Just got G9 and DxO PL... hallelujah!!

I've had a quite a few cameras over the year and I've always loved Panasonic, for the build quality, loved their rangefinder style models and their innovative features like post focus and grabbing photos from 4k/6k videos etc.

But, was always disappointed with noise at anything above 800 iso, but the G9 is leaps ahead of the GX8 and G7 that I had in years past iso wise, ok, that's one big plus, the other is DxO Photo Lab Elite, OMG, seriously, I'm not one given to be overly 'wow' about stuff, but really, it is wow!

I never really found any software that could with minimal effort get higher iso shots from Panny to look good.

Was lucky enough to get DxO PL4 Elite for $70 odd, and by JUST using the Deep Prime option (not adjusting anything else at all) I'm able to get great quality jpegs from the RAW, see 100% crop comparisons below, the left side is the SOOC jpeg (2000 iso in the cat crops, and 3200 iso in the dead roses shot) and right is jpeg after using Deep Prime button on RAW file, no other adjustments at all... I'm amazed, yip its not quite my A9 at 3200 but its close and its more fun to use.

Open in gallery and look at bit closer, the difference is substantial. All of a sudden I wont mind shooting at 4000 or 5000 iso with my G9 whereas previously I wouldn't have gone above 2000 iso odd.

Hehe, yeah it's a fantastic combo 😀

Since I've tested Photolab4, it has become my best companion for m43 cameras. Not only at high iso, but also to maximize detail reproduction at low iso. Finally,I think color reproduction is better than what ACR or Lightroom can achieve. Really, this software is a game changer.

Yep, fully agreed. I've been able to revive some totally hopeless high ISO bird shots with the software.

Marko

I have the G9 + DxO PL4 as well. It's really helpful when you have an OK exposure to begin with, but significantly less so if you shoot in very low light. It's not entirely worthless in low light, and certainly beats Lightroom, but noticeably less useful than when you have an OK exposure to begin with.

glassoholic wrote:

Yes... m43 and DXO Photolab Elite (with Deep Prime) + RAW files are a very good combo for getting the utmost IQ possible out of our little sensors.

The camera sensor in your phone is little, m43 is a big sensor!

The OP is late to see the light, I use DxO Optics Pro 8 many years ago, much better then Photoshop raw.

Jozef

I agree. I've been using LR standalone v. 6 for years, and PhotoLab 4 with Deep Prime is leaps beyond it in terms of noise reduction and sharpness. I am now usually pleased with the results from shooting with auto ISO limited to 6400. Getting the exposure right is more important than sticking to low ISO.

There are still a lot of interface features I like about LR. Maybe my top request would be for DXO to implement dual monitor support. When working in the LR Develop module, having the full image displayed in the LR screen while the second monitor can be set to display the image at 100% is so handy. I sometimes use LR to cull images in this manner, deleting the non-keepers without any editing, and then I open DXO to edit.

I find the G9 also clearly superior to my prior Panasonic bodies (GX8, GX7, GM5) in terms of color. Auto white balance generally nails color to my satisfaction, and I find I'm correcting color a LOT less than I used to. That and simply clicking on the "Deep Prime" button in DXO, rather than futzing with the noise reduction and sharpening sliders in LR, has really shortened the time I spend in processing.

I am deeply satisfied with my G9 + Oly 12-40 and 40-150 f2.8 PRO Setup.
DxO cannot "invent lost detail" and lost "dynamic range" yet DxO 4.0 AI Prime Do-Noise is excellent for Colored Images (e.g. birds in the Zoo) at ISO 3200 and even in night scenes in the shaddows ISO 1600 at - 2/3 EV is great.
I am waiting for the in-door events to open again for more serious testing of this combo together with my Godox TT685o Fill Flash

I only have one wish left ... if you disable all pixel noise processing in DxO and go 1:1 you can see that e.g. Lumix G9 1/10s ISO 3200 Images have quite some hot pixel. Due to additional heat the Pixel Shift Images might already get quite some (many hundreds) at 1/1s ISO 800 (shooting Night Sky Lines) ...
I hope that DxO Upgrades the Hot Pixel Removal also for 80 MP Pixel Shift RAWs.
----
In general the G9 80 MP raws can be processed quite well with DxO and with DxO AI Do-Noise also < 2 min on medium fast pc and GPU

allematic wrote:

Oh yeah it's really that good. I don't care about ISO anymore and I can even get usable images out of underexposed ISO 3200-6400 shots. Best thing is that it requires little to zero user intervention.

!!! Yes - that do-noise setting in DxO is auto adapting to the local noise with prime de-noise 10-20% (normal <= ISO 400) or 30-40 (high shadow lift, >= ISO 1600) and similar "Prime Clear View" and Smart Lighting, edge sharpness boost etc. a very good quality can be achieved with a few standard settings and without local adaption. If you are less  picky you can configure more settings to auto

Sundre wrote:

I have the G9 + DxO PL4 as well. It's really helpful when you have an OK exposure to begin with, but significantly less so if you shoot in very low light. It's not entirely worthless in low light, and certainly beats Lightroom, but noticeably less useful than when you have an OK exposure to begin with.

I think what you mean to say is that it's less useful at high ISO, since you can get an OK exposure in low light by simply dragging the shutter.

In which case, I entirely disagree. DeepPRIME is incredibly effective even at ISO 12,800. Sure, you lose detail relative to lower ISO settings, but the images are usable for prints at least one full size larger. In my view, DeepPRIME is most valuable with high-ISO shots, as it greatly expands the range of uses to which they can be put.

brentbrent wrote:

I agree. I've been using LR standalone v. 6 for years, and PhotoLab 4 with Deep Prime is leaps beyond it in terms of noise reduction and sharpness. I am now usually pleased with the results from shooting with auto ISO limited to 6400. Getting the exposure right is more important than sticking to low ISO.

For my event work, most of which goes straight to social media, I'm now comfortable letting ISO drift up to 12,800 with my GX8 & GX9. Whoa. Why did I buy that 35mm-format kit? I coulda saved $12,000 if DeepPRIME had come out two years ago.

There are still a lot of interface features I like about LR. Maybe my top request would be for DXO to implement dual monitor support.

Um...say what? I put the the thumbnail grids on my second display.

When working in the LR Develop module, having the full image displayed in the LR screen while the second monitor can be set to display the image at 100% is so handy. I sometimes use LR to cull images in this manner, deleting the non-keepers without any editing, and then I open DXO to edit.

I find the G9 also clearly superior to my prior Panasonic bodies (GX8, GX7, GM5) in terms of color. Auto white balance generally nails color to my satisfaction, and I find I'm correcting color a LOT less than I used to. That and simply clicking on the "Deep Prime" button in DXO, rather than futzing with the noise reduction and sharpening sliders in LR, has really shortened the time I spend in processing.

Jacques Cornell wrote:

Sundre wrote:

I have the G9 + DxO PL4 as well. It's really helpful when you have an OK exposure to begin with, but significantly less so if you shoot in very low light. It's not entirely worthless in low light, and certainly beats Lightroom, but noticeably less useful than when you have an OK exposure to begin with.

I think what you mean to say is that it's less useful at high ISO, since you can get an OK exposure in low light by simply dragging the shutter.

In which case, I entirely disagree. DeepPRIME is incredibly effective even at ISO 12,800. Sure, you lose detail relative to lower ISO settings, but the images are usable for prints at least one full size larger. In my view, DeepPRIME is most valuable with high-ISO shots, as it greatly expands the range of uses to which they can be put.

Not exactly. I'll need to go back to my low light photos and think about why DP doesn't help all that much with them, but it's not just about high ISO. It's something about shadow noise/detail...

Will contemplate it until I know what I mean

Sundre wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

Sundre wrote:

I have the G9 + DxO PL4 as well. It's really helpful when you have an OK exposure to begin with, but significantly less so if you shoot in very low light. It's not entirely worthless in low light, and certainly beats Lightroom, but noticeably less useful than when you have an OK exposure to begin with.

I think what you mean to say is that it's less useful at high ISO, since you can get an OK exposure in low light by simply dragging the shutter.

In which case, I entirely disagree. DeepPRIME is incredibly effective even at ISO 12,800. Sure, you lose detail relative to lower ISO settings, but the images are usable for prints at least one full size larger. In my view, DeepPRIME is most valuable with high-ISO shots, as it greatly expands the range of uses to which they can be put.

Not exactly. I'll need to go back to my low light photos and think about why DP doesn't help all that much with them

Maybe you dragged the shutter enough to cause motion blur. I used to do that out of fear of pushing ISO too high. No more.

, but it's not just about high ISO. It's something about shadow noise/detail...

Will contemplate it until I know what I mean

Check this out.

Jacques Cornell wrote:

Sundre wrote:

Not exactly. I'll need to go back to my low light photos and think about why DP doesn't help all that much with them

Maybe you dragged the shutter enough to cause motion blur. I used to do that out of fear of pushing ISO too high. No more.

, but it's not just about high ISO. It's something about shadow noise/detail...

Will contemplate it until I know what I mean

Check this out.

Looks good. I'm too busy to do it myself right now, but this is the one photo where I wasn't able to get the kind of results I hoped with DP... If you feel like having a look at the RAW file (from my Tresorit Cloud account).

Feels like no matter what I do, it feels noisy and not sharp enough.

https://web.tresorit.com/l/YTXwo#UbVI6AvPTfC4p2aQ8gFbzw

Sundre wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

Sundre wrote:

Not exactly. I'll need to go back to my low light photos and think about why DP doesn't help all that much with them

Maybe you dragged the shutter enough to cause motion blur. I used to do that out of fear of pushing ISO too high. No more.

, but it's not just about high ISO. It's something about shadow noise/detail...

Will contemplate it until I know what I mean

Check this out.

Looks good. I'm too busy to do it myself right now, but this is the one photo where I wasn't able to get the kind of results I hoped with DP... If you feel like having a look at the RAW file (from my Tresorit Cloud account).

Feels like no matter what I do, it feels noisy and not sharp enough.

https://web.tresorit.com/l/YTXwo#UbVI6AvPTfC4p2aQ8gFbzw

I gave it a go. There are four things that make this image really difficult.

1. Dynamic range is huge. In choosing to preserve the highlights, you drove the shadows into complete blackness.
2. The image is underexposed. Another stop of exposure (with a larger aperture) would have helped here, and you could probably have recovered the highlights.
3. There appears to be blur from subjects moving, and possibly from camera shake as well (the sign at right and the tree lights show this).
4. Focus appears to be in front of the primary subject, the woman in the foreground. The cobblestones about two feet in front of her are in sharp focus.

In short, while there is some loss of detail from the high ISO setting, I believe most of the detail loss is due to the four factors I described above. It may seem counterintuitive, but I think you'd have done better at ISO 6400 and shutter 1/100. f2.8 or f4 and ISO 1600 or 3200 would have been even better. And, nailing focus on the main subject, or focusing on the sign on the right, would have helped.

In short, the issues are related largely to exposure and AF errors. Sorry.

Two years ago, I reviewed some of my high-ISO event photos (I'm an event pro) because, like you, I felt that my ISO 3200 shots lacked detail. What I found was that I was using a too-slow shutter because I was wary of pushing ISO any further. I began letting auto ISO drift up to 6400 and using faster shutter speeds, and I immediately got better detail, especially with moving subjects. I think that if you do likewise, and use larger apertures when available, you'll see a noticeable improvement.