. That said, I can't really tell the difference.

My feeling is that if the image is properly exposed, high ISO images are very usable.

True but I have underexposed images by a stop at ISO 2000 or higher and got reasonable results using NR. It is a big improvement over the 7D2 but that does not realy answer greyswan's exam question.

I've been an LR user since 2011. I waited for many years for Adobe Denoise AI. Since its release I got rid of Topaz Photo AI, Topaz DeNoise AI, Topaz Gigipixel, DXO PureRaw and PL (I only had PL3) and On1 NoNoise. I only kept Topaz Sharpen AI.

Works for me. ISO 20000

Lester Wareham wrote in post #19555087
As I said in the post I tried exiftool but with nothing, unless they call it something else?

Update: I found this:

https://www.dpreview.c​om/forums/thread/45986​85

I'll chech the exiftool logs (pc is off at mo and I am down a third of a bottle of Caret so can't be asked to turn it on tonight).

I would say On (2) sounds like OISL rather than IBIS but check.

Right. I think it only shows IS and the only reason I got it so it shows me which IS mode I used. Still pain to use and I still don't understand why Canon would not include IMO such critical info.

digital paradise wrote in post #19556125
I've been an LR user since 2011. I waited for many years for Adobe Denoise AI. Since its release I got rid of Topaz Photo AI, Topaz DeNoise AI, Topaz Gigipixel, DXO PureRaw and PL (I only had PL3) and On1 NoNoise. I only kept Topaz Sharpen AI.

Works for me. ISO 20000

Hosted photo: posted by digital paradise in
./showthread.php?p=195​56125&i=i59301155
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

I concur that Adobe Denoise AI seems to do quite well. I need a new graphics card with a GPU engine however. The on-board graphics do fine with Topaz Denoise but struggle mightily with the Adobe option, taking 5-10 min per photo.

In what way do you find Topaz sharpening to be better than the LR solution?

digital paradise wrote in post #19556125
I've been an LR user since 2011. I waited for many years for Adobe Denoise AI. Since its release I got rid of Topaz Photo AI, Topaz DeNoise AI, Topaz Gigipixel, DXO PureRaw and PL (I only had PL3) and On1 NoNoise. I only kept Topaz Sharpen AI.

Works for me. ISO 20000

Hosted photo: posted by digital paradise in
./showthread.php?p=195​56125&i=i59301155
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

This is what I do now, Topaz Sharpen AI and Adobe Denoise AI. The former works really great at times but fails with awful artefacts at other times. The latter is effective all the time (so far).

digital paradise wrote in post #19556125
I've been an LR user since 2011. I waited for many years for Adobe Denoise AI. Since its release I got rid of Topaz Photo AI, Topaz DeNoise AI, Topaz Gigipixel, DXO PureRaw and PL (I only had PL3) and On1 NoNoise. I only kept Topaz Sharpen AI.

Works for me. ISO 20000

Hosted photo: posted by digital paradise in
./showthread.php?p=195​56125&i=i59301155
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

I have the Topaz family, DXO PL 6 and Adobe LR. I haven't used Adobe LR NR enough to figure out what other apps it can effectively remove. I have actually liked the results every time I've used Adobe AI NR, so I might be dropping some of the others as well.

Scrumhalf wrote in post #19556129
I concur that Adobe Denoise AI seems to do quite well. I need a new graphics card with a GPU engine however. The on-board graphics do fine with Topaz Denoise but struggle mightily with the Adobe option, taking 5-10 min per photo.

In what way do you find Topaz sharpening to be better than the LR solution?

Yes AI eats VRAM. Before I got my new iMac in 2019 I could not even use Topaz DeNoise AI. Looked good in DeNoise but it had awful swaths of artefacts. Someone suggested I crop my files to 50% and that worked. With my new one I got 8GB VRAM because I knew more AI was coming. I'm between 36 and 45 seconds.

I don't use Topaz Sharpening very often as I find LrC does a good job. Sometimes a file needs a little more than LrC can do so I'll use it. I try to avoid creating another TIFF. Since I paid for Sharpen AI I may as well use it. I don't really the others anymore, even if they can do better. I was getting tired of trying to figure out which one to use and which ones I will renew. Not to mention the costs that come with that.

Since Topaz Sharpen AI opens as a TIFF I can use it forever unit my OS or something else stops supporting it. It's pretty mature and while Photo AI has been getting weekly updates I think Topaz Sharpen AI had only one since last fall. Before I purchased Photo AI I did email support and they did confirm that when Photo AI gets as good as the stand alone apps they will no longer be for sale and no support once your year runs out. I expect this will happen this fall. Topaz will be a one app company - Photo and Video AI.

PinholeR5 wrote in post #19556176
I have the Topaz family, DXO PL 6 and Adobe LR. I haven't used Adobe LR NR enough to figure out what other apps it can effectively remove. I have actually liked the results every time I've used Adobe AI NR, so I might be dropping some of the others as well.

I have pretty much watched every video review and comparison out there. Just like I found no two files are alike and sometimes across the same file Adobe Denoise did better in certain areas and DXO PureRaw in other areas. Same as Topaz.

Most conclusions were that if you have 3rd party NR apps use what works best for you. If you don't have any then you may want to consider saving our money. Of course that is just a general statement.

digital paradise wrote in post #19556193
Yes AI eats VRAM. Before I got my new iMac in 2019 I could not even use Topaz DeNoise AI. Looked good in DeNoise but it had awful swaths of artefacts. Someone suggested I crop my files to 50% and that worked. With my new one I got 8GB VRAM because I knew more AI was coming. I'm between 36 and 45 seconds.

I don't use Topaz Sharpening very often as I find LrC does a good job. Sometimes a file needs a little more than LrC can do so I'll use it. I try to avoid creating another TIFF. Since I paid for Sharpen AI I may as well use it. I don't really the others anymore, even if they can do better. I was getting tired of trying to figure out which one to use and which ones I will renew. Not to mention the costs that come with that.

Since Topaz Sharpen AI opens as a TIFF I can use it forever unit my OS or something else stops supporting it. It's pretty mature and while Photo AI has been getting weekly updates I think Topaz Sharpen AI had only one since last fall. Before I purchased Photo AI I did email support and they did confirm that when Photo AI gets as good as the stand alone apps they will no longer be for sale and no support once your year runs out. I expect this will happen this fall. Topaz will be a one app company - Photo and Video AI.

A correction.I could not even use Topaz DeNoise AI. Looked good in DeNoise but it had awful swaths of artefacts - back in LR or PS.

digital paradise wrote in post #19556247
A correction.I could not even use Topaz DeNoise AI. Looked good in DeNoise but it had awful swaths of artefacts - back in LR or PS.

I have just been using Topaz DeNoise AI for all R7 shots of ISO 2000 and above, I have found it very effective and an improvement on old methods. Below ISO 2000 I use my old work flow.

Below ISO 2000: DPP default NR sharpening off batch to TIFF, Mask capture sharpen in Photoshop to full Res TIFF.

Above ISO 2000: DPP NR sliders to zero, sharpening off batch to TIFF. Drag and drop set into Topaz select all, default set is low light auto, click save. No further processing this gives the full res TIFF.

I'll add some screen shots.

Can you show the examples of artifacts.