Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Perhaps they decreased the sensitivity of the EVF's eye-detector. I was always blanking out the LCD by random finger movements and wished that I could turn that sensitivity down.Anyone notice a bit more lag when going from the rear LCD screen to the EVF? Mine seems to hesitate a bit.
Perhaps they decreased the sensitivity of the EVF's eye-detector. I was always blanking out the LCD by random finger movements and wished that I could turn that sensitivity down.
Now, that's interesting.- I only tested this on one image, but the edits made in Phocus 3.7.3 including keystone correction came through just fine when exported as a 16 bit tiff.
Confirmed as an issue.Now, that's interesting.
If it works for you, then either they fixed it and published an updated 3.7.3 binary or it happens only on my specific Desktop Mac.
Now I'm abroad and have a MBP with me. I'll give the new version a try again.
Thanks for testing.
Marco
Perhaps. I am running the M1 chip. What OS are you on? The spec sheet states that OS10.15 or higher is required.Confirmed as an issue.
Still not working on my MBP 13' Intel 2017.
...
Maybe it is an Intel-only issue.
Marco
That is correct. You can prove that to yourself by changing the white balance and watching the histogram change.I assume that the LV histogram is based upon jpeg data, not raw data.
I keep looking for the RAW white balance setting....That is correct. You can prove that to yourself by changing the white balance and watching the histogram change.
You can approximate it by setting the color temperature to 2500 and making the tint all the way green (-100) .I keep looking for the RAW white balance setting....
Thank you for that! I confess to exposure laziness - if I'm worried, I underexpose a stop - but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate "best practices", and you can usually be counted on to provide them.You can approximate it by setting the color temperature to 2500 and making the tint all the way green (-100) .
UniWB on the X2D - the last word
This is the 42nd in a series of posts on the Hasselblad X2D 100C camera and the XCD lenses. You will be able to find all the posts in this series by looking at the righthand column on this page and finding the Category “X2D”. If you've read this set of posts, then you'll knowblog.kasson.com
Thanks. The nice thing about the way the X2D handles WB is that it's easy to switch back and forth between the various modes, so you don't have to look at a green EVF image all the time. Just invoke manual WB when you want to use UniWB, and then switch it back to, say, auto. However, if you want to look at the three-channel histogram, with the X2D you can't do that in live view, so you'll have to leave the WB on manual, suffer the green finder image, and look at the color histogram when you review the green-looking capture.Thank you for that! I confess to exposure laziness - if I'm worried, I underexpose a stop - but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate "best practices", and you can usually be counted on to provide them.
I guess the IQ150 is the only digital capture device that outputs a raw data histogram. That seems surprising. I wonder if it's a way for camera manufacturers to save photographers from themselves by biasing the camera toward underexposure.That is correct. You can prove that to yourself by changing the white balance and watching the histogram change.
The Q2M does, too.I guess the IQ150 is the only digital capture device that outputs a raw data histogram.
For some subjects, like flowers, you can get overexposure from believing that the live histograms apply to raw data. But I think the main reasons are JPEG-centric thinking, and not wanting to have to add another image pipeline to the EVF processing. But I'm with you in that I'd love to see a multi-channel live raw histogram.I wonder if it's a way for camera manufacturers to save photographers from themselves by biasing the camera toward underexposure.
If I am right the first Leica M Monochrom (M9 based, CCD) had a Raw-histogram as well…I guess the IQ150 is the only digital capture device that outputs a raw data histogram. That seems surprising. I wonder if it's a way for camera manufacturers to save photographers from themselves by biasing the camera toward underexposure.
I actually don’t understand how a JPG histogram is less work - the raw is being read off of the sensor by something, and adding a step to histogram the values between 0 to 2^n-1 bits seems less mathematically challenging than running the JPEG algorithm and then doing the same thing (maybe at a lower resolution), but still. The the EVF/display basically take raw data anyway at a lower res, not JPEG data. So why not histogram it in that domain?For some subjects, like flowers, you can get overexposure from believing that the live histograms apply to raw data. But I think the main reasons are JPEG-centric thinking, and not wanting to have to add another image pipeline to the EVF processing. But I'm with you in that I'd love to see a multi-channel live raw histogram.
Yes it did/does, not sure about the later versions....If I am right the first Leica M Monochrom (M9 based, CCD) had a Raw-histogram as well…
MacOS Monterey 12.6.5 (on Intel CPU).Perhaps. I am running the M1 chip. What OS are you on? The spec sheet states that OS10.15 or higher is required.