An honest comparison between DxO PhotoLab and Lightroom Classic

Friday 14 August 2026, 11:33 by Nando Harmsen | 1,256 views | 5 comments

This article was translated from Dutch with the help of AI. Read the original.

For many, Lightroom Classic is the go-to photo editing programme. But there are others, including DxO PhotoLab. I compared the two. The best choice mainly depends on what you want to use it for.

There are many photo editing programmes to choose from. Often, the price of the software is the deciding factor. I wrote a whole article about that. When price is the deciding factor, you may have to make concessions.

Lightroom Classic Library
Lightroom Classic is considered the gold standard. That is why literally all other photo editing software is compared with it. They are Lightroom alternatives, or Lightroom killers.

But be careful with all those posts, YouTube videos and articles that praise other software to the skies. You often need to look closely at the downsides or disadvantages before making a choice or switching.

In this article, I compare DxO PhotoLab with Lightroom Classic (LrC). I use the latter in my everyday photography. I am creating a course about DxO PhotoLab (DxO PL). So I have gained a fairly good understanding of this software.

What are the similarities?

Both Lightroom Classic and DxO PhotoLab consist of (at least) two parts. Cataloguing the photos on your hard drive and editing the photos. Both are important if you want to keep a good overview.

With both programmes, the photos are stored on and remain on the hard drive. You can add keywords and descriptions, and there is of course a rating system with stars and colours.

You can collect photos together without moving them from their location on the hard drive. A photo can be in multiple albums (LrC) or projects (DxO PL). You can create virtual copies for different edits.

The PhotoLibrary, the library in DxO PL.
The edits can be global or local using masks. Both include AI masks for simplified selections. Automatic image corrections are available, along with all the necessary export functions.

Lightroom Classic uses a catalogue in which everything is stored. DxO PhotoLab appears not to have a catalogue, but in reality there is a database hidden somewhere on your hard drive.

DxO PhotoLab also stores adjustments and other information in separate DOP files, and optionally in XMP files. Lightroom Classic can also use the latter, but you have to enable that deliberately.

The library

Lightroom Classic offers many options in the Library module. Viewing the contents of folders and subfolders provides a great deal of flexibility. You can manage your files entirely from Lightroom Classic without having to switch to Explorer or Finder.

The contents of subfolders cannot be displayed in DxO PL.
DxO PhotoLab offers limited functionality when it comes to file management. It can seem untidy because the contents of the entire hard drive are always visible. The contents of subfolders are never shown until you click on them individually.

The search function and selection methods are extensive in Lightroom Classic and offer enormous flexibility.
The search functions in Lightroom Classic are very extensive. They offer almost every option. DxO PhotoLab has one search bar, and searches cannot be carried out separately for each folder or subfolder. It is more difficult to use complex search functions.

There is one search field in DxO PL. Searching works well, but is not very intuitive.
DxO PhotoLab has projects, which are called albums in Lightroom Classic. However, smart albums that fill themselves based on criteria are not possible.

The Develop module

Editing photos is almost identical in both programmes. There are differences here and there, but they are not very significant. The layout of the tools seems clearer in Lightroom Classic, but that is personal.

It is the great strength behind DxO PL, the DeepPRIME noise reduction. Add lens corrections and sharpening to that.
DxO PhotoLab has excellent lens correction and advanced noise reduction. Lightroom Classic also has both options, but in many cases DxO PhotoLab seems just that little bit better in this respect.

An AI mask in DxO PL.
Local editing with masks is possible in both, including AI masks. The absence of a radial mask in DxO PL is notable. Using masks is easier and more accessible in Lightroom Classic.

The Develop module in Lightroom Classic is clear

Extra functions or modules

The options Lightroom Classic offers are very extensive. Think of HDR and panorama, various preset options and perspective corrections. If you want to get the most out of DxO PL, you have to buy extra modules.

Luminosity masks are not included as standard in DxO PL, but are available in the extra DxO FilmPack module, which you have to pay extra for.
Sometimes strange choices have been made in DxO PhotoLab. To give one example, luminosity masks are not available as standard. You have to buy DxO FilmPack for that, which is actually aimed at presets.

Lightroom Classic offers the option to create panoramas.
Lightroom Classic offers more options, such as the 'blur lens' or 'assisted selection' options. You also get cloud storage and a mobile version of the programme. DxO PhotoLab has none of this, and panoramas are not possible at all.

Integration with other software

Lightroom Classic allows you to switch to other software. This is very well integrated, and the result comes back into the Lightroom Classic environment. The DxO PureRaw editor can also be opened from Lightroom Classic.

Lightroom Classic allows you to use many DxO plugins.
Apart from DxO PureRaw, Lightroom Classic also works seamlessly with other DxO modules, such as FilmPack, ViewPoint and of course NIK. These DxO modules also work perfectly with DxO PL, of course.

DxO PhotoLab also allows you to send photos directly to other software, such as Photoshop or Affinity. However, it is less smoothly integrated, giving you less flexibility and fewer options.

My experiences so far

For managing photos on the hard drive, I prefer the way Lightroom Classic works. There are many more options, and everything works in a much more user-friendly and clearer way than in DxO PL.

From Lightroom Classic, you can use DxO PureRAW if you only want to use DeepPRIME noise reduction and lens correction.
When it comes to editing, I also prefer Lightroom Classic. I find everything clearer and perhaps more logical too. DxO PhotoLab does have better noise reduction, as well as lens correction options.

Conclusion

If you are hoping for a 'best software' or 'best choice' stamp, I have to disappoint you. After all, it is not a competition. Both programmes perform excellently. They have strengths and less strong points.

DxO PhotoLab is a wonderful programme and has its strengths. However, it is more limited than Lightroom Classic in many respects. The strengths of DxO PhotoLab can be combined well with Lightroom Classic by using DxO PureRaw as a plugin.

It is important to weigh up the pros and cons carefully. Preferably, do not choose on principle. You should find working with the software enjoyable. Avoid becoming annoyed by missing or awkward functionality.

Try it out for yourself. Download a trial version and get started. Try things out and be honest with yourself. Only then will you make a good choice.

You might also like

• 

  DxO PhotoLab as an alternative to Lightroom

  by Nando Harmsen

• 

  An impression of the DxO PureRAW4 plugin for Lightroom

  by Nando Harmsen

• 

  Price comparison of software with and without a subscription

  by Nando Harmsen

• 

  Adobe updates Lightroom (Classic) with new AI masks

  by Elja Trum

• 

  Speed up Lightroom Classic by reinstalling it

  by Elja Trum

• 

  The new DXO PhotoLab version 10

  by Nando Harmsen

5 comments

Have your say

Please note: Articles older than a week can only be commented on by signed-in visitors.
Would you still like to comment? sign in or create a free account.