The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

New MFDB Company Survey

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I have, and for Hassey files at least the results are excellent. Colour is slightly different, as is moire suppression, but it's in the ballpark. I guess, like Leica, this owes to Blad working with Adobe, not shutting them out as I understand P1 does.
There is no way in which P1 is "shutting out" Adobe.

Every modern Phase One back is supported by Adobe LightRoom and LR does as good of a job with a Phase One file as it does with most any other camera it supports. Adobe also supports a wide variety of lenses for automatic (or manual) lens correction from the Phase One ecosystem.

Many people notice there is an improvement when you work with a Phase One raw file in Phase One's software Capture One vs in LightRoom. This is not because LR does a poor job (in absolute terms, or in comparison to other types of raw files), but because C1 does such a good job with them.

In fact, many users observe that their Nikon/Canon/Fuji/Sony raw files are better handled in C1 than in LR. Obviously Phase One is not "shutting out" Adobe from providing better raw processing of those brands either.
 

MB100

New member
There is no way in which P1 is "shutting out" Adobe.

Every modern Phase One back is supported by Adobe LightRoom and LR does as good of a job with a Phase One file as it does with most any other camera it supports. Adobe also supports a wide variety of lenses for automatic (or manual) lens correction from the Phase One ecosystem.

Many people notice there is an improvement when you work with a Phase One raw file in Phase One's software Capture One vs in LightRoom. This is not because LR does a poor job (in absolute terms, or in comparison to other types of raw files), but because C1 does such a good job with them.

In fact, many users observe that their Nikon/Canon/Fuji/Sony raw files are better handled in C1 than in LR. Obviously Phase One is not "shutting out" Adobe from providing better raw processing of those brands either.
Indeed, and I think that this speaks excellently to the fact that specialization is what produces the best products for us. PhaseOne with CaptureOne has spent a lot of time an money developing their raw product to the best of their abilities (which is quite good).

While Adobe is a much larger company, they have a much more diversified portfolio, and it just goes to show that a small(er) group focused on a specific goal can create a strong product.
 

tjv

Active member
But do they work with Adobe to help them improve their conversions, as Leica and Hasselblad do? Maybe they do and I'm mistaken, but I much prefer this kind of "open" approach.
 

Uaiomex

Member
+1

However, I could get onto a blissful glide with a true 645 cmos sensor revolving inside its back for under nine grand. Ok, make it ten grand.
Available in V mount of course. Mp's are primordially irrelevant but the more the merrier.

Eduardo


I'd be ecstatic...
 

yongfei

New member
You domain name is a good sign: square camera. Yes, in digital age, square format makes a lot of sense, as turning of camera is not needed.
 

T.Dascalos

Not Available
Great to hear someone is working on a square sensor. May you have great success, so I could buy one some day!
Who is working on a (big) square sensor? That would be a suicidal financial move for a maker with only 6x4.5 cameras currently in production.
 

Uaiomex

Member
A square camera does not necessarily mean a square sensor. It could just mean the opportunity for a waist level finder and a revolving 645 sensor or back. Two amazing things that in my opinion would set digital medium format FAR APART from dslr's. On the other hand, the same technology can be used for the 645 bodies with their dslr shooting style.

I can't quite understand why the Hy6 failed but it deserves another chance. The V refuses to die despite Hasselblad has neglected it for the last 10 years.

Eduardo


Who is working on a (big) square sensor? That would be a suicidal financial move for a maker with only 6x4.5 cameras currently in production.
 
Last edited:

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
wondered how this was coming along?.........
Brian ("BH") the OP is a friend of mine.

I texted him and he passes on the following message: "The project did not make it off the ground and was put on indefinite hold."

Too bad. I'd love to see a startup enter the high-end camera space and make something unique/different.
 

jduncan

Active member
Hi Guys,

You may have noticed that my internet presence has been rather anemic of late, well that has been because I have been working very hard on a new medium format digital back company that I have started.

We have received an initial round of funding and are currently using that to create a prototype. We are now looking to raise a second round of funding to finish the prototyping process and get to making cameras.

As part of the initial round of funding, I have created an online survey to hear from the photographic community what they are looking for in a new medium format digital back. I would greatly appreciate it if you could take this survey and let me know what products you want us to make.

The survey can be found at SquareCameras.com

Best,

BH
Hi,

I will recommend that you wait until Nikon makes their intention clear.
That mount seems to be MF scale (enough not host the current 100mpixel sensor).
If Nikon enters MF that will force Canon to enter too, and the market will be crowded, if is not already.
I commend you for taking the initiative but I will wait a little.

Best regards,
 
Top