YT: Hasselblad 907x & CFV 100c - A journey with Ian Atkinson on location with Technical cameras

[Ian Atkinson]

Ah okay, I'll increase the clarity and see what happens. I agree with the angle of light. I had 20mm of shift and 10mm of rise when conducting the test. The 23mm S had significant cut off at this amount of movements but I did it to see if there were any areas of issue.
I can't see any banding on any of the lenses I tested at normal exposure, however when I increase the clarity to 100% the banding is visible in the top left corner of (20mm shift and 10mm rise) all the lenses I tested, it is significantly more noticeable on the 23mm S Rodenstock. It is also more noticeable on the 38mm XL Schnieder.
Personally I would never introduce this amount of clarity into my own images, but that's not to say some people do and the real question is should you be able to or not.
My guess is that like many of the artefacts that are in digital files the manipulation of the image causes them to be more noticeable in certain situations. Not ideal but it is the nature of the technology. I still think this is the best digital back I've used and I shoot predominantly on a Phaseone IQ3100 on my Techno.
My work around would be not use clarity beyond 20% and perhaps never on skies, again not ideal.
Hope this helps.

 

[f8orbust]

Just to reiterate what I've posted elsewhere - the banding is (or, can be) completely mitigated in Raw Therapee and ART (Another Raw Therapee). ART in particular seems able to resolve the issue straight off the bat, i.e. with very little work. From what I've read elsewhere, ART has been tweaked in order to address a similar problem with the sensor, but in the Fuji series of cameras that use it. RT and ART are also able offer the user some controls over how the LCC correction is performed, which is really nice. I guess H/B will resolve the issue completely in the next release of Phocus.

BTW, if anyone has RAWs that demonstrate the problem beyond those that 'diggles' made available, it would be handy if you could make them accessible for testing (e.g. via Google Drive). At the end of the day it (potentially) benefits everyone who has one of these DBs on their radar. Thinking S/K wide angles in particular - would be nice to see what happens on the 28 ...

 

[ruebe]

Just to reiterate what I've posted elsewhere - the banding is (or, can be) completely mitigated in Raw Therapee and ART (Another Raw Therapee). ART in particular seems able to resolve the issue straight off the bat, i.e. with very little work. From what I've read elsewhere, ART has been tweaked in order to address a similar problem with the sensor, but in the Fuji series of cameras that use it. RT and ART are also able offer the user some controls over how the LCC correction is performed, which is really nice. I guess H/B will resolve the issue completely in the next release of Phocus.

BTW, if anyone has RAWs that demonstrate the problem beyond those that 'diggles' made available, it would be handy if you could make them accessible for testing (e.g. via Google Drive). At the end of the day it (potentially) benefits everyone who has one of these DBs on their radar. Thinking S/K wide angles in particular - would be nice to see what happens on the 28 ...

Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life

www.dropbox.com

 

[diggles]

Ah okay, I'll increase the clarity and see what happens. I agree with the angle of light. I had 20mm of shift and 10mm of rise when conducting the test. The 23mm S had significant cut off at this amount of movements but I did it to see if there were any areas of issue.
I can't see any banding on any of the lenses I tested at normal exposure, however when I increase the clarity to 100% the banding is visible in the top left corner of (20mm shift and 10mm rise) all the lenses I tested, it is significantly more noticeable on the 23mm S Rodenstock. It is also more noticeable on the 38mm XL Schnieder.
Personally I would never introduce this amount of clarity into my own images, but that's not to say some people do and the real question is should you be able to or not.
My guess is that like many of the artefacts that are in digital files the manipulation of the image causes them to be more noticeable in certain situations. Not ideal but it is the nature of the technology. I still think this is the best digital back I've used and I shoot predominantly on a Phaseone IQ3100 on my Techno.
My work around would be not use clarity beyond 20% and perhaps never on skies, again not ideal.
Hope this helps.

Just for clarity (pun intended )…

With the 35XL and small amounts of shift, the banding is definitely noticeable straight out of the camera without any corrections.

A big question for a lot of people was whether or not this issue was unique to Schneider lenses, but it appears that it is an issue with Rodenstock lenses as well. To what degree is difficult to tell without seeing those RAW files.

The promising news is that Hasselblad is aware of the banding and it is fixable via software using either Photoshop or ART/RawTherapee. Hopefully, this means that Hasselblad will be come up with a firmware update that will fix it in camera or at the very least a software update for Phocus that fixes it.

Previous backs I've had are the CFV ii 50c and the IQ4 150. The 100C is my favorite to use as well. Just hope they can sort this all out.

I also want to thank you for taking the time to join the discussion. Your insights and perspective are invaluable, especially given your wide-reaching audience.