Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Sample P30 RAW file required  (Read 12384 times)

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #20 on: April 20, 2008, 12:48:36 pm »

As someone who shoots both the D3 and a P45+ back on a Mamiya AFD II, I'll say the following:

The primary thing the P+ back has over the D3 is MP. I don't see much difference in dynamic range, and per pixel quality and the ability to pull clean detail out of the shadows isn't as far apart as you'd think. I expected, and wanted, the P45+ to stomp the D3, if for no other reason than to justify my P45+ purchase, but I have to admit I was surprised by what I saw. I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for saying this, but I think it's a fair statement.

For grins, I've shot both side by side at different focal lengths and then cropped a 12MP, 3:2 aspect shot out of the P45+ image so that I ended up with the same field of view and the same number of MP as the D3 shot, and then compared the shots at 100%. There are some color differences, but the amount of detail captured is similar (remember, I've shot at different focal lengths so that I ended up with two images with the same field of view and the same MP). I give a slight edge to the P45+ pixels, probably due to the lack of the AA filter, but it's closer than you'd think. Of course, if you're shooting at similar focal lengths from the same location, it's no contest. In this situation, the higher MP that the back delivers yield much more detail than the D3 could ever hope to capture, and of course you can print the P45+ files much bigger.

Regarding dynamic range, the ability to pull clean detail out of the shadows (generally considered a MFDB strong point) is very comparable, as long as you shoot in 14-bit mode on the D3. With both the P45+ and D3, I can pull amazingly clean detail out of the shadows. One other consideration is that the D3 and P45+ use very different tone curves, and as a result, the D3 has more highlight headroom than the P45+ does at default RAW converter settings. You generally don't have to pull up the shadows as much on the D3 as you do on the P45+.

They both have their place. I use the P45+ for landscapes from moderately wide to short telephoto focal lengths, where I want to print big, and for that it can't be beat. For everything else, I pretty much use the D3.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 12:51:37 pm by Mort54 »
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #21 on: April 20, 2008, 01:49:39 pm »

It is a disgrace for the forum what is happening here. After 21 posts and many well-meant advice, still not one person has offered what the OP has asked for. Looks like everybody is creating images only for exhibitions. Of course, Capture Integration too is shy to show raw images.

Rodney, I have some P30 raw files on HD from a fellow member, marcmccalmont. If he does not mind it, I will upload those files for you. I emailed him and I am waiting for his reply.
Logged
Gabor

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2008, 01:54:06 pm »

Quote
Regarding dynamic range, the ability to pull clean detail out of the shadows (generally considered a MFDB strong point) is very comparable, as long as you shoot in 14-bit mode on the D3
Which raw processor(s) have you used for teh comparison, and at which ISOs have you shot with the P30?

Quote
One other consideration is that the D3 and P45+ use very different tone curves, and as a result, the D3 has more highlight headroom than the P45+ does at default RAW converter settings
Neither the D3 nor the P45 use any tone curves when recording in Raw.
Logged
Gabor

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2008, 02:21:13 pm »

Quote
Which raw processor(s) have you used for teh comparison, and at which ISOs have you shot with the P30?
ACR for this comparison, and it was a P45+ I shot with, not a P30 (yes, I know, the OP asked about the P30, but I was really addressing some of the other comments in this thread that scoffed at using a D3 in comparison to a MFDB). I shot at ISO 200 on the D3 (it's minimum std ISO), and 100 on the P45+. Obviously the lenses were different. It's possible I'll get more DR or detail extraction out of the P45+ with Capture One, but so far I haven't seen any evidence of that. However I'll be the first to point out I don't use CO very often (mostly because I'm happy with ACR in Lightroom). I do like CO colors a bit better for the default conversion, but I can easily get the same colors in ACR with just a few tweaks in the color channels.

Quote
Neither the D3 nor the P45 use any tone curves when recording in Raw.
True, but the RAW converter does, and that's what I was talking about. Obviouisly the RAW file isn't much of anything until you run it thru a RAW converter. I should have been clearer.

I'm certainly not bashing the P45+. I love the results I get from it, and wouldn't give it up for anything. I'm simply saying that in some specific areas, the D3 is pretty good also (detail extraction from the shadows being a prime example). I'm sure the same can be said for various Canon cameras, but I don't have any of those, so my comments are limited to my D3. By the way, I would not say the same for my D300, or any of the earlier Nikon's I've owned. The D3 is a totally new animal and has left all other Nikon's in the dust.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 02:26:54 pm by Mort54 »
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #24 on: April 20, 2008, 02:59:34 pm »

Quote
True, but the RAW converter does, and that's what I was talking about
Watch out with this. ACR makes an auto "exposure adjustment" to the P30 and P45 shots: -1 EV with ISO 100, +1 EV with ISO 400 and +2 EV with ISO 800. I don't know how much it is with ISO 200, but if you upload such a file, I can determine it. It is not natural, that it would be 0 EV.

This is important for you to know, because you don't see this adjustment: ACR does not indicate it, you see only the effect. In other words, if you want to know how the image looks without adjustment, you have to compensate for the auto-adjustment. This fact may affect the comparison as well: the shadows of the P45 ISO100 images are displayed one stop darker than they should be. On the other side, clipping may become hidden. The opposite will happen with higher ISOs .
Logged
Gabor

E_Edwards

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #25 on: April 20, 2008, 03:12:04 pm »

Quote
After 21 posts and many well-meant advice, still not one person has offered what the OP has asked for. Looks like everybody is creating images only for exhibitions. Of course, Capture Integration too is shy to show raw images.

Yes, this is very strange...

Also, Phase website, no raw files to be seen. Ditto for Capture Integration, a link leading to nowhere when I checked earlier.

If only someone could explain the reason why.

My own theory is that the sellers don't want to lay their cards on the table. They want you to call them so they can give you the sales talk, like, there's much more to a digital back than a raw file, there's the workflow, after sales, bla, bla, bla. We know, believe me, we know all that.

I'm sure the reason is driven by sales. But not everybody wants to call the dealers for a demo initially, they may want to have a preliminary examination of files, ask a few people around and so on. Much like buying a car, you read reviews, you buy magazines, you compare prices and options....then, eventually,  you make up your mind to go to the dealers for a test drive.

Since the process of buying a medium format digital back is shrouded in secrecy, from dealers prices to vested interests, to inaccurate or non existent reviews and comparisons, how can anyone blame someone who is a little confused at the very least, and wants to see some initial proof with his own eyes, call it the carrot, before taking further steps.

I've had five camera backs and countless DSLRs, I know the importance of workflow, software integration, after-sales service, reliability, warranty, replacement policy, etc. but I've always wanted to see files beforehand, before I call the reps, and I know I'm not the only one.

Edward
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 03:15:25 pm by E_Edwards »
Logged

Colorwave

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1006
    • Colorwave Imaging
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #26 on: April 20, 2008, 03:14:15 pm »

Quote
Watch out with this. ACR makes an auto "exposure adjustment" to the P30 and P45 shots: -1 EV with ISO 100, +1 EV with ISO 400 and +2 EV with ISO 800. I don't know how much it is with ISO 200, but if you upload such a file, I can determine it. It is not natural, that it would be 0 EV.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190810\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just out of curiosity, what is the logic behind this?
Thanks,
Ron H.
Logged
-Ron H.
[url=http://colorwaveimaging.com

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2008, 03:28:22 pm »

Quote
Just out of curiosity, what is the logic behind this?
I don't know. IMO there is no actual reason whatsoever, it is simply a mistake of ACR.

Perhaps others, who had use earlier versions of such backs could contribute to solving this question. One possible explanation is, that earlier models did not have "true" ISO settings, higher ISO was realized simply by numerical adjustment, and that is, what ACR is still emulating. Such behaviour is very normal nowadays, for example the mentioned Nikon D3 offers ISO settings up to 25600; however, 12800 and 25600 are numerical derivatives of 6400 (but the multiplication occurs in-camera, the data in the raw file is already adjusted, the raw processor does not need to make any extra steps).
Logged
Gabor

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #28 on: April 20, 2008, 07:55:34 pm »

Rodney,

here are five raw files from the P30, courtessy to Marc:

http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019371.TIF
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019372.TIF
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019666.TIF
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL...00_CF019157.tif
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL...00_CF019153.tif

The best one for a comparison might be CF19372. It has been shot for dynamic range comparison with the Canon 5D, and it is perfectly exposed, with some dark area for noise analysis.

I guess you don't have C1 yet and you will open the files with ACR. ACR applies an initial exposure adjustment, -1 EV for the ISO 100 images, +1 for ISO 400 and +2 for ISO 800, but it does not say that it is doing so. Therefor you need to counter-adjust in order to see, how the image looks without adjustment.

For example the ISO 800 image is vastly underexposed, about 3 1/2 stops from the right edge; still it appears very normal in ACR due to the clandestine adjustment (it speaks a lot for this camera, that an image so vastly underexposed looks still so).

I captured the *raw* histograms of these images and put them in a layered TIFF
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_Histograms.TIF

if you take a look at the layers, you will see how the exposure was.

Have fun.
Logged
Gabor

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #29 on: April 20, 2008, 08:10:29 pm »

Quote
Watch out with this. ACR makes an auto "exposure adjustment" to the P30 and P45 shots: -1 EV with ISO 100, +1 EV with ISO 400 and +2 EV with ISO 800. I don't know how much it is with ISO 200, but if you upload such a file, I can determine it. It is not natural, that it would be 0 EV.
Well, that's interesting. That would explain why many of my P45+ images (I often shoot at ISO 100, and rarely higher) appear brighter when I open them in Capture One. Generally, I find the default brightness I get with Lightroom (ACR) to be better, more in keeping with my actual exposure. I'd be interested in knowing the source of this information, just so I can read up on it a bit.

Regards,
Mort
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #30 on: April 20, 2008, 08:24:51 pm »

My apologies. After reading Edmund's comments I discovered that several of the links, including the P30 raw file on the page Chris linked to earlier in this thread were broken.

They have been fixed. http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/

Not to interfere with your conspiracy theories, but the reason the links were broken was because I am an imperfect webmaster (I've been working on my personal website all weekend).

Doug

Quote
Yes, this is very strange...

Also, Phase website, no raw files to be seen. Ditto for Capture Integration, a link leading to nowhere when I checked earlier.

If only someone could explain the reason why.
 not the only one.

Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190814\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #31 on: April 20, 2008, 08:38:04 pm »

Quote
I'd be interested in knowing the source of this information, just so I can read up on it a bit.
Sorry, there is nothing to read about it. You can find the fact when analysing DNG images converted from the native raw files, as these contain a tag called BaselineExposure. This tag is present in the raw fiels of several cameras, but nowhere else in such "brutal" manner, i.e. two full stops.

We had a discussion about this subject for perhaps two weeks ago, but that does not give a clue for the reason specifically this adjustment (of the Phase One images) is done.
Logged
Gabor

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #32 on: April 20, 2008, 09:10:37 pm »

Quote
They have been fixed
I am sure they were not meant to me, but thanks anyway.

A very interesting and instructive comparison.

1. The lack of AA filter helps the initial sharpness of the P30 and P45. However, it helps creating nice Moire as well; see the shirt.

2. Noise: the P45 is much noisier than the P30, which is at the same level as the Canon. The larger pixel sites of the P30 are cleaner.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 10:49:02 pm by Panopeeper »
Logged
Gabor

E_Edwards

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #33 on: April 21, 2008, 07:41:20 am »

Quote
They have been fixed. http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/

Not to interfere with your conspiracy theories, but the reason the links were broken was because I am an imperfect webmaster (I've been working on my personal website all weekend).

Doug
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190866\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



Thank you for fixing it and for your own tests. Still, it would be helpful if all manufacturers had clear and relevant raw sample files, easily accessible on their websites.

Edward
Logged

hobbsr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 111
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #34 on: April 21, 2008, 08:42:49 am »

Thank you very much for the sample files, I am on the road at the moment and will wait until back in the studio to see them in the right light and on the bigger screen.

Any other comments or views compared with other systems like D3 or M8 would be great.

Regards

Rodney
Logged

nicholask

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 33
    • http://www.viewfinderdigitisation.com.au
Sample P30 RAW file required
« Reply #35 on: April 22, 2008, 03:04:10 am »

Rodney,
I have been interested in trying out some Phase backs, too. I was amused to see that you have been in contact with American dealers, Rodney, since, like you, I am in Australia as well.

I think it is a real indictment of our Phase dealer in Australia that we have both had to look to the States - in my case to get competitive pricing, and to try to check availability of RBs.

Also, in spite of the repeated requests I have made over several weeks to the local dealer to set up a demo of a Phase back on an AFD platform, no demo has been arranged - I have given up on Phase altogether now, since no one has taken any great interest in selling the product to me. In fact, I also had problems trying to ascertain from the US dealers whether they had any refurbished units available. Is this the great Phase One refurbished back conspiracy? Are there simply none of these units out there?
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up