V12 disappointments

Discussions, questions, comments and suggestions regarding Capture One PRO, Capture One PRO For Sony / Fujifilm, Capture One DB and Capture One Express For Sony / For Fujifilm 12.x for Mac

V12 disappointments

Postby NNN636002042127646575 » Sun Dec 02, 2018 11:21 am

Expensive

No support for any of the new Nikon lenses for the Z6/Z7

Useful new features for are limited to luma masking and a nice gradient mask and...actually, what else? (Although I do appreciate the new look which makes life easier).

Expensive. Very expensive for what feels like a minor update. With a combination of Nikon and Fuji X cameras there is not much choice (especially as V11 won't support my Z7!) if I want to use one piece of software, and the results from C1 are nicer than from most competitors (Nikon's Capture NX-D does a great job but it's slow and buggy), but the moment there is a competitor I'm switching to avoid paying hundreds of Euros per annum. PhaseOne, if you're listening, you got this one wrong. Please acknowledge that and talk to your users.

Jan-Peter
NNN636002042127646575
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby Tim Trim » Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:05 am

The upgrade is, in Australian terms, $5 a week put aside during the year. For me that is a reasonable cost.
If you look at the lifecycle of V11, there were a lot of features added from 11.0 to 11.3 that were all included in the original purchase/upgrade price.
Tim Trim
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 12:27 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby Ian3 » Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:01 am

Something to think about is whether you notice problems with the Z series lenses that need correction. A lens not being "supported" does not mean that Capture One can't use the images taken with it - it just means that there is no customised profile of corrections for it. Do the lenses need that, and if they do is it so often that you can't occasionally apply manual corrections?

And as Tim Trim mentions, there are usually service releases during the life-cycle of a version (so 12.1, 12.2, etc). If you think that you would like to have support for these lenses added, ask for it in a Support Case.

Ian
Ian3
 
Posts: 2489
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby Paul_Steunebrink » Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:51 pm

NNN636002042127646575 wrote:No support for any of the new Nikon lenses for the Z6/Z7

It's early days. Lenses will come.
Best regards,
Paul E. Steunebrink, Image Alchemist (website All about Capture One), Capture One trainer
User avatar
Paul_Steunebrink
Certified Professional
Certified Professional
 
Posts: 9467
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby deejjjaaaa » Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:16 pm

Didn't Nikon claim them to be perfect ... so no corrections required :D
deejjjaaaa
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 7:53 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby NNN636002042127646575 » Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:11 pm

Ian3 wrote:Something to think about is whether you notice problems with the Z series lenses that need correction. A lens not being "supported" does not mean that Capture One can't use the images taken with it - it just means that there is no customised profile of corrections for it. Do the lenses need that, and if they do is it so often that you can't occasionally apply manual corrections?

And as Tim Trim mentions, there are usually service releases during the life-cycle of a version (so 12.1, 12.2, etc). If you think that you would like to have support for these lenses added, ask for it in a Support Case.

Ian


The 24-70/4 has linear distortion that is irregular. It's not that it is all that bad, but it changes over the focal length and that means you can't really use a preset to fix it. A proper lens profile would take care of that and be a major time saver!

Nikon provides the necessary information in the files, which the Adobe products pick up, so I don't understand why it's such a big deal for PhaseOne to incorporate this. And again, if this was inexpensive software I would not be so upset about it - and more patient - but we're being asked to pay a premium price and I don't feel I'm getting a premium product.

Jan-Peter
NNN636002042127646575
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby Paul_Steunebrink » Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:11 pm

NNN636002042127646575 wrote:(...)
Nikon provides the necessary information in the files, which the Adobe products pick up, so I don't understand why it's such a big deal for PhaseOne to incorporate this. And again, if this was inexpensive software I would not be so upset about it - and more patient - but we're being asked to pay a premium price and I don't feel I'm getting a premium product.

Maybe you unintentionally answered your own question.

Phase One does not make the lens correction from information in the image file, like Adobe does according to you. It needs the thing in house and run it through a test and measurement procedures. That takes time, costs money, gives better results. Just as you would expect from a premium product.
Best regards,
Paul E. Steunebrink, Image Alchemist (website All about Capture One), Capture One trainer
User avatar
Paul_Steunebrink
Certified Professional
Certified Professional
 
Posts: 9467
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby SFA » Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:47 pm

Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
NNN636002042127646575 wrote:(...)
Nikon provides the necessary information in the files, which the Adobe products pick up, so I don't understand why it's such a big deal for PhaseOne to incorporate this. And again, if this was inexpensive software I would not be so upset about it - and more patient - but we're being asked to pay a premium price and I don't feel I'm getting a premium product.

Maybe you unintentionally answered your own question.

Phase One does not make the lens correction from information in the image file, like Adobe does according to you. It needs the thing in house and run it through a test and measurement procedures. That takes time, costs money, gives better results. Just as you would expect from a premium product.


May also require modification to the test rig to use the new mounts for the recently released cameras from Nikon and Canon.

My interest having been piqued I downloaded some Z6 RAW sample files from DPReview, concentrating on files where edits had been applied to the RAWs and comparisons were available with out of camera jpgs. RAW edits were, reportedly, created using a beta version of Adobe Camera Raw.

There are not many wide shots available using the Z 24-70 but, taking one image that is amongst the easier to observe lens corrections, at 52mm there is no evident correction applied at all in the edited-in-Camera Raw interpretation. There may have been some vignetting correction but on the shots that have been edited (no mention of vignette correction in the notes) the changes applied make that tricky to assess.

On the other hand for the Z 50mm shots it is quite easy so see the geometric changes applied in the edited versions.

Now this puzzles me somewhat.

For a start, if these corrections come from the lens technical data why are they not applied to the out of camera jpgs?

I assume that they are not applied to the jpgs on the basis that the changes look like the remove content from the RAWs edited and it would seem unlikely that the processing for corrections in camera would add data.

In the editing noted accompanying each camera the edit information - adjustments made - are listed. No mention of lens corrections in any of the notes I have read BUT if it is automatic then perhaps it is not considered to be significant by the DPR testers in the context of what they are trying to report. After all not all Z6 buyers will be using Camera Raw as an editor and the article is a review of the camera not the editing software.

It's difficult to know the details since so far as I can discover the full review of the camera has yet to be published. So whether this is a pre-release unit, for example, is unknown, at least to me.

I see they have published the Z7 review so maybe that offers additional insights. I have yet to read it.


Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 6225
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby NNN636002042127646575 » Fri Dec 07, 2018 9:16 pm

Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
NNN636002042127646575 wrote:(...)
Nikon provides the necessary information in the files, which the Adobe products pick up, so I don't understand why it's such a big deal for PhaseOne to incorporate this. And again, if this was inexpensive software I would not be so upset about it - and more patient - but we're being asked to pay a premium price and I don't feel I'm getting a premium product.

Maybe you unintentionally answered your own question.

Phase One does not make the lens correction from information in the image file, like Adobe does according to you. It needs the thing in house and run it through a test and measurement procedures. That takes time, costs money, gives better results. Just as you would expect from a premium product.



True - but for that premium price maybe they could get it done a bit faster!
NNN636002042127646575
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby NNN636002042127646575 » Fri Dec 07, 2018 9:22 pm

SFA wrote:
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
NNN636002042127646575 wrote:(...)
Nikon provides the necessary information in the files, which the Adobe products pick up, so I don't understand why it's such a big deal for PhaseOne to incorporate this. And again, if this was inexpensive software I would not be so upset about it - and more patient - but we're being asked to pay a premium price and I don't feel I'm getting a premium product.

Maybe you unintentionally answered your own question.

Phase One does not make the lens correction from information in the image file, like Adobe does according to you. It needs the thing in house and run it through a test and measurement procedures. That takes time, costs money, gives better results. Just as you would expect from a premium product.


May also require modification to the test rig to use the new mounts for the recently released cameras from Nikon and Canon.

My interest having been piqued I downloaded some Z6 RAW sample files from DPReview, concentrating on files where edits had been applied to the RAWs and comparisons were available with out of camera jpgs. RAW edits were, reportedly, created using a beta version of Adobe Camera Raw.

There are not many wide shots available using the Z 24-70 but, taking one image that is amongst the easier to observe lens corrections, at 52mm there is no evident correction applied at all in the edited-in-Camera Raw interpretation. There may have been some vignetting correction but on the shots that have been edited (no mention of vignette correction in the notes) the changes applied make that tricky to assess.

On the other hand for the Z 50mm shots it is quite easy so see the geometric changes applied in the edited versions.

Now this puzzles me somewhat.

For a start, if these corrections come from the lens technical data why are they not applied to the out of camera jpgs?

I assume that they are not applied to the jpgs on the basis that the changes look like the remove content from the RAWs edited and it would seem unlikely that the processing for corrections in camera would add data.

In the editing noted accompanying each camera the edit information - adjustments made - are listed. No mention of lens corrections in any of the notes I have read BUT if it is automatic then perhaps it is not considered to be significant by the DPR testers in the context of what they are trying to report. After all not all Z6 buyers will be using Camera Raw as an editor and the article is a review of the camera not the editing software.

It's difficult to know the details since so far as I can discover the full review of the camera has yet to be published. So whether this is a pre-release unit, for example, is unknown, at least to me.

I see they have published the Z7 review so maybe that offers additional insights. I have yet to read it.


Grant


I just did a quick and dirty comparison between a NEF in C1, a NEF in the new DxO PhotoLab 2.1 which has their own camera and lens profile, and an out-of-camera JPG, 24-70/4 at 24mm. The DxO and JPG are almost identical when it comes to geometry, and I couldn't get the C1 version to look the same. With the lens correction I can certainly get an acceptable image but not a great one. Interestingly, at 24mm at least, there are three zones visible with differences. In the centre third the best I can do with C1 still leaves a visible barrel distortion, in the extreme corners there is a small amount of incorrect distortion, and the 'middle third' corrects almost perfectly. Hence my desire for a proper full lens profile for C1. Then again, now that DxO has a good option I can use that for images where linear distortion is critical.

Jan-Peter
NNN636002042127646575
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: V12 disappointments

Postby Artem_Cold » Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:10 pm

Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
NNN636002042127646575 wrote:(...)
Nikon provides the necessary information in the files, which the Adobe products pick up, so I don't understand why it's such a big deal for PhaseOne to incorporate this. And again, if this was inexpensive software I would not be so upset about it - and more patient - but we're being asked to pay a premium price and I don't feel I'm getting a premium product.

Maybe you unintentionally answered your own question.

Phase One does not make the lens correction from information in the image file, like Adobe does according to you. It needs the thing in house and run it through a test and measurement procedures. That takes time, costs money, gives better results. Just as you would expect from a premium product.


I read that new Nikon lenses have a built-in profile (like Fuji lenses). And in Lightroom it seems true. The correction is applied by default and cannot be disabled (just like Fuji again). In C1 I can select "manufacturer profile" if I work with Fuji and use lens correction but for Nikon I cant. And "manufacturer profile" - is an old story, even when C1 and Fuji didn't have a collaboration, it worked fine. Waiting for updates for Nikon :(
Artem_Cold
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 4:27 pm


Return to Capture One 12.x Software for Mac



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: digger1914 and 2 guests