Capture One to Support Fuji GFX

[matted]

Two big things Phase has going for it with the XF in my eyes are leaf shutter lenses and Profoto integration. Obviously Hasselblad has the leaf shutter lenses as well, but without a focal plane shutter you lose some flexibility (with non-LS lenses, having a “backup shutter”, lower exposure latency, etc).

While Profoto integration is nice to have, it is certainly not a deal breaker, however the LS lenses and resultant flash sync speeds are definitely a deal breaker for many pros. If Fuji were to add some LS lenses to their arsenal I could see even more people dropping their XFs in favour of a GFX (myself included). LS lenses and C1 are the main things keeping me using Phase right now.

[Christopher]

Can one of you guys with a business explain why ANYBODY would pay $40K+ for a 150MP Phase/XF when they can get the very modern focus-across-the -frame GFX with a 100MP for $10K?

If P1 can afford to do this then they must have a pretty convincing competitor for the GFX waiting on launch.

Edmund

It’s hard to imagine, but I bought it the second I saw the lens cast improvement. Besides that, it’s hard to believe but there are actually clients wanting more data than my Iq3100 can delivery.

Besides I don’t think the GFX will be in my hands before June/July even though I have ordered it at two dealers already.

Besides that the flash integration is just great and I actually love the XF camera. When weight is not my biggest concern I always choose the XF over the GFX.

Besides it will be great again to work with my arca more intensely.

Don’t get me wrong, if my business couldn’t afford it and turn it around I would never invest in a Phase One product. I love what Fuji is doing and think it’s a great place to be a photographer.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Doug Peterson]

Can one of you guys with a business explain why ANYBODY would pay $40K+ for a 150MP Phase/XF when they can get the very modern focus-across-the -frame GFX with a 100MP for $10K?

They are really very different cameras, each with unique pros and cons.

You know the main arguments in favor of the Fuji (price, size, weight, EVF and the AF options that come with it).

Below are some of the reasons why someone would go with a Phase One. Obviously many of the items are speculative since we’re comparing a very-soon-to-ship product to one that’s being planned for spring of next year, but I feel my speculation is pretty well backed by previous relevant experience and understanding of the market and the underlying technologies.

- Big Picture Items (pun intended)
---- The best color available*
---- The look of full-frame 645 vs 44x33
---- Minimalist Scandinavian user interface
---- Unified UI across top LCD, rear LCD, iOS device, and Capture One
---- All features available in C1 (e.g. every custom setting, every function)
---- OVF (both OVF and EVF have technical advantages and a given photographer may like one more than the other)
---- OVF based Waist-Level-Finder: a pivoting LCD tackles the same use-case, but as anyone who has used a Hassy 500 knows, there is no more dimensionally tactile view of a scene than that through a Waist-Level-Finder.
---- Dynamic Range (TBD). Since the GFX100 isn’t out until next spring at the earliest this is speculation, but speculation backed by a decade of previous such comparisons. I’m sure the DR of both cameras will be spectacular, but Phase One has always found a way to squeeze out slightly more DR out of any given sensor generation, and with the 150mp sensor R+D tells me they have a few unannounced rabbits up their sleeve.
---- Different ergonomics. No doubt it is larger than the GFX, but size is not the only measure of ergonomics, nor is smaller always better for ergonomics. Someone can love OR hate the way either the GFX or XF feels, and either way they are right. Personally, I know I'm biased, but my opinion is the XF feels great in my hand; it has the heft, build quality, and feel of a real camera.
---- The absolute best image quality. One can argue all day long about how much the difference is worth to a given person, just as one can argue about this for the very best CNC machines, cars, wine, or TVs, but there is always a (niche) market for the very best.
---- The IQ4 is shipping very soon. The IQ3 is already shipping. The GFX100 is estimated for spring, which for many pros is several paid projects away and for many enthusiasts might be a “trip of a lifetime” away. Moreover, Phase One isn’t sitting idle during that period. I would expect more features on the IQ4 to be added by then, and who knows what new hardware.

- Monochrome or IR
---- The IQ4 150mp Achromatic is unequivocally the king of monochrome. The technical advantage of a monochrome sensor to a color-sensor-converted-to-BW-in-post is subtle, but real. The technical advantage of shooting IR on a monochrome sensor is pretty significant. The next-step-down (other than Phase One’s previous two monochrome systems) is the Leica M Monochrome which is a sensor 2.5 times smaller and 16% of the resolution.
---- The technical advantage of a monochrome sensor for IR work is pretty significant.

- Workflow Tools
---- Fully dedicated focus stacking tool (set front and back of object, it calculates and executes the required stack)
---- Integrated Profoto Transmitter
---- Integrated Profoto Receiver (for external triggering)
---- Integrated Profoto TTL
---- Integrated Profoto Manual Control
---- Integrated Flash Duration Meter (any brand)
---- Rear Curtain Custom Trimming, for clipping flash to a shorter duration
---- Vibration-Monitor that shows vibration level experienced during capture (great for long exposures)
---- Vibration-Delay mode that monitors all vibration (internal and external to the camera) and delays capture until it will be sharp. Great for urban architecture.
---- Customizable/draggable grids and guides (in camera)
---- Exposure Calculator. Super fast and easy way to translate exposures before/after large changes in ISO/Shutterspeed/Filters. For those doing long-exposures during the day with big ND filters, or long exposures at night (especially during dawn or dusk when light levels change quickly) this is by far the best tool for quickly and reliably getting to the optimal exposure.
---- Capture One Inside so that on-screen review, JPGs, iOS review, and the raws in Capture One all immediately match the style/look that you want

- Review Features
---- Unobstructed full-image with tools alongside, so that you can examine histogram or exposure-clpping etc without blocking the image
---- Clipping Warning. Not just an "exposure warning" tool from the 90s; this is still the best way to use an ETTR workflow, or to evaluate whether highlights in an image are "just very bright" or are "totally unrecoverable"
---- Exposure Heat Map. Still the best way I've seen on any camera to evaluate the exposure on a specific subject in a high-key or low-key exposure.
---- REALLY fast interface (TBD). The IQ4 has roughly the same computing power as an iPad Pro. For anyone who has used an IQ1/2/3 the speed of the IQ4 (e.g. how quickly you can zoom to 100% or pan around an image) is going to be eye opening. I can’t speak to the GFX100 since it’s only pre-natal at this point, but I’d be surprised if they pack as much processing umph into the smaller body.

- Lenses
---- Fuji's lenses are very good. But I'll put up lenses like the Schneider 35LS Blue Ring, Schneider 45LS Blue Ring or Schneider 150LS f/2.8 Blue Ring, Rodenstock 32HR, or Rodenstock 50HR against any other lenses in the world.
---- Lens look. This is entirely subjective so someone many prefer the look of the Fuji lenses or the look of the Schneider lenses.
---- Native 1/1600th leaf-shutter flash sync with every first-party lens. Alternative psuedo-sync tech is available for nearly any camera, but they all lose significant power at faster shutter speeds (hence you see so many adapters to mount 2 or 4 or even 8 flashes into a softbox). Native leaf shutter flash sync is unrivaled for easy, flexible, and powerful [ambient+flash] photography.

- Tethering
---- Ethernet tethering with native cable length support up to 330 feet (100 meters), including POE (Power Over Ethernet) such that the one cable functions as both tethering and power to run the complete camera system
---- The fastest tethering available (better raw compression, better optimized tethering pipeline, fully optimized C1 pipeline)
---- Fully wireless, totally native raw-file transfer to Capture One
---- IP accessible tethering, for advanced workflows involving shooting directly to a server or an off-site location

- Tech cameras and View cameras
---- The most flexible movements
---- The most native operation
---- Weight (back only 1.2 pounds vs 2 pounds)
---- Wideness of lenses (full-frame 645 sensor vs 44x33)

- Others
---- Best-in-class lossless and lossy compression options. The average raw file from an IQ3 100mp is *smaller* than the raw from a GFX 50 while despite the higher bit depth and resolution. Phase One simply owns the best IP for compressing raw files.
---- Differentiation. Whether it’s fair or not, some clients will respond different to a photographer using a larger camera that obviously looks the part of “specialized high-end camera” vs one that looks roughly like the camera their nephew uses. The XF or an IQ on an Arca/Cambo/Alpa, look fundamentally different than a GFX. I, personally, find this annoying, since professionals should be judged by the product they produce and the experience of working with them, rather than a lay persons understanding of their equipment, but it is nonetheless a market reality that should be acknowledged.

- Service/Support
---- Five year warranty on all items in a kit purchase (back, body, all lenses) including unlimited actuations
---- Overnight loaner (or often same day if you can get to your dealer, or are within courier distance)
---- Unmatched pre-purchase experience (depending on the quality of your dealer). We (DT) have two offices (NYC and LA) and 25 full-time employees almost all of whom are high-level experts on the P1 ecosystem ("almost all" because of course, e.g. our accountant has little photo knowledge).
---- Unmatched concierge-level post-purchase support (depending on the quality of your dealer)
---- Unmatched training options
---- Widely supported by rental studios, digital techs, and production companies (this may change over time; Fuji could make greater inroads here over the next few years, but currently it's pretty lopsided toward P1 and Hassy)

- Resolution
---- More pixels (assuming 150mp model)

*Obviously subjective, but also hard to deny when you do the comparisons. Adding Capture One support will likely narrow this gap, but its very hard to compete with fully-integrated color (the same team making the camera, lenses, software, and profiles; starting the profiling process during the prototype stage of the hardware).

Also note that while everyone points to the flagship (which is, to be fair, the top seller) Phase One CPO IQ kits (with body, leaf shutter lens, warranty, dealer support, and all new accessories) start at $14k and backs only or P+ kits start at under $8k. Many of the advantages above apply even to the lowest-entry-price units; for example, flash sync speed is 1/1600th even with a P40+ on a DF+ which would cost roughly half of a [GFX + lens]. Do also remember that the GFX price is most commonly cited without a lens, while P1 kits come with either the 80mm Schneider LS or the lens of your choice depending on model/generation; it's a small but important distinction worth noting when trying to make comparisons.

Finally note that many users will be upgrading from previous backs. If a user already owns, for example, an XF, IQ180, and several Schneider LS BR lenses, then the cost to upgrade the back (the body, nor lenses, do not need to be upgraded) will be far less than the price of buying an XF IQ4 150mp kit. There are dozens of backs one might be upgrading from, along with competitive trade-ins (e.g. for Hassy or Fuji owners) so the numbers get a bit much to start laundry listing, but P1's trade-in program means the comparison is not always to the list price of the system.

[narikin]

- Big Picture Items (pun intended)
---- The best color available*

THIS.

End of story.

I've written it before, but after 65,000+ actuations on my IQ3100, it's still open jaw at the results, daily.

I own other cameras, and all of those process in Capture One, but none comes close for results - color, tonality, shadow definition, etc. So much so, I'm convinced Phase hobbles the non Phase output. A same generation, same pixel size, same manufacturer, Sony sensor in the A7R3, comes nowhere near the color of an IQ back. It remains to be seen what a 100mp BSI Fuji through C1 will look like, but I expect to see it mysteriously  falling well short of the IQ4's output.

[Doug Peterson]

THIS.

End of story.

I've written it before, but after 65,000+ actuations on my IQ3100, it's still open jaw at the results, daily.

I own other cameras, and all of those process in Capture One, but none comes close for results - color, tonality, shadow definition, etc. So much so, I'm convinced Phase hobbles the non Phase output. A same generation, same pixel size, same manufacturer, Sony sensor in the A7R3, comes nowhere near the color of an IQ back. It remains to be seen what a 100mp BSI Fuji through C1 will look like, but I expect to see it mysteriously  falling well short of the IQ4's output.

Phase One does not "hobble" any other camera's color in C1.

If that were true you could find that your Sony looked better in LR than in C1, or that the in-camera JPG looked better than C1's rendition of the raw. The reverse is true; C1 is widely acknowledged as producing the best color for Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fuji (I suspect others as well, but I have little personal experience outside the brands I listed).

The Salzburg Mozarteum Orchestra does not "hobble" themselves when rehearsing and performing Bach. I'm sure they practice long and hard whichever the composer is. But of course they rehearse longer and harder to fine-tune their performance of a signature Mozart piece (he was born in Salzburg).

Even that analogy is flawed because it implies a one-way relationship; the music is fixed and the orchestra is improving their interpretation/performance of it. Instead imagine the interplay between Bach and the contemporary orchestras he worked with. He could write a draft of a new piece, hear it performed, revise the music according to that, and repeat that process several times. That's more similar to what happens at P1 as the hardware, software, and color teams work together from the earliest prototype of a new Phase One camera.

A camera system is far more than a sensor. The quality you can achieve when you control the development of the entire system is different than when you only have control over part.

[narikin]

Doug,  I don't dispute that Capture One outputs are better than Lightroom or whatever, but I stand by my impression that Phase don't take the same obsessive care in profiling other camera sensors as they do their own.

I have tested my Sony A7R3 sensor against IQ3-100, which, once again, is: same generation tech, same pixel size, same manufacturer (i.e. Sony). I took a Zeiss Otus, locked the lens to a  tripod pointed at a studio scene, and simply swapped the back end from A7R3 to IQ3100, nothing else changed at all. Open both files in C1, and damn!: the 3100 is far better color than the Sony A7R3.  So either Sony is putting inferior sensor tech in their cameras, which is unlikely considering they make them, or Phase simply goes above and beyond when profiling it's own backs, in ways it doesn't with other companies.  That scenario is understandable, (why wouldn't they  - their reputation depends on it!) but doesn't change the end result.

Others report better color in C1 when custom profiling their cameras, which only adds to my impression. That said, it remains that - an impression.

[Doug Peterson]

I have tested my Sony A7R3 sensor against IQ3-100, which, once again, is: same generation tech, same pixel size, same manufacturer (i.e. Sony). I took a Zeiss Otus, locked the lens to a  tripod pointed at a studio scene, and simply swapped the back end from A7R3 to IQ3100, nothing else changed at all. Open both files in C1, and damn!: the 3100 is far better color than the Sony A7R3. 

Notably, a sensor from the same manufacturer and year do not necessarily share the same CFA, spectral response, or IR filter.

Doug,  I don't dispute that Capture One outputs are better than Lightroom or whatever, but I stand by my impression that Phase don't take the same obsessive care in profiling other camera sensors as they do their own. [...] Phase simply goes above and beyond when profiling it's own backs, in ways it doesn't with other companies.  That scenario is understandable, (why wouldn't they  - their reputation depends on it!) but doesn't change the end result.

That they go "above and beyond" for their own backs is not in dispute. I say just this in my post above. They spend many weeks of time tweaking the profiles for each new Phase One camera. There are 500 cameras that P1 supports in C1; there are literally not enough weeks in the year for them to spend that kind of time on every single camera.

I suspect very strongly that Phase One spends more employee time creating, checking, and fine-tuning profiles for Sony cameras than any other software maker.

But yes, they spend far more time when it's their own camera, and when it's their own camera they are also able to change the hardware based on what they see in the profiling process.

I only disagree with your prior use of the word "hobble".

Others report better color in C1 when custom profiling their cameras, which only adds to my impression. That said, it remains that - an impression.

Custom profiling can sometimes improve the performance (of any camera) within the narrow constraints of the scene which was used to create the profile. The joy of C1's bespoke profiles is they perform so well across a huge variety of lighting scenarios (mid-day, morning, studio flash, even stage lighting or industrial lighting).

[eronald]

If someone at Fuji arranged to loan me a camera I would create a profile.

Edmund

Doug,  I don't dispute that Capture One outputs are better than Lightroom or whatever, but I stand by my impression that Phase don't take the same obsessive care in profiling other camera sensors as they do their own.

I have tested my Sony A7R3 sensor against IQ3-100, which, once again, is: same generation tech, same pixel size, same manufacturer (i.e. Sony). I took a Zeiss Otus, locked the lens to a  tripod pointed at a studio scene, and simply swapped the back end from A7R3 to IQ3100, nothing else changed at all. Open both files in C1, and damn!: the 3100 is far better color than the Sony A7R3.  So either Sony is putting inferior sensor tech in their cameras, which is unlikely considering they make them, or Phase simply goes above and beyond when profiling it's own backs, in ways it doesn't with other companies.  That scenario is understandable, (why wouldn't they  - their reputation depends on it!) but doesn't change the end result.

Others report better color in C1 when custom profiling their cameras, which only adds to my impression. That said, it remains that - an impression.

[nemtom]

Doug,  I don't dispute that Capture One outputs are better than Lightroom or whatever, but I stand by my impression that Phase don't take the same obsessive care in profiling other camera sensors as they do their own.

I have tested my Sony A7R3 sensor against IQ3-100, which, once again, is: same generation tech, same pixel size, same manufacturer (i.e. Sony). I took a Zeiss Otus, locked the lens to a  tripod pointed at a studio scene, and simply swapped the back end from A7R3 to IQ3100, nothing else changed at all. Open both files in C1, and damn!: the 3100 is far better color than the Sony A7R3.  So either Sony is putting inferior sensor tech in their cameras, which is unlikely considering they make them, or Phase simply goes above and beyond when profiling it's own backs, in ways it doesn't with other companies.  That scenario is understandable, (why wouldn't they  - their reputation depends on it!) but doesn't change the end result.

Others report better color in C1 when custom profiling their cameras, which only adds to my impression. That said, it remains that - an impression.

I hope you did notice that the base ISO in the Sony camera is ISO 100, but it is ISO 50 in the Phase One's back (and ISO-35 for the Trichromatic). That is because of the different CFA in front of the sensor. Higher base ISO with the same well capacity means more transparent color filters, with more cross talk (green in red channel, UV in all channels, etc). Just to make the difference stand out, the Achromatic without any filter has a base ISO 200. Basically that indicates that the A7RIII's CFA is twice as transparent as the original IQ3 100MP.
So I would suspect that the Sony sensor has quite a bit more cross-talk than any of the color backs from Phase. This is up to the camera manufacturer, which one to choose. Higher base ISO - hence less noise on the same ISO level - , or more precise color reproduction.
One can produce a profile which recovers most of the cross talk, but it is tricky in some situations...

[BobShaw]

A camera system is far more than a sensor. The quality you can achieve when you control the development of the entire system is different than when you only have control over part.

Hasselblad would certainly agree with that.

[eronald]

I hope you did notice that the base ISO in the Sony camera is ISO 100, but it is ISO 50 in the Phase One's back (and ISO-35 for the Trichromatic). That is because of the different CFA in front of the sensor. Higher base ISO with the same well capacity means more transparent color filters, with more cross talk (green in red channel, UV in all channels, etc). Just to make the difference stand out, the Achromatic without any filter has a base ISO 200. Basically that indicates that the A7RIII's CFA is twice as transparent as the original IQ3 100MP.
So I would suspect that the Sony sensor has quite a bit more cross-talk than any of the color backs from Phase. This is up to the camera manufacturer, which one to choose. Higher base ISO - hence less noise on the same ISO level - , or more precise color reproduction.
One can produce a profile which recovers most of the cross talk, but it is tricky in some situations...

Some of the images I've seen show bad green separation in the Sony. Everyone has told me I'm just imagining things
I don't understand why they would sacrifice color given the incredible way ISO can be cranked up these day, but it may have something to do with a desire to allow consumers to shoot video in normal indoors lighting.

Edmund

[DP]

THIS.

End of story.

I've written it before, but after 65,000+ actuations on my IQ3100, it's still open jaw at the results, daily.

I own other cameras, and all of those process in Capture One, but none comes close for results - color, tonality, shadow definition, etc. So much so, I'm convinced Phase hobbles the non Phase output. A same generation, same pixel size, same manufacturer, Sony sensor in the A7R3, comes nowhere near the color of an IQ back. It remains to be seen what a 100mp BSI Fuji through C1 will look like, but I expect to see it mysteriously  falling well short of the IQ4's output.

at least we do not hear anymore about "16bit" from CCD MF (and that the usual wording back then)... thank you !

[DP]

I hope you did notice that the base ISO in the Sony camera is ISO 100, but it is ISO 50 in the Phase One's back

nominal ISO is also (A) sufficiently arbitrary calculated by different manufacturers per ISO standard allowing to use "brightness" after raw conversion (unlike what is called Ssat ISO, used by DxO) and (B) affected by sensel's well size ... so not only CFA properties are at play...

[Gerd_Peters]

at least we do not hear anymore about "16bit" from CCD MF (and that the usual wording back then)... thank you !

The IQ3100 (Tr.) has real 16 bits and not just a 16 bit file. It's easy to check in RawDigger.

Greeting Gerd

[vjbelle]

THIS.

End of story.

I've written it before, but after 65,000+ actuations on my IQ3100, it's still open jaw at the results, daily.

I own other cameras, and all of those process in Capture One, but none comes close for results - color, tonality, shadow definition, etc. So much so, I'm convinced Phase hobbles the non Phase output. A same generation, same pixel size, same manufacturer, Sony sensor in the A7R3, comes nowhere near the color of an IQ back. It remains to be seen what a 100mp BSI Fuji through C1 will look like, but I expect to see it mysteriously  falling well short of the IQ4's output.

There really is no comparison between a 3100 and a A7R3.  Its not just the sensor but the camera processing as well.  I suggest you take a look at a 50MP Fuji and a 3100.  I own both and the color out of C1 for both is exceptional and at times almost indistinguishable if not for the resolution difference.  I would expect the same similarity for both the Fuji 100MP and IQ4. 

Time will tell......

Victor

[Bo_Dez]

Some of the images I've seen show bad green separation in the Sony. Everyone has told me I'm just imagining things
I don't understand why they would sacrifice color given the incredible way ISO can be cranked up these day, but it may have something to do with a desire to allow consumers to shoot video in normal indoors lighting.

Edmund

I agree about Sony greens! Infact, I've found greens are the weakest link in a lot of 35mm cameras.

[StoryinPictures]

I think supporting Fuji was a genius move for Phase.  I'm sure Fuji gave them money to do so, but the real genius is selling more Phase cameras. How?

1. Not supporting Fuji is tacit admission Fuji is a direct competitor. And it mostly is not. As stated above, there are real differences between Phase and Fuji which are not insignificant. Those with $XX, XXX to spend on a camera can have the very best if they need it.

2. The customers who are already into Phase won't change without cause.  But there are many more who are not using or considering using Phase. But they might just consider getting a Fuji. And if they do, they learn the Medium Format advantage. And a few of them will discover and long for Phase. And some of them will rent and some of them will buy. And Phase just got some business it wouldn't have had.

Fuji as gateway drug....

3. There will be more users on the Capture One band wagon.

4. Cash from Fuji. Yeah, I'm sure this probably wasn't a deciding factor. But it doesn't hurt.

Fuji is a great, smart and innovative company and they have been doing this for a while. Phase is also exceptionally good at what it does and will, in all likelihood, manage to stay well ahead of the pack by continuing to innovate and develop.

Win for Fuji.  Win for Phase. Win for the customer.

Win. Win. Win.

[DP]

I think supporting Fuji was a genius move for Phase.

money talks, that genius discovery was made millennia ago... P1 simply retreated from the certain (battle)field ("cheap" MF) and it was plain stupid not to scrape some business

[Ray Harrison]

To me, there are two types of people: Those who are going to buy into Phase or other 5 figure systems and those who are not  . You either have the disposable income/institutional budget/paying clients/overwhelming need to support that purchase or you are getting something else. Not sure that Phase will get a lot of Fuji mainliners into their particular designer drug.

To the contrary and anecdotally, I've read here and elsewhere of folks not purchasing into GFX simply because there wasn't C1 support. Now there is, so Fuji should pick up some sales, I'd think. Phase will hook people in to C1. Of course, it's like a 5/1 cost ratio of Fuji+lens or two to a new top-of-the-line Phase system so it wouldn't take many Phase sales, I suppose, from a pure dollar perspective.

I do agree that by not supporting GFX, Phase was admitting they were a competitor so best to just suck it up and support it from a marketing standpoint.

Fuji as gateway drug....

[faberryman]

To me, there are two types of people: Those who are going to buy into Phase or other 5 figure systems and those who are not  . You either have the disposable income/institutional budget/paying clients/overwhelming need to support that purchase or you are getting something else.

Typical logical fallacy of black and white thinking.

Not sure that Phase will get a lot of Fuji mainliners into their particular designer drug.

But the opposite may occur.