No, I have
learned exactly because I am
open to science and data. It doesn't hurt that my CFA viewpoint is backed up by Phase One, a camera manufacturer:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60658069
Who backs up your dated viewpoints? Crickets. Until you get hold of an IQ3 trichromatic and debunk its color fidelity you will never win this argument.
fPrime
Hi,
Phase One is about as reliable source of information as Mr. Donald Trump.
Hi Erik,
I don't think we should take this discussion political by making comparisons to Donald Trump, the democratically elected 45th President of the United States of America. You can tell that Iliah is already doing his level best to not answer the questions put before him. Trump only takes us further off track.
That being said, I don't agree with your suggestion that Phase One isn't a reliable source of information. Please, what
evidence do you have that they aren't credible?
Phase One, after all, are not exactly an industry lightweight.
- They are an long established medium format camera manufacturer. As such they have design expertise with sensors, CFA's, and hardware integration.
- They offer an industry leading program called C1 Pro. As such they have design expertise with RAW conversion, color profiling, and image editing.
- They have created custom camera profiles for virtually all professional and consumer cameras. As such they have insider's expertise on how good (or bad) the color performance is from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Fuji, and Panasonic... and how it has shifted over time.
Does the expertise or breadth of knowledge of any individual PST member approach that of Phase One? Hardly. Your personal expertise is in the nuclear power field and as a hobby you might have had experience with profiling and comparing a handful of cameras, but a hundred of them like P1? No. Iliah is a software engineer who might know how to assemble some code to study RAW metadata, but has he ever designed a CFA or built a camera with one like P1 has? No. Can you see why any rational person would have to conclude that Phase One's manufacturer explanations credibly outweigh the explanations of any one armchair prognosticator here on DPR?
If your bias against them is purely that all they say
should be suspect simply because they make a trichromatic camera and promote its color advantages, then that's a weak case IMHO. They could have made their marketing case purely by comparing their trichromatic camera against their standard camera and been finished with it. But no, they took the time to show how and why CFA's for all digital cameras had been weakened over time and why custom profiling is fallacious beyond the calibrated test lighting and test colors. I have also argued the same here on DPR for the better part of six years using SMI data, empirical image evidence, and industry references.
So, like I said to Iliah, for now the battle is over and he has lost. However, I have in fairness suggested a way that he or anyone else might try to challenge Phase One's determination on the matter:
1. Measure a CFA spectrogram for the IQ3 trichromatic and show that in reality P1 doesn't actually have a trichromatic CFA installed, and/or...
2. Test the IQ3 trichromatic camera against a standard camera with a set of subjects that typically invoke metameric failure and show that in reality there's no difference in the color performance between either.
Do either or both of these successfully and I'll be more than happy to eat crow on P1's credibility. :-D
fPrime
