06-06-2012, 12:35 PM
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1338968600' post='18696']
Recently I have read many reviews on MFT cameras. I have an impression that factories improve the high iso performance of small size sensors through very intensive noise reduction processing inside the camera, which is applied even to raw files. Some do it good and get great pictures, some do it bad and result much loss of details in their pictures. [color="#0000ff"]I don't know if DSLRs also apply noise reduction in camera to their raw files (in a non-turn-off way) [/color]and if yes, how intensive the processing is.
Frank
[/quote]
All do to some degree, as that is unavoidable. Nikon is famous for it (because they do it very well indeed).
Kind regards, Wim
Recently I have read many reviews on MFT cameras. I have an impression that factories improve the high iso performance of small size sensors through very intensive noise reduction processing inside the camera, which is applied even to raw files. Some do it good and get great pictures, some do it bad and result much loss of details in their pictures. [color="#0000ff"]I don't know if DSLRs also apply noise reduction in camera to their raw files (in a non-turn-off way) [/color]and if yes, how intensive the processing is.
Frank
[/quote]
All do to some degree, as that is unavoidable. Nikon is famous for it (because they do it very well indeed).
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....