ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Thanks a lot!+1, great light, colors, and composition. :thumbs:
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 a lot!+1, great light, colors, and composition. :thumbs:
Seconded.This thread has gone off song for me.
Thanks for this. I'm a BTS junkie for camera manufacturers.
When Ueno Takashi discusses the "next camera", and he spells out the choices, full frame 35mm or medium format, it clicked for me. Canon. Nikon. Sony. These three companies dominate the professional camera market, in terms of market share. But these are not medium format companies, have never produced prominent cameras in a medium format segment. Fuji has. It totally made sense for them to bypass 35mm full frame.
Steve Hendrix/CI
+1 regarding splitting the technical discussion off onto another thread or even sub-forumSeconded.
Much as I find the current diversion fascinating, and Erik’s photo lovely, I can’t help but think this thread could do with a bit of mod clean-up with the non-Fuji GFX 100 technical discussion split off into a different thread.
I click on this thread hoping to read the latest news and updates on this exciting new camera system.
Perhaps the offer of a $15 PayPal contribution to the forum’s coffers will be sufficient motivation for a mod to step in and tidy things up?
(But please don’t lose the aside - there is valuable and interesting content here.)
Kind regards,
Gerald.
Yes, and it is important to note that engineers are not marketers, and while they may do a fantastic job of extracting maximum quality, marketing does not always do a great job of showing that quality to potential purchasers (which is their job). Ultimately, this is likely because the differences can often be subtle, and subtle is not an easy sell.
The thing about the quantitative data state and the human visual state is that there is a lot in between that happens to the quantitative data that presents it to the human eye to visualize, and this takes numerous forms, ink on paper (and the myriad options and variations that entails), pixels on a display, etc. If the entirety of superior image quality (noise, dynamic range, color reproduction, rendering, etc.) can be viewed at the end result stage, then that is what matters. I'm saying that it may be too subtle for marketing to get interested in telling that difficult story.
Yes, engineers must continue to develop. The key is in how much extra quality can they extract from a 16 bit image from the same sensor vs a 14 bit image that will matter to the end user. The fact that it is a subtle difference says they have done their job well with a high quality device even at 14 bit. But at the very high end of imaging, those small differences can and should matter. In any event, given a choice, I'll choose the higher quality image, even if it is just a teensie weensie bit. I'm not interested in shooting at a faster capture rate (some may be in certain situations) or worried about optimizing the amount of hard drive space I have.
The nice thing is that anyone who has a device capable of generating both 14 bit and 16 bit files is capable of viewing the results themselves and making a choice (though that does not guarantee they will see or appreciate the differences).
Steve Hendrix
Hi,
I am not sure about this. Historically, Phase One made a lot of noise about 16-bit data path. But, realistically, the old CCD backs like my P45+ were more like 12 EV in dynamic range which means that there was just 12 bits worth of data and barely that.
As a matter of fact, the IQ 180 also sported just below 12 EV dynamic range, at least as measured by DxO-mark. So the CCD backs delivered like 12 bit data in a 16 bit format.
But, behold! Phase One engineers were smart enough to put those 12 EV of DR in a 14 bit data file that was expanded to 16 bit when opened in a raw processor.
When the IQ 3100 MP arrived, there was for the first time a sensor that achieved more than 14EV of DR on the pixel level. That made for a meaningful 16-bit file. So, for the IQ 3100 MP, Phase one invented a new file format that actually contained 16 bit data.
With the arrival of the 150 MP sensor, Sony made the pixels smaller. At this time, it is not very clear if per pixel DR on the Sony 54x41 mm 150 MP sensor is capable of a DR in excess of 14 bits per pixel. It seems that the 100 MP cousine at 44x33 mm size is well served by 14 bits.
I am pretty sure that engineers make the right decisions, left on their own. But engineers always need to satisfy marketing.
I used to work with computer makers like SGI (Silicon Graphics). SGI had some interesting features like CC-NUMA, that actually made some sense to engineers.
But, no engineer ever could explain while SGI would charge 2k$US US for a 200$ DVD drive, especially so as SGI was delivering the operating system on 15 CDs. would they deliver the OS on DVD, it would save like 4-8 man hours and spending 2K$US on a DVD may make sense.
For some reasons, SGI killed itself. The way things were, my company shifted to Windows and Linux. Conversion costs were horrible. It may have made business sense to stay with SGI, or it may not. But, charging 2k$US for a DVD drive was just not reasonable. No engineer would be able to defend it.
In the long run, being honest may be a good policy. Argue for the real benefits, if there are some.
Best regards
Erik
I am with you, Steve! Can't wait to see what others will be shooting! I have no stake in the Fuji camp and never will, just a personal preference and suttuation.Anyway, I'm not going to continue to discuss bit depth theory and detail on this thread. Enough have complained that a separate "16 Bit, Let's Talk It out" thread totally makes sense. Because it is not limited to the Fuji GFX 100 anyway.
So .... looks like about 13 more days before ship time. I can't wait to get our demo in our hands. I'm interested to know what first projects those who have ordered have in mind for use with the Fuji GFX 100?
Steve Hendrix/CI
Hi Karl-Heinz,When taking an image I naively assume there must be a number of more important considerations than worrying about 14 or 16 bit capture, no? :facesmack:
. . .
So .... looks like about 13 more days before ship time. I can't wait to get our demo in our hands. I'm interested to know what first projects those who have ordered have in mind for use with the Fuji GFX 100?
Steve Hendrix/CI
One of my first projects, other than configuring, getting up to speed with muscle memory, fun/test shooting.... my first real project will be photographing Frank Lloyd Wright’s Fallingwater the first week in September for several days - after a drive across country from CA, photographing along the way in Utah (Zion, Escalante, Burr Trail), Colorado and Northwestern Michigan (Grand Traverse Peninsula) and our cabin on Island Lake. Woopie! I just shut down my consulting business after almost 20 years, “after” I’d already retired (youngish)... so this is the “year of being free and doing my own photography.” The GFX 100 will be the frosting on the cake.
Rand
Another interesting note I found is Photoshop limits its 16 bit values to 0-32,768.
So in Photoshop you are essentially limited to a 15 bit file.
Interesting use as well.