[Intrepid00]

Is it normal to see so much noise even at ISO 100 with DNG? I'm opening the pictures in Lightroom 5.3 and I even daylight photos end up with lots of noise. I also noticed that DNG are not being tagged with GPS information.

[buxz777]

even a decent slr cameras will show noise , the raw data is straight from the sensor with no processing , if your settings are right 100 iso etc etc then you should be able to clear it up nicely in lightroom by applying a noise filter? remember that the raw files are straight from the sensor with no processing , its your chance to make that picture how you want it bud ;-) have a play in lightroom and see what you can do to it ;-)

here is some free software that might help , it has a free 30 day trial http://www.rawphotodesk.com/details.html

[unstoppablekem]

Can you show us these photos that gave a lot of noise, so we can get a better understanding of what's going on?

[RainbowSeven]

Noise is really high, even for smartphone, original JPG was better than what I could get from Lightroom 5.3 without heavy tweaking

[infestedd]

im curious to see some examples, since my carrier didnt let us download black yet

[thelostsoul]

Noise is really high, even for smartphone, original JPG was better than what I could get from Lightroom 5.3 without heavy tweaking

I'm using the latest version of LightZone and the images I see are a little noisy, but not bad. Keep in mind that a RAW image is definitely expected to contain a lot of noise because it is simply what the image sensor sees minus processing. I've uploaded a couple sample images from my latest trip saved in 100% quality JPGs in "as shot" mode from LightZone. I know very little about processing photos, so I uploaded the RAW file, the Nokia Camera's oversampled image, the full resolution export, and the autosaved downsized image from LightZone of each picture. These are untouched except what I described here.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bzxj8o1ga5esa7g/4fRsGuFnjc

[infestedd]

Well, the noise is a lot more "sharper" than the processed jpg, what should be expected. But im pretty sure photoshop algorythim can do better than the camera processing

[buxz777]

Well, the noise is a lot more "sharper" than the processed jpg, what should be expected. But im pretty sure photoshop algorythim can do better than the camera processing

nokia are well known for their camera processing with the 808 being touted by many as having some of the best jpeg processing they have seen , me included . Seriously the 808/1020 on black are producing some of the cleanest noise free images I have seen from cameras (I haven't spent 1k or silly money on cameras by the way but I do mess around with lots of decent cameras as I love photography)

I think the user vlado could go into more detail about the processing , I am sure it his him that done some research into it at some point with his 808 as the processing is that good and gets that good results , lets also not forget that the 41mp raw image doesn't have the benefit of oversampling like the 5mp jpeg pureview image does ;-)

I think with the right tools and the right knowledge you will get great shots from the raw files , I have seen some great work from users on the net so far with some really clean crisp shots but don't forget that the nokia 5mp images also have oversampling going on and very good jepg processing all ready underway ;-)

here is some info on the 808 http://press.nokia.com/wp-content/up...whitepaper.pdf it explains about the oversampling etc ,

[Intrepid00]

Can you show us these photos that gave a lot of noise, so we can get a better understanding of what's going on?

I noticed in Lightroom I was really only seeing the noise when I started to zoom in.

For example, (You can view the original size to see the noise on Flickr)


Big Thunder Railroad by intrepid00, on Flickr

Looks okay but if you zoom in with no noise reduction.


I have never had the pleasure of getting to use RAW and I was just wondering if it was normal.

I mean overall I am so much happier having RAW. I can tweak just parts of it for lighting, change the exposure, heal brush works a lot better, fix that awful yellow tint, etc.

[Intrepid00]

Noise is really high, even for smartphone, original JPG was better than what I could get from Lightroom 5.3 without heavy tweaking

Yeah, I don't know how Nokia did it but the JPG they spit out (minus the yellow tint) was usually coming out way better than I could get out of LightRoom 5.3.

I think I need to take some sample pictures next time I have a bright sunny day. This could be some time though thanks to the winter weather. I would also like to see some samples of the 1520 RAW to see how it does.

[Intrepid00]

Can you show us these photos that gave a lot of noise, so we can get a better understanding of what's going on?

All pictures with flash, ISO 100 and shortest shutter speed on dial. I attached the over sampled JPEG. What Nokia does with it is darn right amazing.

DNG Default import into Lightroom 5.3 (Notice the torn fiber detail)



HiRes JPG from 1020 (Notice the lack of torn fiber detail)



Noise Reduction in Lightroom 5.3 applied and WB done by LightRoom. (Reduction on Lum was 75 with detail at 75)



I'd say with my awful testing DNG is still better even if the noise is a little higher than you would expect. Which makes sense, but with what Nokia manages to pull with over sampling most users can also just leave it on HiRes and reframe at will.

DNG from Camera

[thelostsoul]

I noticed in Lightroom I was really only seeing the noise when I started to zoom in.

For example, (You can view the original size to see the noise on Flickr)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3808/1...39f6f5d1_b.jpg
Big Thunder Railroad by intrepid00, on Flickr

Looks okay but if you zoom in with no noise reduction.
http://i.imgur.com/hUU7ZRD.png

I have never had the pleasure of getting to use RAW and I was just wondering if it was normal.

I mean overall I am so much happier having RAW. I can tweak just parts of it for lighting, change the exposure, heal brush works a lot better, fix that awful yellow tint, etc.

It looks like you've been testing your 1020's black update at a similar place to me! Those two pictures I uploaded were from Disney World :)

I've been considering compiling an album to share, but I need to go through about 400 pictures. I'd also like to compare it to my friend's Sony DSLR, which is about 800 pictures to sift through. I'll get to it though.

[Intrepid00]

It looks like you've been testing your 1020's black update at a similar place to me! Those two pictures I uploaded were from Disney World :)

I've been considering compiling an album to share, but I need to go through about 400 pictures. I'd also like to compare it to my friend's Sony DSLR, which is about 800 pictures to sift through. I'll get to it though.

Yeah, I was there last week for the day. I'm looking at your RAW processed it easily looks the best as you can see more detail in the plant leaves. I did a few night shots, mostly family so I won't be sharing, but they came out really, really good with RAW as I could adjust the exposure. Without having to carry a DSLR around the Lumia 1020 is making a pretty good option.

Also, switch between your RAW processed and the HiRes JPEG and look at the stone near the bridge. The detail is just about lost in the HiRes JPEG but is still there in the RAW. I really hope they launch a better 1020 this summer. It just better not be a phablet.

[vlad0]

Its normal for you to see noise in the raw files.. if you want noise free RAW files I suggest investing into a full frame DSLR :)

I think the user vlado could go into more detail about the processing , I am sure it his him that done some research into it at some point with his 808 as the processing is that good and gets that good results , lets also not forget that the 41mp raw image doesn't have the benefit of oversampling like the 5mp jpeg pureview image does ;-)

The jpeg processing on the 808 is indeed very good. The color reproduction could be better, but in terms of noise reduction its extremely efficient. The thing I like the most about it is that it responds very well to post processing. Of course is not as good as RAW, but its really good for jpeg.

I don't even know if the 808 can do RAW to be honest.. that built in image processor (DSP) could be a limitation when it comes to that.

The black update for the 1020/1520 brings the processing much closer to the pre-windows phone algorithms that Nokia were using, which is imo are way better than before.. I am sorry but whatever the 1020 shipped with was sh*tty.. its much better now. As soon as I saw pics from the 1520 I knew that black was a step in the right direction.

[RainbowSeven]

Its normal for you to see noise in the raw files.. if you want noise free RAW files I suggest investing into a full frame DSLR :)



The jpeg processing on the 808 is indeed very good. The color reproduction could be better, but in terms of noise reduction its extremely efficient. The thing I like the most about it is that it responds very well to post processing. Of course is not as good as RAW, but its really good for jpeg.

I don't even know if the 808 can do RAW to be honest.. that built in image processor (DSP) could be a limitation when it comes to that.

The black update for the 1020/1520 brings the processing much closer to the pre-windows phone algorithms that Nokia were using, which is imo are way better than before.. I am sorry but whatever the 1020 shipped with was sh*tty.. its much better now. As soon as I saw pics from the 1520 I knew that black was a step in the right direction.

For most of my photos original Nokia processing (to JPG) produces visually better results than Lightroom which is counter-intuitive IMO.
Just sharing my results.
It's good to have DNG though, RAW -> JPG algorithms get better all the time.
Kudos to Nokia processing once again. it's really hard to beat even by top quality software such as Lightroom.

[Ilya Nikolaev]

I also noticed that DNG are not being tagged with GPS information.

I also noticed that DNG files don't have geotags although 5mp JPEG copies do have GPS information. Can anyone give some info on this? Is it ok? Or are there any ways of fixing this issue?

[Crasstoe]

No Geotags at all on any high res image, raw or jpeg. No work around I am afraid.