DXO PureRaw2 vs Lightroom

These 2 images were both in DXO PureRaw2 and Lightroom using generic setting of lens correction, auto white balance, auto exposure.

I did boost the lightroom image just a little to match the DXO but what a difference! DXO PureRAW2 adds so much detail. These were shot at ISO 12,800 - 1/30 with a Canon 28mm IS USM prime.

Terrible lighting but DXO makes it look like a 3200 or better image on the 6D. (see the cropped shots at the bottom)

DXO PureRaw2

Lightroom:

DXO:

Lightroom:

Oh dear....

Ignorance is bliss for you I see

Please elaborate what do I ignore?

My comment was related to the fact that aparently both samples were treated to show the biggest possible differences in favour to DxO.

Both SW behave differently.

DxO targets on very heavy noise reduction with all the flaws it inherently brings and is primarily targeted to people who from some strange reason think ISO12800 and higher should be totally noise free.

LR has exacxtly oposite attitude. Not panicking about some residual noise and offers more natural look at the price of residual noise.

There is no better or worse. It is just a different approach. And each of us can select what suits us better.

And personally I do not get at all this aim to simplify (or better to say primitivising) things to be black and white, right or wrong, better or worse.

This is just different. From multiple points of view.

(and a footnote: what is the relvancy of your initial post to "Canon SLR Lens Talk"?)

Borathon

Thanks Barry

Now what's interesting is what say topaz could then do with the lightroom version?

Nice demo  with the 28 2.8 IS for relevance to this forum

I agree. I tried DXO about two years ago based on many reviews on the forums and was immediately impressed. What they can do with noise handling is simply amazing. It's a really a big deal with my 5Ds; it could push that noisy ol' sensor much further than Adobe ACR could without banding and much cleaner shadows. It felt like a sensor upgrade for that camera in the noise/DR department. DXO has become my default RAW converter for all my cameras. I prefer it on my Panny M43 cameras also.

I don't mind noise, but I don't like 'ugly' noise, and to me DXO is less blotchy.  Especially if you push high ISO shadows any amount.  I don't go crazy on this typically, but the extra latitude is welcome.

I still have Adobe RAW as I'm on subscription. Certain scenes I prefer Adobe's color output over DXO, but once the ISO climbs up there or I need to push shadows, it's DXO for me.

I recently tried my 5Ds RAWs with the latest version of ACR, thinking maybe they made some updates and caught up on shadow recovery. Sadly, nope.