 Fondly Remembered
 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Perthshire Scotland
Posts: 8,168
 |
I'd agree from those examples.
That said - I've often found that one NR package might come out on top for one particular image - then one of the other NR packages performs better on another image.
All you folks with recent camera models shouldn't need it anyway
That said - I've often found that one NR package might come out on top for one particular image - then one of the other NR packages performs better on another image.
All you folks with recent camera models shouldn't need it anyway
|
Kit 1 Canon 1D Mark 3 Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II |
Kit 2 1D2 & 40D |
 Senior Member
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,419
|
Yeah I found the best solution to noise was my D700 
Before I used neat image, and it was OK. Found to be honest that the noise reduction built in to LR3 is the best I have played with.
Before I used neat image, and it was OK. Found to be honest that the noise reduction built in to LR3 is the best I have played with.
|
Kit 1 Nikon D700 Nikon MB-D10 Battery Grip Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR Nikon micro AF 200mm f/4 |
Other Kit View my profile to see my other kit! |
|
My Compact/P&S: Fuji X100 |
|
Senior Member
 |
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: uk/usa
Posts: 10,146
|
I use LR3 noise reduction too, do have some noise plug in for CS5 but don't use it. TBH, have found the D300, to be pretty good as far as noise goes anyway. Will admit to not being too bothered, about a bit of noise either,depends on what mood you want to achieve too.
Good tests though Goggs, from those pics the Noise Ninja looks the best.
Good tests though Goggs, from those pics the Noise Ninja looks the best.