Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)  (Read 8177 times)

Stephen Scharf

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 125
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #40 on: March 01, 2017, 02:08:27 PM »

I don't think it's fair to say "raw support on the GFX has been a bit slow in coming". While most of the writers had pre-production bodies a couple of months ago (one told me he could shoot in raw), Adobe generally wait for production bodies before they support the camera. As that schedule showed it's very unusual for any new proprietary raw format to be supported immediately, and the GFX is no different. A DNG option might have meant support on day one though.

It makes complete sense for a company to do this, and in fact, this is the more disciplined approach from a business and quality perspective. The last thing they want are "prototype" RAW files from cameras that are not representative of production units. This creates risk on a number of different levels, including potentially inaccurate perceptions about quality as well as possible major QA issues for a company to deal with. 

On a side note: the biotech companies I've worked for do the same exact thing regarding analysis software for instrument releases for the same reasons. Software is not released until production instruments units are released for sale into the field.

IMHO, Life's too short for folks to get their panties in a bunch about this.

Get out and shoot. You'll feel better. Honest.  ;D
« Last Edit: March 01, 2017, 03:16:13 PM by Stephen Scharf »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10197
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #41 on: March 01, 2017, 04:27:45 PM »

If Hasselblad with its relatively meager resources can work with Adobe to insure  timely LR support, surely Fuji could.

The X1D was committed by Hasselblad to ship in September, raw support in LR was 3 months late relative to this. According to Hasselblad themselves, the delay of the X1D had nothing to do with its imaging processing pipe that is identical to the H6D-50c that was on the market... in March 2016... so it's hard to understand why Hasselblad couldn't get LR support by the Sept announced ship date.

I am more invested in Hasselblad than most people here... but I don't understand the need to broadcast unfair statements about the GFX.

If Fuji gets LR support before late May they will have been faster than Hasselblad.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2071
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #42 on: March 01, 2017, 04:32:24 PM »

IMHO, Life's too short for folks to get their panties in a bunch about this.

Get out and shoot. You'll feel better. Honest.  ;D

No kidding! In fact I'd recommend to anyone interested in this system, but without a compelling reason to have it now (bragging rights don't qualify), that they wait a few months while whatever rough edges there are get discovered & dealt with. If I decide to get in, it likely won't be 'til the 110mm comes out. OTOH if you genuinely enjoy being an early adopter you'll already be accustomed to dealing with rough edges. IMO whinging about 'em suggests fanboy-ism at work.

-Dave-
Logged

hcubell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 791
    • http://www.howardcubell.com
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #43 on: March 01, 2017, 04:45:58 PM »

The X1D was committed by Hasselblad to ship in September, raw support in LR was 3 months late relative to this. According to Hasselblad themselves, the delay of the X1D had nothing to do with its imaging processing pipe that is identical to the H6D-50c that was on the market... in March 2016... so it's hard to understand why Hasselblad couldn't get LR support by the Sept announced ship date.

I am more invested in Hasselblad than most people here... but I don't understand the need to broadcast unfair statements about the GFX.

If Fuji gets LR support before late May they will have been faster than Hasselblad.

Cheers,
Bernard

Let's not confuse the issue here by arguing over whether the timing of  Hasselblad support for the X1D is appropriately looked at from the vantage point of the imaginary shipping date of Mid-September, or the actual shipping date. My basic point is that the GFX is a $10k plus camera system that is shipping with no raw support. (I don't think anyone really considers SlikyPix a real option.) AFAIK, that has never happened before with a medium format camera system. Phase One always has raw support in Capture One. Hasselblad always has at least raw support in Phocus. If somebody told the potential buyers of a Phase or a Hasselblad that they could only shoot JPEGs for a month, I think everyone would be rolling on the floor with laughter.
Logged

hcubell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 791
    • http://www.howardcubell.com
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #44 on: March 01, 2017, 04:54:33 PM »

No kidding! In fact I'd recommend to anyone interested in this system, but without a compelling reason to have it now (bragging rights don't qualify), that they wait a few months while whatever rough edges there are get discovered & dealt with.

-Dave-

I think you are right. I did not realize when I ordered the GFX that there would be no LR support in very short order, and I cannot evaluate the GFX for my needs without it. I will likely cancel my pre-order at this point and wait.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10197
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #45 on: March 01, 2017, 06:07:20 PM »

I think you are right. I did not realize when I ordered the GFX that there would be no LR support in very short order, and I cannot evaluate the GFX for my needs without it. I will likely cancel my pre-order at this point and wait.

What does Silkypix not do that Phocus does?

But yes, you should cancel your pre-order now! Someone else will certainly make good use of that body and enjoy LR support shortly after.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

hcubell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 791
    • http://www.howardcubell.com
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #46 on: March 01, 2017, 06:19:47 PM »

What does Silkypix not do that Phocus does?

Cheers,
Bernard

The Japanese are extraordinary at many things, but writing intelligible and functional raw conversion software is not one of them.  I don't have the time or the inclination to learn SilkyPix. 
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10197
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #47 on: March 01, 2017, 06:57:53 PM »

The Japanese are extraordinary at many things, but writing intelligible and functional raw conversion software is not one of them.  I don't have the time or the inclination to learn SilkyPix.

As if Phocus were a great piece of code...

All that only shows that your interest for the GFX is low. You are not behaving like a real buyer. More like someone looking for reasons not to buy.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

hcubell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 791
    • http://www.howardcubell.com
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #48 on: March 01, 2017, 08:57:43 PM »

As if Phocus were a great piece of code...

All that only shows that your interest for the GFX is low. You are not behaving like a real buyer. More like someone looking for reasons not to buy.

Cheers,
Bernard

Well, it's good that you have diversified your Kool Aid to include Fuji as well as Nikon. LOL. SilkyPix is just wonderful software.




Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10197
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #49 on: March 01, 2017, 09:09:52 PM »

Well, it's good that you have diversified your Kool Aid to include Fuji as well as Nikon. LOL. SilkyPix is just wonderful software.

Silkypix is good enough to evaluate the quality of the GFX raw files if you are interested in buying the camera. It was already good enough when I used it 10 years ago on my Mamiya ZD files.

I am not a Fuji user, the only commonality you'll find between me, Nikon and Fuji is the desire to look at things in an objective and fair way. If anything you are acting anti-Fuji a lot more than I am acting pro-Fuji.

I have always been brand agnostic (I cannot think of a brand I have never used or owned, except perhaps P1 due to them being out of my financial reach), and select my equipment based on what I think is best for my needs. All the claims that I have made about Nikon throughout the years have always ended up being seen as accurate and the view of the majority, although it sometimes took time... ;) It took 8 years for Canon to catch up in terms of DR, those who read my post as being pro-Nikon/anti-Canon completely missed the point, my posts were just pro image quality. Now that Canon has mostly caught up in terms of DR I would be totally fine to use their bodies, but I don't see what I would gain over my current Nikons who took a lead in AF in the meantime...

Anyway, whatever works for you, but I find in all objectivity the GFX to be a great option, eventhough I am invested in Hasselblad equipment.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: March 02, 2017, 01:02:41 AM by BernardLanguillier »
Logged
A few images online here!

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3902
    • http://www.beardsworth.co.uk
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #50 on: March 02, 2017, 02:52:24 AM »

I think you are right. I did not realize when I ordered the GFX that there would be no LR support in very short order, and I cannot evaluate the GFX for my needs without it. I will likely cancel my pre-order at this point and wait.

Fuji seem to have a good relationship with Adobe (their X-T2 was supported on day one) and I doubt you'll be waiting long for LR support for the GFX, but I think it might make sense to cancel the order until things are clear. It might be for only a few days or weeks, but sadly one just cannot assume any new camera will be supported on launch day if Fuji and other camera makers fail to include an option to shoot as DNG.

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6717
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #51 on: March 02, 2017, 04:52:56 AM »

Fuji seem to have a good relationship with Adobe (their X-T2 was supported on day one) and I doubt you'll be waiting long for LR support for the GFX, but I think it might make sense to cancel the order until things are clear. It might be for only a few days or weeks, but sadly one just cannot assume any new camera will be supported on launch day if Fuji and other camera makers fail to include an option to shoot as DNG.

Hi John,

Even if a camera has an option to shoot DNG, even almighty Adobe still needs to make profiles and verify/create lensprofiles. Right?

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3902
    • http://www.beardsworth.co.uk
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #52 on: March 02, 2017, 06:12:53 AM »

You should still be able to read the DNGs into your catalogue, so you could follow your normal import workflow, putting files in your folder structure, renaming them, applying any metadata. Following your usual practices has got to be more efficient and less error-prone than being forced to adopt some other method or having to pile up everything until the proprietary format is eventually supported. I think it's important not to overlook these asset management angles.

On the processing side, Adobe's profiles wouldn't be available but users could still postpone lens corrections till later (are they built-in like with Fuji's X cameras?) and process with a generic Camera Calibration profile. My guess is that users would step in with their own profiles. Perfect? Not by any means, but workable, probably. And certainly much better than where we are now.

John

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5913
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #53 on: March 02, 2017, 07:58:55 AM »

The Sony sensor is drop-in digital, should give identical results re. color on most cameras, so imge quality at reasonabke ISO will bevthere in Lightroom if it is already there for another camera with this sensor.

Lens correcrions are a different story ...

Edmund
Logged

Stephen Scharf

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 125
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #54 on: March 02, 2017, 11:47:23 AM »

The Sony sensor is drop-in digital, should give identical results re. color on most cameras, so imge quality at reasonabke ISO will bevthere in Lightroom if it is already there for another camera with this sensor.

Lens correcrions are a different story ...

Edmund

The sensor is not a "drop-in" off the shelf sensor from Sony; it's a bespoke design made for Fujifilm by Sony. It's not the same sensor as in the X1D.  Then there is the factor of Fuji's image processor, and then finally the Fuji lenses. The GFX lens mount engineering also plays a key role here. The attributes and qualities of the final image are a result of the interaction of the bespoke sensor design, imaging processor, lenses and lens mount.
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1587
    • The Last Word
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #55 on: March 02, 2017, 12:07:56 PM »

The sensor is not a "drop-in" off the shelf sensor from Sony; it's a bespoke design made for Fujifilm by Sony. It's not the same sensor as in the X1D.  Then there is the factor of Fuji's image processor, and then finally the Fuji lenses. The GFX lens mount engineering also plays a key role here. The attributes and qualities of the final image are a result of the interaction of the bespoke sensor design, imaging processor, lenses and lens mount.

Sounds like you know a lot about the details of the GFX sensor design. How is it different from the other Sony 33x44mm sensors? Do they all use ramp column ADCs? Are the FWCs different? How about RN? QE? CFAs?

I'd be really interested in the differences and and as much as you can tell us about how you know what you know about the GFX design.

Jim

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3514
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2017, 01:17:39 PM »

Hi Jim:

Fuji has a small site where they are writing up tech info on the GFX.  So far they have covered the sensor design and G mount.  Here is a link to the Fuji write up on their version of the Sony 50MP.  Appears that Fuji may have made some changes but without a camera to test, hard to really say.

http://fujifilm-x.com/de/x-stories/gfx-technologies-1/

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1587
    • The Last Word
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2017, 01:33:32 PM »

Hi Jim:

Fuji has a small site where they are writing up tech info on the GFX.  So far they have covered the sensor design and G mount.  Here is a link to the Fuji write up on their version of the Sony 50MP.  Appears that Fuji may have made some changes but without a camera to test, hard to really say.

http://fujifilm-x.com/de/x-stories/gfx-technologies-1/


Thanks, Paul. Unfortunately, this is written in such a way that I can gain almost nothing useful out of it.

What I think they are saying:

The FWC has been increased by a factor of 2^(1/3) = 1,26.
The effective fill factor has been reduced from nearly 100% to something less. This will increase MTF50 and also increase aliasing.
They have increased the sensor scan speed during AF acquisition from 130 frames per second to 200 fps. If they refresh the EVF at this rate, that should also reduce EVF latency, but they don't say whether they do that or not.

There have been some packaging changes that I can't figure out: "Of course, the sensor itself has the surface size of 43.8x32.9mm, but the shape of the sensor unit is different for the GFX 50S. Typically the sensor is mounted to the silicon circuit with terminals placed on both sides of the sensor. But in the case of GFX, the sensor is mounted to the silicon circuit with the terminals placed on the back side of the sensor. "

My problem with this statement is that the sensor is itself a silicon circuit. Are they saying that they are using a stacked sensor? That would be news to me. Or is it as simple as saying that the package terminals are located behind the sensor? That wouldn't be rocket science. But for that to be true, the package would have to be the thing that they're calling the "silicon circuit", and that doesn't make any sense: there's no silicon in the package, at least to speak of. If it's just about the package configuration, there's a downside to their approach: it will not be easy to attach a heat sink right behind the sensor.

There is no mention of different CFA dyes, which I would expect would be the first thing they'd change, since Fuji has a take on color.

They have come up with a term that is new to me: photic saturation. I'm guessing that it is FWC divided by QE, but I don't really know.

At least I'm confused at a higher level.

Jim




« Last Edit: March 02, 2017, 01:50:04 PM by Jim Kasson »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10585
    • Echophoto
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2017, 01:53:18 PM »

Hi Jim,

I think the comparison is made with an unspecified DSLR sensor. It is a bit interesting that they turn the "gapful" microlens design into virtue. Clearly, that would increase aliasing but also improve apparent sharpness.

It may be possible that the microlens design is more tolerant of large beam angles.

Lot of marketing speak involved, no good for SNR.

Best regards
Erik

Thanks, Paul. Unfortunately, this is written in such a way that I can gain almost nothing useful out of it.

What I think they are saying:

The FWC has been increased by a factor of 2^(1/3) = 1,26.
The effective fill factor has been reduced from nearly 100% to something less. This will increase MTF50 and also increase aliasing.
They have increased the sensor scan speed during AF acquisition from 130 frames per second to 200 fps. If they refresh the EVF at this rate, that should also reduce EVF latency, but they don't say whether they do that or not.

There have been some packaging changes that I can't figure out: "Of course, the sensor itself has the surface size of 43.8x32.9mm, but the shape of the sensor unit is different for the GFX 50S. Typically the sensor is mounted to the silicon circuit with terminals placed on both sides of the sensor. But in the case of GFX, the sensor is mounted to the silicon circuit with the terminals placed on the back side of the sensor. "

My problem with this statement is that the sensor is itself a silicon circuit. Are they saying that they are using a stacked sensor? That would be news to me.

There is no mention of different CFA dyes, which I would expect would be the first thing they'd change, since Fuji has a take on color.

They have come up with a term that is new to me: photic saturation. I'm guessing that it is FWC divided by QE, but I don't really know.

At least I'm confused at a higher level.

Jim

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3514
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Fuji GFX availability slips (round 1?)
« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2017, 02:18:08 PM »

Jim,

I quickly will defer to your knowledge on the subject.   :)

My experience with the P1 application of the 50MP Sony was very positive, very good DR and shadow recovery.  I mainly stayed away due to the crop factor of 1:3 and the fact all my lenses were designed for 645 sized chips.  The Fuji, with lenses designed around the crop is where I plan to be. 

I have never been a big fan of x-trans and if Fuji had made this chip x-trans, I would have not been so fast to order.  But I have seen what the chip can do with a Bayer pattern.  But to Fuji's credit, they did somethings with this 2.5 year old chip that no one else had done, namely EFC and ES, which are a huge plus for me.

Just wish B&H would get their order in.  Still not sure what is going on there. 

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Up