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!

How to process GFX files with C1.

Jan

Member
Hassy processed with C1?

Why?

Phocus is supposed to be the best around for image quality, Hasselblad lens profiles and color accuracy. C1 is excellent, but not for Hasselblad files, definitely not for Hasselblad files!
Based on that argument it makes me wonder why you wish to process Fuji files with C1.
 

Iktinos

Not Available
I just think if they had their own division or company it would greatly improve its revenue stream with some ideas I suggested or some other ways to get more folks to use it. It is the best tethering I ever used. For folks that make a living at this I really don't think we mind paying a couple hundred dollars for a full package. Or buy modules for the system you own idea.

From a personal point of view I won't buy hardware that can't use it but that does not mean I'm buying Phase gear either. So I lose that ability. So Fuji is out and so is Hassy although I could use a Phocus there. But as you can see that limits me right out of the gate. I understand their policy and really don't disagree with them either . But as a end user I wish they would consider a idea like this.
It maybe that dividing the Hardware from software sales is not feasible at the moment for P1 to do. It could be that the hardware division would then be under threat for survival.

Obviously C1 has been kept not accessible from other MF platforms as to protect the sales of hardware against competition since the software support is a parameter that the customer considers when deciding on the platform he will go with. Therefore it reasonable to consider that if C1 was accessible from other platforms, it could cause further reduction of hardware sales.

Inevitably, the recent (larger than expected) expansion of the MF market due to the mirrorless cameras having being released, has caused attraction to the MF market from higher end DSLR users, but surely there should have been some cannibalization of the higher end of the market too.

If one adds to the above mentioned that the balance of sales in the higher end of the market has caused Hasselblad's share to increase with respect to P1, it may mean that further reduction of hardware sales from P1 is not feasible.
 

Iktinos

Not Available
It may be worthy to mention that Capture One 9.3 opens DNG files from Lightroom without hacking the exif meta data.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
One thing is for sure from my experience, sadly neither Iridient or Adobe can do much with the higher ISO files, 2500 and up, especially if pushed at all, where as C1 does an amazing job on them.

LR seems to have a lot of color smearing in the higher ISO files, and the C1 conversion is just rock solid.

It's tragic that Fuji and P1 couldn't come to some agreement for this.

Paul Caldwell
 

dnercesian

New member
Everybody (almost) says this, however, the sensor is NOT the same, it's of the same origin alright, but Fuji has a "special" version with different shape and smaller microlenses which should improve on light perception per pixel and reduce color casts. According to Imaging resource, Fuji GFX gave them the "best results they've ever seen" out of all.
Marketing BS. Fuji just cooks the files. They have done it for years.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Keep in mind that the statement related to camera JPEG at high ISO.

That said, Imaging Resource's raw GFX images look pretty good to me in Lightroom.

Best regards
Erik

Everybody (almost) says this, however, the sensor is NOT the same, it's of the same origin alright, but Fuji has a "special" version with different shape and smaller microlenses which should improve on light perception per pixel and reduce color casts. According to Imaging resource, Fuji GFX gave them the "best results they've ever seen" out of all.
 

Jan

Member
Keep in mind that the statement related to camera JPEG at high ISO.
I would like to think so too indeed, otherwise we might as well discard camera RAW from now onwards. The sensor is hardware. If there is any difference in output between two similar sensors it is because of software processing taking place. RAW files however are meant to be unprocessed.

One could argue that a similar sensor with different (superior) specs has been produced for Fuji but that is very plausible considering the price for the body. Unless one is willing to believe Sony picked up the R&D cost for it.
 

Iktinos

Not Available
One could argue that a similar sensor with different (superior) specs has been produced for Fuji but that is very plausible considering the price for the body. Unless one is willing to believe Sony picked up the R&D cost for it.
The price of the body is totally irrelevant to Fuji GFX having a customized for them version of the Sony sensor. The volume of the market share Fuji is after is multiple times the volume all other makers do together.

Fuji has done that before (in multiple cases) based on a Sony sensor on their other cameras.

Fuji GFX 50S does have a customized for them version of the Sony sensor, simply because (well) they use a customized version of the sensor!

It's nothing one can do if you insist that "it isn't so" simply because you don't think "it's possible" and "there is some fraud involved"... is there?
 

DB5

Member
I can't see how Phase can keep Capture One closed off any longer. The new Fuji and Hasselblad cameras are on the march and if Phase don't adapt they will struggle. Firstly because the cheaper alternative is going to fill the gap and secondly because with the increased interest in adobe products will come much more development and Adobe is getting stronger and stronger since it's subscription change over and what gap Capture One has is going to be closed and lost pretty quickly. I would say loss of relevance is even starting to happen and they are going to have to diversify to keep the pace - being on that Mamiya 7D that was supposedly almost ready for release in 2015.
 

Iktinos

Not Available
I can't see how Phase can keep Capture One closed off any longer. The new Fuji and Hasselblad cameras are on the march and if Phase don't adapt they will struggle. Firstly because the cheaper alternative is going to fill the gap and secondly because with the increased interest in adobe products will come much more development and Adobe is getting stronger and stronger since it's subscription change over and what gap Capture One has is going to be closed and lost pretty quickly. I would say loss of relevance is even starting to happen and they are going to have to diversify to keep the pace - being on that Mamiya 7D that was supposedly almost ready for release in 2015.
I agree on this.

Surely P1's decisions for their marketing policies in the near future will depend on their Hardware volume share. With Hasselblad increasing their share on the (already very small) higher end of the MF market and the mirrorless entrance causing some further shrinkage of the higher end of the market due to cannibalization of the total MF market, I don't see how they can keep with past policies.

Surely they've considered the matter, but the more they delay (IMO) to take advantage of the demand there is for their C1 software, the more the handicap with (software) competition will close in the near future to the extend that it may not matter anymore.

What if the GFX-100s with the 100mp Sony sensor comes out later this year causing even more cannibalization happening to the higher end of the market and if by the time "Phocus" has another two or three upgrades (they had four significant ones last year) and if LR improves further by the time (which will surely happen)? Surely one can't expect Fuji to stay "constant" with their own software, they have both interest and tradition to support their (superb) products the best they can.
 

Jan

Member
The price of the body is totally irrelevant to Fuji GFX having a customized for them version of the Sony sensor. The volume of the market share Fuji is after is multiple times the volume all other makers do together.

Fuji has done that before (in multiple cases) based on a Sony sensor on their other cameras.

Fuji GFX 50S does have a customized for them version of the Sony sensor, simply because (well) they use a customized version of the sensor!

It's nothing one can do if you insist that "it isn't so" simply because you don't think "it's possible" and "there is some fraud involved"... is there?
You take it way over the top.

I'm not insisting anything, I never used the word fraud and these days, technically everything is possible. Having that said, I am free to have my opinion based on what I consider most plausible and I am not the only one following the route of common sense instead of the marketing department of a manufacturer.

You seem to have lots of insight information claiming 'the volume of the market share Fuji is after is multiple times the volume all other makers do together'. Based on what? The price of the body is relevant since the most expensive component inside is .... drum roll .... the sensor.

Music is in the ear of the beholder. You believe what you want. And so do I.
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
I agree on this.

Surely P1's decisions for their marketing policies in the near future will depend on their Hardware volume share. With Hasselblad increasing their share on the (already very small) higher end of the MF market and the mirrorless entrance causing some further shrinkage of the higher end of the market due to cannibalization of the total MF market, I don't see how they can keep with past policies.

Surely they've considered the matter, but the more they delay (IMO) to take advantage of the demand there is for their C1 software, the more the handicap with (software) competition will close in the near future to the extend that it may not matter anymore.

What if the GFX-100s with the 100mp Sony sensor comes out later this year causing even more cannibalization happening to the higher end of the market and if by the time "Phocus" has another two or three upgrades (they had four significant ones last year) and if LR improves further by the time (which will surely happen)? Surely one can't expect Fuji to stay "constant" with their own software, they have both interest and tradition to support their (superb) products the best they can.

What you mean by Hasselblad "increasing their market share of the high end of the MF market", is the fact that Hasselblad shipped zero 100mp units (which would be the high end of the MF market, I suppose) until perhaps the 12th month of 2016, while Phase One began shipping the 1st month of 2016, which means that for 2016, it was a complete domination of the high end of the MF market for Phase One, and that in 2017, the fact Hasselblad is now finally shipping 100mp, those who are purchasing 100mp now may consider the Hasselblad to purchase, in addition to the Phase One. Yes?


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Iktinos

Not Available
You take it way over the top.

I'm not insisting anything, I never used the word fraud and these days, technically everything is possible. Having that said, I am free to have my opinion based on what I consider most plausible and I am not the only one following the route of common sense instead of the marketing department of a manufacturer.
It's not an "opinion" anymore if one questions the claiming of the manufacturer himself (especially if he does so based on no evidence what so ever). Neither it's "common sense", "common sense" is that the manufacturers are saying the truth when they claim they have a customized version of a sensor, otherwise it would be fraud from their side to claim "fiction" facts.

You take it way over the top.

You seem to have lots of insight information claiming 'the volume of the market share Fuji is after is multiple times the volume all other makers do together'. Based on what? The price of the body is relevant since the most expensive component inside is .... drum roll .... the sensor.
I only know that Fuji has set the "safe market volume" to 25K units annually for minimum production (total volume of MF market before the X1D -not to mention the GFX- was about 5K new units) and demand is many times that.

You take it way over the top.
Music is in the ear of the beholder. You believe what you want. And so do I.
Sure thing... still Fuji GFX-50S has a customized for Fuji sensor though, no matter what you want to believe on. (based on nothing but a crystal ball as you confess)
 

dnercesian

New member
It's not an "opinion" anymore if one questions the claiming of the manufacturer himself (especially if he does so based on no evidence what so ever). Neither it's "common sense", "common sense" is that the manufacturers are saying the truth when they claim they have a customized version of a sensor, otherwise it would be fraud from their side to claim "fiction" facts.



I only know that Fuji has set the "safe market volume" to 25K units annually for minimum production (total volume of MF market before the X1D -not to mention the GFX- was about 5K new units) and demand is many times that.



Sure thing... still Fuji GFX-50S has a customized for Fuji sensor though, no matter what you want to believe on. (based on nothing but a crystal ball as you confess)
How about based on the fact that Fuji claimed the same thing with the X Trans sensor, saying that it eliminated moire in non AA applications when it did no such thing in real life? In fact, all it really did was complicate the demosaicing process and make people do the raw converter dance for years, which they are still doing if you read topics in various Fuji discussion forums. From ISO fudging to overcooked files with obvious noise reduction, color, and sharpening artifacts, Fuji's marketing team has been in the BS business for quite some time. The funny thing is that they did not need to employ these gimmicks and then lie about them, because they got so much other stuff right on their cameras, but I guess they didn't think that was enough.

So yeah, people who have their own opinion on this subject are not forming such based on a "crystal ball" as you disingenuously suggest. There is a history. There are also the hardware facts and limitations. Your logic seems to be, "well they said it, so it must be true". I'm sorry, but I find that much more baseless an argument. Even so, you are entitled to your opinion and I hope you are happy with your purchase. But let others to their opinions as well without making passive aggressive remarks about their opinions being less credible, lest you get called out on your own.

Drum roll as the Fujahideen mobilizes to attack...
 

Iktinos

Not Available
What you mean by Hasselblad "increasing their market share of the high end of the MF market", is the fact that Hasselblad shipped zero 100mp units (which would be the high end of the MF market, I suppose) until perhaps the 12th month of 2016, while Phase One began shipping the 1st month of 2016, which means that for 2016, it was a complete domination of the high end of the MF market for Phase One, and that in 2017, the fact Hasselblad is now finally shipping 100mp, those who are purchasing 100mp now may consider the Hasselblad to purchase, in addition to the Phase One. Yes?


Steve Hendrix/CI
By higher end of the market, I mean the whole part that only Haselblad and P1 participate on, this is the (SLR) camera + MFDB combination. X1D isn't included in that market section.

By (some) cannibalization of the higher end MF market, I mean the total volume of it as it is described above.

By "Hasselblad increasing their share" in the higher end section of the market, I mean the balance between Hasselblad and P1 to have changed in favor of Hasselblad with respect to the past. (meaning Hasselblad selling more percentage and Phase less than they used to do during the later past years).

By "market situation", I mean the current market situation where both higher end companies have full availability of their full line of higher end products.
 

Iktinos

Not Available
How about based on the fact that Fuji claimed the same thing with the X Trans sensor, saying that it eliminated moire in non AA applications when it did no such thing in real life? In fact, all it really did was complicate the demosaicing process and make people do the raw converter dance for years, which they are still doing if you read topics in various Fuji discussion forums. From ISO fudging to overcooked files with obvious noise reduction, color, and sharpening artifacts, Fuji's marketing team has been in the BS business for quite some time. The funny thing is that they did not need to employ these gimmicks and then lie about them, because they got so much other stuff right on their cameras, but I guess they didn't think that was enough.

So yeah, people who have their own opinion on this subject are not forming such based on a "crystal ball" as you disingenuously suggest. There is a history. There are also the hardware facts and limitations. Your logic seems to be, "well they said it, so it must be true". I'm sorry, but I find that much more baseless an argument. Even so, you are entitled to your opinion and I hope you are happy with your purchase. But let others to their opinions as well without making passive aggressive remarks about their opinions being less credible, lest you get called out on your own.

Drum roll as the Fujahideen mobilizes to attack...
Thanks for confirming that Fuji had exclusive to them versions of sensors before they did with the GFX one.

The performance or not of a sensor can (of course) be criticized by an "opinion", it is not the same though as if one questions the existence of a customized sensor.

The GFX has a customized (not x-trans) sensor in it and you are (totally) out of subject by inventing a never existed before "conversation" in which I won't participate (because it doesn't interest me). Full stop.
 

dkyle

New member
is the fact that Hasselblad shipped zero 100mp units (which would be the high end of the MF market, I suppose) until perhaps the 12th month of 2016,


Steve Hendrix/CI
That is not a fact.

I received mine in Nov 2016.

I was not the first one to receive one, I do know that for a fact.
 

hcubell

Well-known member
Thanks for confirming that Fuji had exclusive to them versions of sensors before they did with the GFX one.

The performance or not of a sensor can (of course) be criticized by an "opinion", it is not the same though as if one questions the existence of a customized sensor.

The GFX has a customized (not x-trans) sensor in it and you are (totally) out of subject by inventing a never existed before "conversation" in which I won't participate (because it doesn't interest me). Full stop.
The issue to me is not whether Fuji obtained a "customized" version of the Sony 50 MP sensor with some sort of change to the microlenses. The issue is whether the custom feature makes a damn bit of difference in the real world. I do NOT trust Fuji's marketing machine to provide a candid answer. I would trust someone who REALLY knows what he is talking about as an engineer who actually works on optimizing sensors for cameras. That's not me. Is that you?
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The price of the body is totally irrelevant to Fuji GFX having a customized for them version of the Sony sensor. The volume of the market share Fuji is after is multiple times the volume all other makers do together.
Sure Fuji has a custom sensor in the same way that EVERYONE has a customized FOR THEM sensor. Both the Nikon D810 and Pentax K1 sensor are customized (for them) version of the original A7R sensor which was a revamped variation of the Sony produced D800 sensor. Sony has stated in many interviews that they produce sensors that they will not sell to others as well.

I agree with Jan that the body price IS relevant to their commercial success and there are clear cost cutting measures that Fuji has taken to get the GFX50s out at the price it's selling for. For instance the autofocus is CDAF only when if they were updating andgoing fully custom then one would think an obvious upgrade would be to add PDAF given the sordid AF performance of cameras like the X-Pro 1 or the original A7R. Cost of customization became a factor because they had a target price to reach. I would imagine if a revised version was released anytime soon that it'l debut closer to the $7,500-10,000 price range IF it (1) has cutting edge next generation medium format technology and (2) is released around the same time that the IQ4/H7D/645zII etc. cameras come to market.

Stating that this is a Fuji spec'ed customization of the tried and true Sony 44x33 sensor is probably a true statement. Guess what? Phase One, Hasselblad, and Pentax all received customized Sony sensors (to their specs) too and didn't have to wait until it was close to EOL to do so which is to Fuji's pricing benefit. The notion of your provocation that this Fuji is more special than other sensors (as if Sony wouldn't fabricate an OEM sensor to the specs of any camera manufacturer) is what is likely irritating people on some level.

My own unsubstantiated opinion of the industry, given the chatter that the two new mirrorless MF cameras (Fuji and Hasselblad) are creating Phase One will likely not wait as long to put out a mirrorless camera as they have to bring out the XF body. Given the close ties between Phase One and Sony (being that their is a Sony branded Capture One version) I wouldn't be surprised to see Sony engineers and Phase One work together to bring it to market faster with an exclusive BSI CMOS 44x33 sensor to compete in price and as a way to drive more people to the Team Phase One ecosystem. If priced aggressively meaning $10-12k or less for the body and a hit lens with dual shutter capability (and it's possible that it could reach those figures if R&D costs were shared partially between the two companies) it would be a sales hit IMO. I don't see many people in the future going for the IQ140/Credo40 series which is the "budget focused" models for now. Great cameras no doubt but we are talking about cameras that are roughly 5+yrs old at this point. Don't think for one minute that Team Phase One is ignoring the Fuji Marketing commotion in Dubai or the blogs that allowed that story to run solid for about 2 weeks or so before being "corrected." Look how many people are willing to hack their RAWs, clamoring for C1 support, and are willing to work without native lens profiles... If anything the last month was an example of great "free PR" for C1Pro software.

I agree with most (and especially Guy's great idea for Phase One and Capture One to operate independently to really push software solutions to those that can't afford or justify the $30-80K camera systems) that they should support other MF cameras myself but I don't think they feel it's more necessary to do so when people constantly interject how much they want them to open support. If anything I feel they take that to mean there's a new market for them in the sub-$15K compact/portable medium format camera system space.
 
Top