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!
Thanks for the honest answers fellas, I am actually receiving the h6d-50c body tomorrow. So I wanted to make sure I want to keep it before opening it up etc.
What do you think is a better software phocus or phase one? I am getting the MF mainly for the tech cam usage. Is the LCC process relatively easy to perform in phocus?
Does the mirror slap on the XF make images blurry? I would assume its not a problem with the leaf shutter lenses. I have had some problems on my 645z with mirror slap shaking the camera.
C1 is a much better featured piece of software. Phocus is really just a (very good) way to get your RAWs into Photoshop or Lightroom.
Yes LCC (aka scene calibration) is very easy to do in Phocus.
Xfs have a function to wait for the camera to settle after the mirror goes up, Hasselblad have a mirror delay and of course a mirror lockup so no difference between the two if you are using leaf shutters.
I'll let the others explain the battery or other things. I just wanted to mention one thing I heard from my friend:
The current version of Phocus from Hasselblad can (almost or completely) eliminate the vertical bandings (a kind of artifact mostly visible when you shift a tech cam lens to the extreme and push clarity of the sky) with their Scene Calibration function, while the current version of Capture One from Phase One still cannot cure this with their LCC function.
I have not confirmed this myself. Maybe someone else could help clarify this.
I've been using Phase One so I can't comment much on the Hasselblad offering. Keep in mind that Alpa and Phase One had collaborated the A-series with official support.
Spec-wise, they are very similar.
Focal Plan lenses on the XF/IQ3-100 system take advantage of an Electronic First Curtain Shutter. Below is off of Phase One's website explaining it.Thanks for the honest answers fellas, I am actually receiving the h6d-50c body tomorrow. So I wanted to make sure I want to keep it before opening it up etc.
What do you think is a better software phocus or phase one? I am getting the MF mainly for the tech cam usage. Is the LCC process relatively easy to perform in phocus?
Does the mirror slap on the XF make images blurry? I would assume its not a problem with the leaf shutter lenses. I have had some problems on my 645z with mirror slap shaking the camera.
I wonder if there is any way to convert IIQ -> 3FR so that they can be taken into Phocus ?It's sad if Phocus can account for this and C1 after almost 3 years still can't...
That's more to do with correcting distortion; since the Schneider's are virtually distortion free, profiles are not really needed.Lens Profiles: Capture One has built-in profiles for Rodenstock and Schneider tech lenses.
In that case I stand correctedLens Profiles: Capture One has built-in profiles for Rodenstock and Schneider tech lenses?
I don't think so. It has profiles for Rodenstock tech lenses, but not Schneiders.
May be thats why Schneider tech lens profiles are absent... (I was just reminded)That's more to do with correcting distortion; since the Schneider's are virtually distortion free, profiles are not really needed.
Absolutely correct in that the Schneider Wide's are virtually distortion free. That's the main reason I keep my 35XL. The use of lens profiles for lens distortion correction in ANY raw developer is very pixel destructive since a lot of resampling has to take place. This also holds true if the lens distortion is corrected in post. What's the sense of having all of those pixels just to throw a lot of them away to correct for lens distortion?That's more to do with correcting distortion; since the Schneider's are virtually distortion free, profiles are not really needed.