$100 Software vs. $3000 Camera

Last year I was shooting with a 1D Mark III and processing with LR 2.7. I was using f/2 primes and mostly shooting at ISO 3200

This year I'm shooting with a 1D Mark IV and processing with LR 3.2. I've ditched the primes and I'm at f/2.8 and ISO 6400. So be aware that the 1D4 shots are at 1 stop higher ISO.
So which is doing more for IQ? The $100 software update or the $3000 camera update?

I'm going to lay this out in four image set posts. First we will look at the 1D Mark III - full image followed by 100% crops processed via LR 2.7 and LR 3.2. Then I'll post the 1D Mark 4 images in the same sequence.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

1D Mark III with both LR versions (100%)

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

And here is the 1D Mark IV full image:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

And the 1D Mark IV images with both versions of LR (100%)

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I never saw much use for noise reduction in LR2, but it's awesome in LR3. Your shots tell the tale.

Conclusions?

The 1D Mark IV is cleaner than the 1D3 even at one stop higher ISO. Plus, the 1D4 is capturing much better detail. Note the eyelash detail in the 1D4 shot. I never saw this level of detal when I was shooting with the 1D3 in these kinds of conditions.

Even so, the LR software update has a huge effect. I will come right out and say that I probably need to back off on NR when using the LR3 software as the skin is getting plasticky. But for this comparison I left all settings the same between the two.

I think if someone is shooting with a 1D Mark III today and wanting better high ISO performance, I'd invest $100 in updating to the latest ACR first before updating camera.

This isn't to say that the 1D Mark IV is not beating the 1D Mark III (remember that the sample photos are at 1 stop different ISO and the 1D4 still shows better detail) but for the price LR3 is great.

isn't that a main new feature in LR, "Luminance Noise Reduction" ? haven't tried other versions, but it a nice tool, but has to used in moderation. enough said, back to the girl's volleyball pics....

Thanks for the heads up!

JeffreyG wrote in post #11177542
Conclusions?

Hard to compare the way you wrote it, but I think they're both right. Look at it this way, with the 1D + LR3 combo you can get incredible low light shots. I upgraded from a 40D to 5DII before I got LR3. I was so blown away by the high iso difference. Then LR3 came out it it took it to another of low light shooting. Just be happy you have both. Besides, LR3 can't shoot 10fps.

LR3 NR is exceptional. and... so is 1d4 high iso performance

In CS5 you can select the new 2010 processing or the legacy,2003, one. I tried it, when I first got CS5 on some high ISO 40D shots I have. I didn't notice anywhere near the difference it seems to have on 1D3 images you are showing. It's quite subtle on 40D RAW files.

Thanks! I've been debating about getting LR3...

It would have been great to see this combined with your other thread about the same topic. That way people could get all the info in one place.

Convinced me, I went over to Ebay and picked up a full license of LR3 for $85. Thanks alot, like I wanted to spend money tonight.

BTW, they have 3 more copies left, if you best-offer at $85, it will auto-accept. I should have tried $80 first.

http://cgi.ebay.com …ain_0&hash=item​35ad79f306