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!

X1D Exif and distance and JPEG size

tashley

Subscriber Member
So I've been poking about in EXIF for files from the Hassy.

If you shoot RAW or JPEG there is no value shown for Exposure Compensation anywhere in EXIF, which is daft and irritating when one is trying to fine-tune ETTR use - unless you make a physical note, you have no idea how often using, for example, +1/3rd stop compensation leads to files with blown skies etc. Hassy should fix this.

Again shooting RAW, there is no Subject Distance shown in either Phocus or LR but if you export TIFF from Phocus and then look at the files in Preview on a Mac and use the Tools palette to look at EXIF, a subject distance is shown. That subject distance is, I can confirm after using a Disto (and a tape measure!) always wrong. By a lot. And even though greater distances do show a larger number in this field they are still totally incorrect and should be ignored.

Shooting JPEG does't seem to record a subject distance at all, or not that I can find.

Lastly, and this was really new to me, if you shoot RAW+JPEG (there is no option to shoot JPEG only) then the JPEG files are about half the pixel dimensions of the RAW file @4128 pixels on the long side versus 8272 for the RAW (I think the 'slightly less than half' factor is due to lens corrections). This fact seems undocumented and in fact the user manual says "The JPEG les are HNC pro led so you can print straight from a folder for amazing quality" - which kind of implies that they are full size.

Has anyone else noticed this? I can't find any reference to it, nor any menu setting to let me change it. Frankly it doesn't matter to me since I don't do JPEG but it would be good, if in the field and running out of memory card space, in extremis, to be able to record full size JPEG with no RAW file. Or, if in the middle of nowhere and with access to a print shop but no computer, to be able to print from full sized JPEG.

In any event, this all betokens the irritation with the system: a great camera with incredible glass but with oddly counterintuitive behaviours which are non-standard and not documented.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Tim, the good thing is I would assume both issues could be fairly easily addressed in a firmware revision. This is especially so for the ability to choose resolution of jpeg and I would think too for providing additional/missing Exif info.

Dave (D&A)
 

algrove

Well-known member
I just wish all manufacturers would at least offer the RAW DNG option and where there is absolutely NO cooking of files in the camera. I respect Pentax for offering that option in the 645Z.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Very interesting, Tim.

It's funny, but I suspect that I would/will treat working with the X1D much as I treat working with the Leica M-D...

With the M-D, the EXIF shows me the lens name and focal length if the lens was six-bit coded, and not even that if it wasn't. The M-D has no settings other than ISO, aperture, and exposure time normally, and the aperture isn't there in EXIF or isn't reliable as it is only an estimate. It also makes no JPEGs at all. The M-D does provide exposure compensation when you have the shutter set to Auto, but I've never once looked for exposure compensation or focus distance in any camera's metadata. I've only rarely looked for f/stop or exposure time, and then usually to determine what to put in the 'tech info' section of the caption that I upload to Flickr; if I don't have them, I don't bother listing anything. I strip all the other EXIF data when I prepare JPEGs for posting. I've not found any of this information to be of much real use or interest to me. I learn my digital cameras much the same way I learned film cameras, lenses, films, and processing techniques ... by making photos, remembering the settings I used, and looking at the results.

A different way of working for sure. I'm not saying that having the information can't be useful or interesting in some cases. But it's simply not the focus of my attention when I'm shooting or processing my photos.

G
 

Miller

Member
From the tech specs of the H6D-50c:
File format Stills: Lossless compressed Hasselblad 3FR, 1/4 size JPEG.
As the X1D uses the same sensor...
 

algrove

Well-known member
Agreed. I tested this today and found no Exposure Bias or Exposure Compensation value in EXIF. This is fundamental and needs to be addressed.



I've parsed a ton of EXIF fields covering many digital cameras since 2002 and haven't found many (any?) that record subject distance and none that record it accurately. The Nikon D810 records a field called Subject Distance Range but it seems to have no correlation to the actual distance to the subject. If you've found otherwise, I'd like to know (aka learn). Maybe Phase One does this with the XF.

For me, the more problematic deficiency of the camera is the lack of distance information either on the lens barrel or in the EVF/LCD presentation when composing a shot. That makes DOF settings a trial and error exercise.



I can confirm that the JPEGs are 3096x4128 pixels, having shot RAW+JPEG for the first time this morning. I have seen no reference to JPEG size in the documentation. I agree that being able to record full-size JPEGs, with or without a RAW file, would be the preferred behavior.

Joe
No arguments with what you say. Just for info I have been pleassantly surprised at how accurate the XT2 focus distance scale actually is. Sorry this is way off topic.:OT:
 
Top