Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
 71 
 on: Today at 06:57:06 AM 
Started by orc73 - Last post by Doug Peterson
As some of you may know, PhaseONE choose to block the Pentax MF cameras in version 9. While it used to be working in v8.
Fair enough, it's their software.

Here what was posted by PhaseOne on their forum:

We have always been clear in this regard, since the very first Capture One software.

We do support a vast range of small and micro format cameras.
With medium format we only support our own "Team Phase One" * camera solutions.

We have never misled anyone in this regard.
We have never changed or revised this policy.
Nor should anyone expect it to change.

If you want to use Capture One in your medium format solution, then purchase a Phase One or Mamiya-Leaf solution.

This thread ends here.
Any new thread with the same topic will simply be deleted.

* "Team Phase One" includes: Phase One, Leaf and Mamiya.
Kind Regards
Ulf Liljegren

Does Silkypix support Phase One files? Does Canon DPP support Nikon files? Etc etc

For 12 years C1 has supported nearly all small format cameras and their own line of medium format cameras. It does not represent "fear" of Pentax and more than it represented "fear" of the Mamiya ZD or any other medium format system that has come and gone while C1 had been around.

Also, what are you talking about regarding reliability?? Phase One is widely acknowledged to be the most robust and reliable back made. Call any major rental house in the world and ask them which backs they prefer for issue free tethering; it will be P1 every time. Maybe you are feferring to the fact that on their public support forum there are support issues posted? This is true of literally any product. Very frustrating especially when you get to see how infrequently the issue complained of on the forum was actually the hardware rather than user error or something like a bad USB cable.

 72 
 on: Today at 06:52:04 AM 
Started by carl dw - Last post by Guillermo Luijk
I added extra unsharp mask to the 5ds image to bring as close to the 5dsr as I can... but I'm still not convinced they are equal in detail. However, I then added the same unsharp mask to the 5dsr and it took another step away from the 5ds

Never intended to offend you Carl. I know it must be difficult to have a clear preference for the images from the 5DS R, because your eyes indicate so, and then listen to someone who claims a part of the extra detail might be just a form of noise. But as Bart ellaborated much better than me, this is the truth in digital sampling systems. And this is the reason for AA filters to exist.

The good news is that the more dense a sensor is compared to the resolution of the lenses used, and the 5DS is already very dense for FF optics, the less significant is the role played by the AA filter. For this reason you should not have many aliasing/moire problems on the 5DS R that would be solved on the 5DS, and you should not have much extra detail on the 5DS R than with the 5DS and proper sharpening.

Eliminating the AA filter from a 5Mpx FF sensor would be simply suicide.

Regards.



Enviado desde mi GT-I9195 mediante Tapatalk

 73 
 on: Today at 06:44:08 AM 
Started by Alan Goldhammer - Last post by TheDocAUS
"The most striking thing about the comparison is how difficult it is to tell them apart... I fail to see any meaningful or systematic difference between the two sets of results... In sum, Im a happy camper with the results from PT8 anything that resembles LR quality so closely is fine for me."

I am I missing something? There does not seem to be any compelling print quality reason to use PT8. So it is really about the other features it brings like improved work-flow?

 74 
 on: Today at 06:43:28 AM 
Started by orc73 - Last post by orc73
The point is, it was working in v8. So it's not that they don't support it, it's that they blocked it.
However yes it is their product and their right to do so and yes Pentax should buy into a proper solution.

I dont know how many paying Canon or Nikon customer they have, and how many paying Pentax users they would have. And I don't even think this is part of their calculation.


 75 
 on: Today at 06:30:34 AM 
Started by Slobodan Blagojevic - Last post by BartvanderWolf
http://blog.lexa.ru/2013/07/14/pro_sraw.html

Ah, yes, thanks. Now it's coming back from my recollection. They are a 'lossy' YCrCb space encoded and decimated formats. So color accuracy suffers, but it of course depends on the subject matter if that is noticeable (especially without a better, downsampled reference).

It remains unclear how the subsampling of color is done, but most likely much less sophisticated than a good downsampling would achieve, perhaps they just simply average neighboring pixels, instead of taking a weighted average like with downsampling. Also the decimation method used for Luminosity (Y) is unclear.

Again, mRaw and sRaw can be perfectly usable for some applications, and may be the only way to store huge numbers of files on a limited (in camera) storage medium. But arguably better image quality can be had from proper downsampling of the full size Raw conversion. MRaw and sRaw are (only) about file size reduction, not highest quality.

Personally I would not use it as a means to reduce noise (if that even works adequately), because it's much more effective to do noise reduction at the full size and do proper down-sampling, and the noise vs detail trade-off benefits from having more pixels to base it on (even if the final output size is relatively small).

Cheers,
Bart

 76 
 on: Today at 05:41:56 AM 
Started by FrankG - Last post by razrblck
Sure, m43 sensors will never be low light monsters, but that shot at 5000ISO can be made to look really good so who cares?

If it fits your needs, stick with it. If you shoot at high ISO all the time and need your pictures to be much cleaner, then smaller sensors are not for you.

 77 
 on: Today at 05:31:48 AM 
Started by kencameron - Last post by kencameron
On Sydney Harbour, Boxing Day

 78 
 on: Today at 05:24:35 AM 
Started by CatcityGary - Last post by Simon Garrett
Just wish they could figure out how to fix the overall performance of the product.

Yes, that would be good.  It definitely helps to use a powerful processor.  I recently upgraded the motherboard in my PC to one with an Intel i7-6700K, which I overclcock a bit.  That (and using an SSD to store catalog, raw cache and previews) makes quite a difference.  Even now, some operations (e.g. rendering 36 Mpixel images at 100%) are not instantaneous (2-3 seconds)

 79 
 on: Today at 05:18:18 AM 
Started by KLaban - Last post by Rob C
Playing around with a headshot of a young lawyer I met recently.


Rob C

 80 
 on: Today at 05:15:47 AM 
Started by Slobodan Blagojevic - Last post by kencameron

As I see it, the word creativity is (should be?) limited to the creative arts such as music, painting, photography, literature, architecture;
So you don't think scientists or mathematicians can be creative (as something quite other than a synonym for intelligence)?

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10