Hi Matti and thanks for this video. In 2023 I tried PureRaw3 and I was not convinced. This year I tried PureRaw4 and bought it. This software in fantastic for m4/3. Now with my PEN-F I take pictures at 12800 iso and the result is magic. I set the lens softness to low or even none. But I have not yet use the Luminance and Details twiks. Could you tell us more ? Thanks. I have also purchased DxO PhotoLab7. Very good softwares.
I have a camera from 2016 and works so well with these corrections and DeepPrimeXD that it truly is like buying a new camera or lens. It significantly extended the life if the camera and lenses and saved me from having to invest in new gear as a results. That's valuable. While software corrections do have their limitations, the advantages are worth it.
The lens profiles and corrections are one thing to eliminate lens aberrations and get the maximum field of view. The other big one is the improved demosaicing, which I find to make an especially big difference on my Fuji X-Trans 5 sensor camera. The result is cleaner, more detailed and has slightly higher dynamic range than via Lightrooms demosaicing. This is very useful when printing large or when cropping heavily. Fujis X-Trans sensors seem to profit even more from this than Bayer sensors from what I've seen. I watched a comparison in image quality between Canon R5 full frame vs X-T5 crop, both with and without DXO preprocessing. At base iso Canon didn't gain much sharpness from DXO, but Fuji did gain a lot. To the point where the preprocessed Fuji files looked as good or better than the R5 files either preprocessed or not. This software is more than worth the price. With it my 16-80 f4 kit zoom can give me equal or more details in the RAW files than my 18mm f.14 prime can without it. Depending on the conditions of the photo of course, but generally speaking that's true. This is comparing a pretty ok kit zoom vs one of the best primes the whole system has to offer.
Hi Matti, Happy 20TH Birthday for Dxo 🎉. And what a good APP it is with good noticeable difference after using DxO. I do like the Noise Removal, and it doesn't look overdone, and it gives the image a natural look. Great examples given Matti. Thanks for sharing this video, I learned something new tonight 😊
4:25 I don’t own any version of DXO Pure Raw so don’t understand how this software works. As you mentioned about the added pixels in DXO Pure Raw, does it work like the Generative Fill in Photoshop? I believe Photoshop has the biggest catalog of lens profiles among other software. What makes lens profiles from DXO is better than Photoshop?
DxO offers the option to expand the image area a tad wider and include the pixels that would be normally thrown away. That only works with lenses that have a lot of barrel type native distortion. If you compare Adobe and DxO results you’ll see right away that DxO looks better, sharper.
It's the best RAW file processor that I have used. Thank you for alerting us to just how good version 4 is!
Hi Matti and thanks for this video. In 2023 I tried PureRaw3 and I was not convinced. This year I tried PureRaw4 and bought it. This software in fantastic for m4/3. Now with my PEN-F I take pictures at 12800 iso and the result is magic. I set the lens softness to low or even none. But I have not yet use the Luminance and Details twiks. Could you tell us more ? Thanks.
I have also purchased DxO PhotoLab7. Very good softwares.
You might want to update your video title. It currently reads "Buy this not new a lens" instead of "Buy this, NOT a new lens"
Thanks for your tip. I know what it says😀 Did you like the video?
You want it to say "not new a lens"? Carry on, then.
I have a camera from 2016 and works so well with these corrections and DeepPrimeXD that it truly is like buying a new camera or lens. It significantly extended the life if the camera and lenses and saved me from having to invest in new gear as a results. That's valuable. While software corrections do have their limitations, the advantages are worth it.
Thanks. That’s it the advantages outweigh the downsides.
The lens profiles and corrections are one thing to eliminate lens aberrations and get the maximum field of view.
The other big one is the improved demosaicing, which I find to make an especially big difference on my Fuji X-Trans 5 sensor camera. The result is cleaner, more detailed and has slightly higher dynamic range than via Lightrooms demosaicing. This is very useful when printing large or when cropping heavily.
Fujis X-Trans sensors seem to profit even more from this than Bayer sensors from what I've seen. I watched a comparison in image quality between Canon R5 full frame vs X-T5 crop, both with and without DXO preprocessing. At base iso Canon didn't gain much sharpness from DXO, but Fuji did gain a lot. To the point where the preprocessed Fuji files looked as good or better than the R5 files either preprocessed or not.
This software is more than worth the price. With it my 16-80 f4 kit zoom can give me equal or more details in the RAW files than my 18mm f.14 prime can without it. Depending on the conditions of the photo of course, but generally speaking that's true. This is comparing a pretty ok kit zoom vs one of the best primes the whole system has to offer.
Hi Matti, Happy 20TH Birthday for Dxo 🎉. And what a good APP it is with good noticeable difference after using DxO. I do like the Noise Removal, and it doesn't look overdone, and it gives the image a natural look. Great examples given Matti. Thanks for sharing this video, I learned something new tonight 😊
Thanks for watching once again😀
Your very welcome Matti 😊
important in general is to compare results with and without correction for vignetting.
especially night shots.
Agreed... DXO makes a world of difference to your lens performance.
Thanks Matti.
Thanks!
4:25 I don’t own any version of DXO Pure Raw so don’t understand how this software works. As you mentioned about the added pixels in DXO Pure Raw, does it work like the Generative Fill in Photoshop?
I believe Photoshop has the biggest catalog of lens profiles among other software. What makes lens profiles from DXO is better than Photoshop?
DxO offers the option to expand the image area a tad wider and include the pixels that would be normally thrown away. That only works with lenses that have a lot of barrel type native distortion. If you compare Adobe and DxO results you’ll see right away that DxO looks better, sharper.
Is possible to create a personal lens profile?
I have not explored that possibility but I doubt it's possible at least to the same extent as the DxO profiles.
Useful video but title makes no sense.
words can be hard, they become jumbled up in your head.
This is exactly why I only buy Lenses that not need software to perform the best possible ! Lens makers today are too lazy !
I knew your comment would come😀
@@mattisulanto 😁