T
thsinar
Guest
I wish I could!
LOL
Thierry
LOL
Thierry
Theirry send me one of those bad boys. LOL
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!
Theirry send me one of those bad boys. LOL
Well we all seen the High ISO stuff of the Sinar and they looked good as well. I just think this is great for us end users that have a bail out when we really need to push the issue. To me ISO 400 on any of these backs if there good than we are goldenI wish I could!
LOL
Thierry
To me it looks better with lowering the luminance setting. It seems to have more detail in the image that the higher setting was losing
I have seen this with other Phase samples too. It seems that there is a default NR stage which you can't avoid. Not such a bad thing - these files are all usable - but it means that you can't compare Phase raw v other raw because the playing field is not level. All you can do is compare final results, and even then individual skill and preferences will come into play.Thierry i am thinking there is some noise reduction going on just bringing it into C1 . I am at C1 defaults and have not added anything to that. Yes the 800 ISO i am seeing some detail loss , not a ton but it is there over 400 and slower.
That may be true but the test seems valid enough to me to give an interested party a pretty good idea of what to expect. I think there are more significant differences between the Sinar and Phase backs than how well they handle noise at higher ISO. Based on Thierry's post and this test by Guy, it seems they both do a fine job of it, much better than previous generation backs.I have seen this with other Phase samples too. It seems that there is a default NR stage which you can't avoid. Not such a bad thing - these files are all usable - but it means that you can't compare Phase raw v other raw because the playing field is not level. All you can do is compare final results, and even then individual skill and preferences will come into play.
I can't see a way around it.
Okay some raws from the kitchen . This one is full tungsten light at ISO 800
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=995AFBB43EE5E974
and this one is from earlier in the day with mixed lighting at ISO 800
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=D5E78D4A4A1FC471
There Raw file extension is .tif i would have preferred something else myself because it can be confusing in filingGuy,
I have downloaded the files, but they are not RAWs, but TIF files. Anyway to get access to a real raw or DNG? Sorry, I don't really know how C1 handle files out of the Phase back: what goes in and what comes out?
Thanks,
Thierry
There Raw file extension is .tif i would have preferred something else myself because it can be confusing in filing
Noiseware cleans up the chroma noise very nicely.Actually looks pretty good. I blowup to 100 percent and take a section from it. There all done approximately the same though