Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 2007 outlook  (Read 63843 times)
Marsupilami
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2006, 04:56:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I recently met up with a Canon Beta tester.  I am sure it is not news here that the Canon lenses suck.  Canon has already made their new 20+ megapixel body with true 16bit.  The problems was that the lenses couldn't handle the new chip.  The body is a new design from the ground up but not a new format.  Supposedly it is a bit smaller in size and it is the first body to be built from the ground up for a digital sensor.  Still with the same mount for the lens, but the glass is being completely redesigned.

As per my conversation the new glass will come out first around PMA with the new body not being introduced till Nov 07 which I am sure will have a year worth of modifications by the time we see it.  So to all the argument creators here and speculation use that energy to go out and shoot.  If you need to buy it now, today to work then either go with a Phase or the Hassy.   

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91491\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hello !

The Canon thing seems to be accurate, new lenses will come to PMA and about the new camera it is interesting that even the people I know at CPS do not know much or anything till now, so very likely the Date Nov 2007 could be correct for a new 1 series. Other cameras we will see earlier.
Apart from speculation this leads to one important thing, really not new but more pressing with this schedule. If you invest now in a medium format system you better get it payed in one year. Nothing wrong with a hasselblad 39 MP for the next couple of years, as long as you are shooting in a well defined space, like interiors. But the majority of photographers is often forced to do a lot of different jobs to make a living, so a high resolution versatile system with high iso up and beyond 1600 Iso, fast operation, lightweight (in compare to medium format) and in a better price range  would be welcomed by all "high end" photographers. It is on location certainly a difference if your gear is worth 50 000 $ or lets say 20 000 $ or less - One example: as I have published a hiking guide to Iceland and go there quite often I doubt that Michael has been with his Hassy to places where I have been (there are great places where you walk for 5 days not 5 hours or so) and in the rough weather you encounter a Slr like 1 DS or D2x is certainly the better tool (you have to fjord rivers 4 degrees celsius cold, if you take a bath there it is good to know that your camera is "only" worth 4500 $ - if we take the D2x for example.
You could say that the outdoor stuff is certainly not high end, but think about it why still a lot of succesfull landscape photographers are using 4x5 inch. So the demand is here I think for almost all areas of photography for a lightweight, fast and most versatile system ( a lot of photographers would be happy if their 39 MP back would do 1600 iso in a decent way, but at weddings I see more the Canon 5 D). What I predict is that if Canon is doing this new 20+ body plus the lenses right than the demand for medium format digital and for 4x5 inch will decrease dramatical. Not because it will be better than hassy or phase one, but so damn close that for 99 % it will be more than good enough. The niche for high end medium format digital will become even smaller than today, maybe too small ?

Read Michaels last article "It's Not The Camera, It's the Photographer – Right?" he had a G 7 and the Hassy, what he really would have needed was his 1 series camera.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2006, 04:59:57 AM by Marsupilami » Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 20, 2006, 06:52:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
lightweight (in compare to medium format)

in what way is a Canon 1-series lightweight?

Quote
and in a better price range

Let's see how it is priced, if it's ever released. I'm expecting $10K+, which is Mamiya ZD territory. And the resolution will be the same. Plus the Mamiya already has proven lenses out, and they are available cheaply on the used market. Canon is up against some competition there. The only real ace I see up Canon's sleeve is high ISO performance, but many pros never need that.

How much will these new high resolution Canon lenses be? Double the price of the existing L series?

Quote
if you take a bath there it is good to know that your camera is "only" worth 4500 $ - if we take the D2x for example.

Yes there is a time and a place for lower-cost cameras but the new Canon won't be one.

Quote
What I predict is that if Canon is doing this new 20+ body plus the lenses right than the demand for medium format digital and for 4x5 inch will decrease dramatical. Not because it will be better than hassy or phase one, but so damn close that for 99 % it will be more than good enough. The niche for high end medium format digital will become even smaller than today, maybe too small ?

There are some major differences. For one thing, most MF digital users had existing MF gear and just needed a digital back end. A whole new system was born with one investment. The Canon 22MP user will be buying a new body plus a set of lenses. I expect this will cost MORE than existing 22 MP solutions.

Then there is the poor (tiny) Canon viewfinder, which I never enjoyed working with. Working with a large clear finder again was the primary reason I just dropped Canon to go back to MF.

Don't forget the special look to MF lenses which many value.

Quote
Read Michaels last article "It's Not The Camera, It's the Photographer – Right?" he had a G 7 and the Hassy, what he really would have needed was his 1 series camera.

I personally think the Canon 5D is the best all-round camera on the market today, and much less risky than a 1-series for those dangerous locations. It already exists. Once again, I don't see a $10K+ Canon body + $3K lens as being 'disposable'. (Yes, those prices are my own estimates but you get the idea).
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Marsupilami
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


« Reply #22 on: December 20, 2006, 07:36:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
in what way is a Canon 1-series lightweight?
Let's see how it is priced, if it's ever released. I'm expecting $10K+, which is Mamiya ZD territory. And the resolution will be the same. Plus the Mamiya already has proven lenses out, and they are available cheaply on the used market. Canon is up against some competition there. The only real ace I see up Canon's sleeve is high ISO performance, but many pros never need that.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Good point, but if you also shoot for example wildlife or sports, try to get a decent 500 mm lens on a medium format, apart from the lack of fast af and fast frames per second. The Mamiya ZD I have tested, picture quality is good, but apart from that the camera has too many flaws to be worth $10 K

Quote
How much will these new high resolution Canon lenses be? Double the price of the existing L series?
Yes there is a time and a place for lower-cost cameras but the new Canon won't be one.
There are some major differences. For one thing, most MF digital users had existing MF gear and just needed a digital back end. A whole new system was born with one investment. The Canon 22MP user will be buying a new body plus a set of lenses. I expect this will cost MORE than existing 22 MP solutions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Another good point, not much to be said against that, time will tell.

Quote
Then there is the poor (tiny) Canon viewfinder, which I never enjoyed working with. Working with a large clear finder again was the primary reason I just dropped Canon to go back to MF.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yeah, the poor viewfinder of a digital SLR is a pain.

Quote
Don't forget the special look to MF lenses which many value.
I personally think the Canon 5D is the best all-round camera on the market today, and much less risky than a 1-series for those dangerous locations. It already exists. Once again, I don't see a $10K+ Canon body + $3K lens as being 'disposable'. (Yes, those prices are my own estimates but you get the idea).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Funny, I did not mention it, but I use the 5d mainly for my work now, sometimes the 1 D Mark II, but only for rare sports assignments.

Thanks for all the good arguments, food for thought is always welcomed.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #23 on: December 20, 2006, 08:33:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I talked at length with the CEO of Hasselblad. I believe he doesn't see it in terms of competition, but more in terms of space for innovation. He called this "The dSLR Advantage" in his presentation: The ability to wring additional improvements out of a tightly integrated system. He noted that Canon and Nikon had seized on this advantage while the MF crowd had not.

Edmund

Quote
If you go back and read carefully the interview that was done with the President of Hasselblad on the LL site earlier this year, you can clearly see that Hasselblad is less focused on Phase, Leaf, etc. as its competition and primarily on Canon. Everyone has assumed that Hasselblad's motivation with the H3D was locking out Phase and Leaf.  Hasselblad felt that, in order to compete in the future with Canon, it had to develop a fully integrated, ultra-high end DSLR that moved the playing field forward with things like a 28mm and T/S lenses and digital APO correction, one battery, a special viewfinder tailored to the format of the chip, and perhaps other surprises. There is a parallel in the computer world. Do you want a tightly integrated, hardware/software, closed platform like a Mac that has state-of-the-art performance(and looks beautiful to boot)or do you insist on having a PC where you have the ability to configure everything yourself? We will see if Hasselblad's assessment of the playing field is accurate. I personally would put my money on them. I would feel otherwise if I had not satified myself that the H3D-39 is the real deal.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91433\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2006, 09:07:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I talked at length with the CEO of Hasselblad. I believe he doesn't see it in terms of competition, but more in terms of space for innovation. He called this "The dSLR Advantage" in his presentation:
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I believe this is marketing speak for we couldn't sell our backs, but we could sell our cameras, so if you want new camera innovations you must buy our digital back.

Quite frankly all the digital back makers squandered opportunity compared to Canon and not because they didn't offer an all iin one solution.

Decent lcd's, higher iso and useable software is what hurts digital back sales.

Just like the American auto manufactuerers, what the db makers need to do is look inward rather than across the street, because that is where the problems are.

When you spend $20,000 to $30,000 on a camera back, the first thing you want to do is get to work.

I own Canons, Nikons, Leaf, Phase and have briefly tried Hasselblad and I my honest opinion is at this point the Phase P-30 has anything close to the iso and stability of competing with a Canon.

C-1 is the only software of all the manufacturers that is stable and full featured.

I can get a beautiful file from the A-22 and did so for 18 months, but the software is just painful.

I learned V-8 because it's the ony way to tether professionally and also learned lightroom, pscs and RD as third party workarounds for batch processing of jpegs.

To edit, sort, name and batch process a one day shoot from the Aptus can take a full day where consequently a 2 day shoot from the Phase using C-1 can get the same results in 4 hours max and without issue.

This isn't a Leaf Bash, because I like the look of the file, but as most people that spend this kind of money I have work to do and quite frankly could care less why software, wi-fi, white balances don't really work as advertised.

In fact, I find it interesting that Leaf, Sinar and Hasselblad all are moving to what seems to be proprietary all in one systems but all three have the most challanged workflows.

I don't want to be moved to a product because it's my only choice of cameras, I want to be moved to a product because it really is a better solution.

I think if all three of these companies would read thier own pdf's and press releases and make a promise that nothing will go out the door until it works as promised, they wouldn't  have to worry about Canon, or Phase.

IMO

JR
[a href=\"http://www.russellrutherford.com/]http://www.russellrutherford.com/[/url]
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #25 on: December 20, 2006, 09:15:16 AM »
ReplyReply

One more issue with the Canon rumour - they need a good RAW processing workflow too. So far Phase One has supported the Canon files but I don't expect that to continue if Canon threatens Phase's digital back market.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #26 on: December 20, 2006, 11:27:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi
I have recieved information this week that a future Phase software will support the ZD. It is part of Mamiya/Phase talks. The first stage seems to be happening with a cash back offer with a Phase/Mamiya purchase. But at the moment both Phase & Mamiya have been quiet on the talks they had around Photokina. If Phase could get there hands on the ZD and make the next version ( hardware & software ) then I think this camera would have greater market appeal. However that is a wish.
Denis
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2006, 12:43:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So far Phase One has supported the Canon files but I don't expect that to continue if Canon threatens Phase's digital back market.


I doubt that would happen if you consider the vast number of DSLR users,both pro and
advanced amateurs,that BUY and use C1 software.

I think the number of Canon DSLR users contribute very significantly to
Phase ones bottom line and i would be surprised if software sales didn't outperform back sales.

Mark
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2006, 03:32:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think the number of Canon DSLR users contribute very significantly to
Phase ones bottom line and i would be surprised if software sales didn't outperform back sales.

Mark, I meant support for the 22MP model, not the prosumer level DSLRs.

Why do you think Capture One doesn't support digital backs from the other players?
« Last Edit: December 20, 2006, 03:35:43 PM by foto-z » Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5163


« Reply #29 on: December 20, 2006, 03:36:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... if Canon comes out this Spring with a new camera in a new format that competes even more directly with the MFDBs at 1/3 to 1/2 of the cost.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quote
If the insistent Nikon 35FF D3x rumours are true
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91554\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Here is my guess: both of these rumors are from the same source, which has been for years the source of many similar rumors that have come to nothing: nostalgic wishful thinking, by people who have not yet accepted the reality that the digital transition is driving a format downsizing at least as great as the ones from sheet film to roll film and then from roll film to 35mm, and that no camera maker is looking to move to a larger format than what its current lens systems is adapted to.

P. S., added later. I can more easily believe the detailed rumor from RicAgu, of new lenses and a radically redesigned body, but no new mount: that is, staying compatible with EF lenses and thus formats not larger than 24x36mm, while trying to offer about as much image detail ("pixel counts") as the larger, more expensive digital formats.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2006, 11:58:31 AM by BJL » Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1131


WWW
« Reply #30 on: December 20, 2006, 03:48:33 PM »
ReplyReply

my rumor comes from one of the largest distributors of canon worldwide who has insigth in future plans for having bought for some 100.000$ canon 1ds2 bodies,- before photokina. he needed to be save that he would not invest in a camera which would have been updated 2 weeks later, so canon explained their politics. and so i knew before photokina that there will be no new 1ds2 ( thierry you remember?) , at least this part of the rumor was true.
i suppose longer term politic can change also. i suppose also that a company as canon will hold more than one option in preparation and in devellopement , even if they dont come out finally for marketing reasons.
but in general for me this mf rumors dont sound unlogic. the most money didnt made canon with its 1ds and 1ds2 bodies, it made the money with its invaluable image transfer which marked canon as "the" leading digital brand.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2006, 12:40:06 AM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Willow Photography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 20, 2006, 06:27:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Congratulation with your P30, James  


Willow

Quote
I believe this is marketing speak for we couldn't sell our backs, but we could sell our cameras, so if you want new camera innovations you must buy our digital back.

Quite frankly all the digital back makers squandered opportunity compared to Canon and not because they didn't offer an all iin one solution.

Decent lcd's, higher iso and useable software is what hurts digital back sales.

Just like the American auto manufactuerers, what the db makers need to do is look inward rather than across the street, because that is where the problems are.

When you spend $20,000 to $30,000 on a camera back, the first thing you want to do is get to work.

I own Canons, Nikons, Leaf, Phase and have briefly tried Hasselblad and I my honest opinion is at this point the Phase P-30 has anything close to the iso and stability of competing with a Canon.

C-1 is the only software of all the manufacturers that is stable and full featured.

I can get a beautiful file from the A-22 and did so for 18 months, but the software is just painful.

I learned V-8 because it's the ony way to tether professionally and also learned lightroom, pscs and RD as third party workarounds for batch processing of jpegs.

To edit, sort, name and batch process a one day shoot from the Aptus can take a full day where consequently a 2 day shoot from the Phase using C-1 can get the same results in 4 hours max and without issue.

This isn't a Leaf Bash, because I like the look of the file, but as most people that spend this kind of money I have work to do and quite frankly could care less why software, wi-fi, white balances don't really work as advertised.

In fact, I find it interesting that Leaf, Sinar and Hasselblad all are moving to what seems to be proprietary all in one systems but all three have the most challanged workflows.

I don't want to be moved to a product because it's my only choice of cameras, I want to be moved to a product because it really is a better solution.

I think if all three of these companies would read thier own pdf's and press releases and make a promise that nothing will go out the door until it works as promised, they wouldn't  have to worry about Canon, or Phase.

IMO

JR
http://www.russellrutherford.com/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91595\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Willow Photography
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1259


« Reply #32 on: December 20, 2006, 09:14:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This sounds like it's probably coming straight from the horse's mouth.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

One way or another, I'm pretty sure there's a horse involved...  

The Canon rumors have me scratching my head -- people with the 1DsII already complain that the glass can't keep up. If they go to ~22-24mp, and the glass still can't keep up...what does that mean? As to the rumors of new glass, is it going to be better than the L glass? L glass is already pretty expensive, so the new stuff would cost like Leica. Of course, quite a few people already put Leica or Zeiss glass on their 1DsII's, so maybe that's what Canon's figuring -- capturing all the business. But still, they haven't come out with one top-ranked wide prime in five years, are they gonna come out with a whole range of better-than-L in one shot? I'd want to see it first, but I'd admit that it'd be a heck of a marketing coup (and photography coup, come to that.) But since PMA is only a couple months away, I would think that there'd be rumors all over the place about the sensational news lenses...

Canon will undoubtedly pull a new body out of the hat this year, because Nikon's lined up for 2008 with a FF model (according to rumors), and no way is Canon gonna let Nikon steal that from them. But the glass...I have my doubts.

If the glass can't keep up with ~22-24mp, that means that Canon's not gonna be much of a threat to the MF market, where they've already gone way past that. If you really think you need 39mp with Hassy glass, you're not going back to Canon at 22; not at Leica prices, anyway.

JC
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #33 on: December 20, 2006, 10:54:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
One way or another, I'm pretty sure there's a horse involved...  

The Canon rumors have me scratching my head -- people with the 1DsII already complain that the glass can't keep up. If they go to ~22-24mp, and the glass still can't keep up...what does that mean? As to the rumors of new glass, is it going to be better than the L glass? L glass is already pretty expensive, so the new stuff would cost like Leica. Of course, quite a few people already put Leica or Zeiss glass on their 1DsII's, so maybe that's what Canon's figuring -- capturing all the business. But still, they haven't come out with one top-ranked wide prime in five years, are they gonna come out with a whole range of better-than-L in one shot? I'd want to see it first, but I'd admit that it'd be a heck of a marketing coup (and photography coup, come to that.) But since PMA is only a couple months away, I would think that there'd be rumors all over the place about the sensational news lenses...

Canon will undoubtedly pull a new body out of the hat this year, because Nikon's lined up for 2008 with a FF model (according to rumors), and no way is Canon gonna let Nikon steal that from them. But the glass...I have my doubts.

If the glass can't keep up with ~22-24mp, that means that Canon's not gonna be much of a threat to the MF market, where they've already gone way past that. If you really think you need 39mp with Hassy glass, you're not going back to Canon at 22; not at Leica prices, anyway.

JC
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91702\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

These rumors and comparisions go round and round.  DSLR vs. Medium format, medium format versus film, Canon, vs. Hasselblad, Phase, Leaf, Sinar.

On a 30" monitor I don't know a single client that can tell the difference between a 17mp dslr and a 30mp medium format file, at least a client I would really want to work with.

They do see the difference in color response, or quick adjustments on set, or a well composed image.  They definately notice when software crashes, or faces go magenta or green, or a camera jams or misses a shot.

Whatever Canon does they probably will do it pretty well because I guess they have the resources, but in the dslr area they don't have any competion.  

Medium format is another topic, but most of us don't shoot medium format because we have to, we do it because we chose to.

Knowing that the difference in price is usually double to triple from the Canon's to any medium format solution, says a lot for either photographer's obsession for image quality, or our obsession for equipment.

Probably both.

JR
Logged
RicAgu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #34 on: December 21, 2006, 12:17:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Hey James,

What are your thoughts on the P30 at 400, 800 and 1600?  I know it is all subjective but I highly respect and trust your opinion.

I have the P25 and now the P45 and I ma impressed with the P45 at 400.  My P25 can't go above 100 and 200 in a bind.  I am thinking about going for the P30 next year once the +'s come out.  THe P45 is amazing but the file storage needs are insane.  I am already reaching full capacity with 5 terabytes.

Thanks,

R
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #35 on: December 21, 2006, 09:32:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hey James,

What are your thoughts on the P30 at 400, 800 and 1600?  I know it is all subjective but I highly respect and trust your opinion.

I have the P25 and now the P45 and I ma impressed with the P45 at 400.  My P25 can't go above 100 and 200 in a bind.  I am thinking about going for the P30 next year once the +'s come out.  THe P45 is amazing but the file storage needs are insane.  I am already reaching full capacity with 5 terabytes.

Thanks,

R
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91719\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Ric,

A lot of this depends on how you convert the raw and I haven't shot much with high iso with the P-30 but so far 400 is very useable with little noise, 800 I haven't tried.

Out of the can the P-30 file is the richest in color and most pleasing I have seen from any mfdb.

It's very smooth, almost like the Canon file, but with much more detail and more exacting in color response.  The Canon files alwys look a little diffused to me and has a global color look where the P-30 file is much sharper and more detailed.

The only thing I dislike about the P-30 and C-1 is the sharpening in C-1.  It seems either on or off.

Off is a little too smooth, on is too brittle.

Bright highlights to medium midtones of the P-30 file are very smooth and don't break up or band, or color cast, especially on skintones.  None of that Pink crossover I've seen on most db files.

Processing settings and color editor in C-1 makes adjustments infinate.

To hold highlights I set the profiles to linear and adjust the contrast and brightness sliders to the look I want.

If the Plus series will really go to 800 smooth and hold detail then this will be a Canon type of killer back.

JR
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #36 on: December 21, 2006, 02:11:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ric,

A lot of this depends on how you convert the raw and I haven't shot much with high iso with the P-30 but so far 400 is very useable with little noise, 800 I haven't tried.

Out of the can the P-30 file is the richest in color and most pleasing I have seen from any mfdb.

It's very smooth, almost like the Canon file, but with much more detail and more exacting in color response.  The Canon files alwys look a little diffused to me and has a global color look where the P-30 file is much sharper and more detailed.

The only thing I dislike about the P-30 and C-1 is the sharpening in C-1.  It seems either on or off.

Off is a little too smooth, on is too brittle.

Bright highlights to medium midtones of the P-30 file are very smooth and don't break up or band, or color cast, especially on skintones.  None of that Pink crossover I've seen on most db files.

Processing settings and color editor in C-1 makes adjustments infinate.

To hold highlights I set the profiles to linear and adjust the contrast and brightness sliders to the look I want.

If the Plus series will really go to 800 smooth and hold detail then this will be a Canon type of killer back.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
have been shooting with my P30 for a couple of weeks now and am really surprised how good it is...i second everything james said, especially the color and smoothness....the 800 is surprising and a canon killer for me because the "grain" looks much more film like and the shadows are much cleaner (not so much color noise) and have of course more detail....i am assuming the + series will take that performance up a notch.....i am not sure how they can improve the color....the best color i have seen out of the can....a step up from my P20 and from the P25 files i have from rented backs....i also agree that i find myself a little stuck with the sharpening in C1, on is a little too harsh, i find myself leaving it off, which lacks a little something....i am used to shooting rollei lenses and always had the sharpening off, but i feel the P30 needs a little (i am shooting with mamiya lenses), just can't control it enough in C1.....i am assuming that phase will have an answer in the C1 v4....the sliders are a little silly anyway...they go up to 100? and i have never gone above 3 (even with the canon)...
the color of the P30 combined with the colorprofiler in C1 is amazing....and the idea that the P30+ with C1v4 will be even better....
Logged

ronno
Guest
« Reply #37 on: December 21, 2006, 02:25:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
....i also agree that i find myself a little stuck with the sharpening in C1,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91802\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Are you guys having issues even using "soft look" sharpening at a low amount?
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #38 on: December 21, 2006, 02:38:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Are you guys having issues even using "soft look" sharpening at a low amount?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91805\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
to make something clear: i am not complaining about it, it just seems to me that the software (which will be upgraded) is a little behind the shipping hardware on this issue....i am used to using the sharpening tool in C1 as i batch my files, either on or off, sometimes soft, rarely hard look, either way at minimal settings....with the P30 i wish i had a little more control, it seems like the sharpening "engine" wasn't made for the P30...this is not an issue, i can still find a setting i am happy with....

about the files in LR and CR: funny but the P30 are cropped in LR, but they aren't in the latest CS3 CR...but i find color to be better in LR...the curves tool in LR combined with P30 files at 800...a pleasure...too bad about that missing bottom/side.....not sure why adobe is working on 2 different tracks seemingly going exactly the same way....
Logged

Jann Lipka
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113



WWW
« Reply #39 on: December 21, 2006, 03:58:28 PM »
ReplyReply

For P45 ,  I would never sharpen in C1 except for Lowres or previewing with customer.
I would always process in C1 into 16 B file with sharpening disabled and sharpen in PS , that
has so much more control with that .
Sharpening in C1 sucks indeed.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad