In Camera Noise Reduction

What settings do you use?

Long exposure, high iso, etc....

Disable, Low, Strong, Normal, etc....

Do you turn it ALL off and remove strictly in post?

I shoot in RAW and do everything in post. I turn all that stuff off.

My advice also is to turn it off and use a really good computer and software to do it. You will get better results, and your camera will be much "quicker".

Yep, everything turned off here to
PP does a better job imho

If you shoot Raw, then some things will just not apply. Long Exposure NR I guess will, although I've just never needed to mess with it. High ISO I believe is not applied to Raw data, and as has been said, you can get good results in your Raw processing software.

If I were shooting jpegs, I'd look to get as much done in-camera as possible, but High ISO Noise Reduction would tend to make me nervous, because I wouldn't want my jpeg overdone to the point of losing detail. So, I guess even then I would save it for post-processing.

I turn it all off and shoot only in raw. I was just wondering if anyone uses these features.

Higgs Boson wrote in post #12964404
I turn it all off and shoot only in raw. I was just wondering if anyone uses these features.

JPEG sportsshooter here--High ISO reduction and let the camera do as much of the work as possible as far as sharpness and contrast FYI.

I use both in-camera settings as well as mild post processing. It provide the best final result IMO. You can see the results of what I do with my 7D mini review on how to get the best out of high ISO shots.

That being said, I did a test in that post where I put the in-camera setting to Strong, a picture style of 3 for sharpening, a bump up in saturation and contrast, then took a look at the resulting JPG. With just minor cleanup, with no further NR than what the camera/DPP did, this was the result.

NR looks not so good at the picture above. Looks like no NR at all.

No NR in my cameras, takes too long time and it is crap compare to PP results.
Canon DPP is crap as well, for real NR, IMO.
Lightroom takes care better.

That pic above by TeamSpeed is taken at ISO 12800, to me, I think the NR is damn good.

kf095 wrote in post #12966395
NR looks not so good at the picture above. Looks like no NR at all.

No NR in my cameras, takes too long time and it is crap compare to PP results.
Canon DPP is crap as well, for real NR, IMO.
Lightroom takes care better.

That would because, as I state in my post, there isn't any other than what dpp honored for strong. If you want to see the results of pp nr, you have to go to my linked post.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12965758
I use both in-camera settings as well as mild post processing. It provide the best final result IMO. You can see the results of what I do with my 7D mini review on how to get the best out of high ISO shots.

That being said, I did a test in that post where I put the in-camera setting to Strong, a picture style of 3 for sharpening, a bump up in saturation and contrast, then took a look at the resulting JPG. With just minor cleanup, with no further NR than what the camera/DPP did, this was the result.

IMG NOTICE: [NOT AN IMAGE URL, NOT RENDERED INLINE]

And the wonderful result???? The shot looks almost like ISO 400 film