rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
Several weeks ago I posted a link to an article about some of the thinking that preceded Fujifilm's decision to develop a medium format camera
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-436734-1.htmlHardly anyone read the post, and no one responded to my question, so I'll try again here.
the author wrote:
The image quality Fujifilm got out of the Pentax RAW file was already superior to the original Pentax image simply by applying their own image processing algorithm
I'm not sure whether "original Pentax image" refers to the raw file or the JPEG file created by the Pentax camera. Does this mean that Fujifilm cameras massage the data they put into "raw" files, or does it mean that many professionals who can afford a camera like this would use SOOC JPEG files??
Not sure I follow every nuance of the question, but that's not material. Have you perhaps tried contacting the original author and asking him/her for clarification? I do follow the gist of the question, and it seems worth asking in order to fully understand and appreciate what Fuji has achieved with their latest medium format camera.
Just get the Hasselblad, end of discussion :-).
if you don't mind a Chionese Company and the real CEO resigned already.
Well, what is medium format? Is slightly bigger than full frame worth the bucks? Check Ken Rockwell's take here:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm#dmf I thought "Medium" was pretty interesting myself until I read this article... Got money to burn to burn? Get one of these things...
I don't put a lot of credence in anything KR has to write.
--Bob
roadchuck wrote:
Well, what is medium format? Is slightly bigger than full frame worth the bucks? Check Ken Rockwell's take here:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm#dmf I thought "Medium" was pretty interesting myself until I read this article... Got money to burn to burn? Get one of these things...
Because you have found some specific information to be wrong? What was that? Where do you find some of the best reliability and education? I'd be glad to learn....
Personally, I find the foundation of material on youtube. Then I take the time to research and experiment with my equipment to accomplish what I'm attempting to do. I also spend a good deal of time in the library reading a number of books related to photography. In some cases, I can find the information on the web. But, if something is referenced in a particular book, I'll look for and read that particular book.
--Bob
roadchuck wrote:
Because you have found some specific information to be wrong? What was that? Where do you find some of the best reliability and education? I'd be glad to learn....
rmalarz wrote:
I don't put a lot of credence in anything KR has to write.
--Bob
I agree, he can be full of himself. I'm not sure who does the photography on his website but it's decent, well done.
rehess wrote:
Several weeks ago I posted a link to an article about some of the thinking that preceded Fujifilm's decision to develop a medium format camera
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-436734-1.htmlHardly anyone read the post, and no one responded to my question, so I'll try again here.
I'm not sure whether "original Pentax image" refers to the raw file or the JPEG file created by the Pentax camera. Does this mean that Fujifilm cameras massage the data they put into "raw" files, or does it mean that many professionals who can afford a camera like this would use SOOC JPEG files??
Several weeks ago I posted a link to an article ab... (
show quote)
It would have to be the raw file the jpeg would be too far removed from the original sensor data. each pixel site only contains 1/3rd of the color information, how do you interpolate that data to create a full color image. The obvious way is using nearest neighbor.
But maybe its reasonable to think that a color in an image would have some value over more than one pixel would say a 3x3 sample of a sensor show 9 slightly different colors, should they be the same? There is noise in the sensor and its going to be rough to some degree like sand paper the charge from noise is going to vary pixel site to pixel site. I'm not a mathematician but i could see that there could be different techniques applied to clean up the color information recorded at the sensor. Fuji seemed to be talking about changing the micro lenses too.
It seems that there is a particular sony sensor that is being used by different manufacturers and they have different approaches to cleaning the sensor data.
Now what seems to be said is that fujis processing engine is superior to pentax's processing engine of the sensor data.
Which suggests they can build a camera with the same sensor and have higher IQ than the pentax with the same sensor.
The other thing which they seemed to be saying was they can get a superior image from a medium format sensor than a full frame one and that if they did make a superior ff camera that rival companies would figure out how to match their IQ.
kinda makes sense, for regular photographers we want best bang for our buck, this is aimed at best bang.
What i would like is to be able to use fuji's processing engine on my Pentax raw files too :)
Different raw processing engines do seem to get different results from a given raw file.
is that enough speculation :)
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.