I was fine with my g9i but have been seeing a lot of good high iso and shadow recovery evidence from the g9ii to ignore it. And I use flash, but even then sometimes with HSS I still need to bump up the iso if the subject is too far or fast.
I think it retains colors at high iso and in underexposed images lot better than the original. The new enhance + noise reduction feature in Camera Raw is very impressive. I just need to pay attention not to overdo it. It goes into uncanny valley territory quickly if pushed too far, and the noise alone rarely bothers me. It's the loss of color and contrast I try to recover.
I don't have the G9 II, still using the G9. I also have an OM-1 and the OM-1 is better than the G9 at high ISO mostly because it retains colors. This is also what I would be expecting from the G9 II.
Yesterday I downloaded DXO PureRaw 4 and compared it to what I can do in LRC with Denoise. I came to the conclusion that LRC was the better option. YMMV of course, but make sure you try out the 14 free trial on DXO before you plop down $119. There are those that might argue that LRC is $10 a month and therefore owning DXO outright for the same annual price is best. But ask yourself where will this technology be in a year from now? I’ve been with Photoshop for about 30 years and Lightroom from the beginning, and to me, the new $10 a month option has saved me a lot of money.
Luminar works well as well !!
I was fine with my g9i but have been seeing a lot of good high iso and shadow recovery evidence from the g9ii to ignore it. And I use flash, but even then sometimes with HSS I still need to bump up the iso if the subject is too far or fast.
On my G9M2, I'm not afraid to go up to ISO 12000 and DXO PureRaws can handle such a high ISO without any problems.
I think it retains colors at high iso and in underexposed images lot better than the original. The new enhance + noise reduction feature in Camera Raw is very impressive. I just need to pay attention not to overdo it. It goes into uncanny valley territory quickly if pushed too far, and the noise alone rarely bothers me. It's the loss of color and contrast I try to recover.
I don't have the G9 II, still using the G9. I also have an OM-1 and the OM-1 is better than the G9 at high ISO mostly because it retains colors. This is also what I would be expecting from the G9 II.
For high ISO photos, nothing beats DXO. I regularly made usuable photos with my GH6.
Do you know how DXO compares to Topaz?
@@ToddBannor Yes. Topaz is better on JPEGs, but it's not even close for high ISO raw. Try it, it's free for a month.
Yesterday I downloaded DXO PureRaw 4 and compared it to what I can do in LRC with Denoise. I came to the conclusion that LRC was the better option. YMMV of course, but make sure you try out the 14 free trial on DXO before you plop down $119.
There are those that might argue that LRC is $10 a month and therefore owning DXO outright for the same annual price is best. But ask yourself where will this technology be in a year from now? I’ve been with Photoshop for about 30 years and Lightroom from the beginning, and to me, the new $10 a month option has saved me a lot of money.