I'm having to go back to Lightroom...
Yes, I love Capture One. Its RAW file decoding is second to none. Its flexibility is amazing. Etc Etc. But I'm going back to Lightroom. Why? Because I have been using a Panasonic FZ2500 (FZ2000 in Europe) camera since November 2016 and Capture One Pro cannot process its RW2 RAW files. I have hung on and hung on. I have opened a support case. But still no go. I have work backing up now which is very difficult. I even tried editing the RAW file headers to read FZ1000 so they could be used but this is so time consuming and the results are not satisfactory anyway because the two cameras are a bit different. Adobe fairly quickly released a new version of Lightroom which supports the FZ2500 (as well as many other new cameras and lenses) so, very sadly, that is where I must transfer my workflow. Capture One may start supporting the Panasonic FZ2500 next week or maybe next year or maybe never. How can we know? I am sure there are many others in my position. What else can we do?
Thanks.
Thanks.
0
-
Well what you're supposed to do is check if your favorite RAW converter supports the camera you plan to buy /before you actually buy it/. Makes no sense to purchase an unsupported camera, as you can never be sure it will ever be supported. 0 -
Thanks for your reply, John Doe.
I had assumed, wrongly as it turned out, that as both the FZ1000 and FZ2000 both have the same one inch sensor and both produce Panasonic RW2 RAW files then Capture One Pro would support them both. I discovered after I had purchased the camera (which I am extremely happy with, by the way) that this is not the case.
In the current situation I feel I would rather have my first choice camera and use it with my second choice software, rather than the other way round.
Thanks again.0 -
I assume you can batch convert the RA2 files to DNG and then handle them in capture one. Not a perfect solution, I know, but perhaps something to try. 0 -
Thanks for the suggestion, Toby Hawkins.
I have never used DNG in my workflow, much preferring to stay with the RAW files. I seem to remember that Capture One does not play well with DNG anyway. Maybe that has been improved with version 10.
I am wondering on what basis the team at Phase One decide to support a particular camera. Is it popularity of a camera and, if so, how is that measured? Does a camera have to have a certain spec before it is considered? Or maybe there is a minimum sensor size a camera has to have before it is supported. I would have thought that, as the likes of the Panasonics FZ200 and FZ1000, the Sonys RX10 series and the RX100 series and other similar cameras are all supported, the FZ2500 (FZ2000) would be as well. Guess I was wrong.0 -
[quote="NNN636157713839780379" wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion, Toby Hawkins.
I have never used DNG in my workflow, much preferring to stay with the RAW files. I seem to remember that Capture One does not play well with DNG anyway. Maybe that has been improved with version 10.
I am wondering on what basis the team at Phase One decide to support a particular camera. Is it popularity of a camera and, if so, how is that measured? Does a camera have to have a certain spec before it is considered? Or maybe there is a minimum sensor size a camera has to have before it is supported. I would have thought that, as the likes of the Panasonics FZ200 and FZ1000, the Sonys RX10 series and the RX100 series and other similar cameras are all supported, the FZ2500 (FZ2000) would be as well. Guess I was wrong.
Popularity certainly, measured partly by the number of requests for support registered through Support Cases.
Other factors might include availability of the camera in question for in house evaluation and development and then any odd characteristics it might have that add to the work required to have it support to the standards that C1 aspires to. (Sorry that's vague but only Phase know what their criteria are for deciding whether they can effectively support a camera and feel comfortable that the job can be done well.)
You would really need to ask Phase about that - so raise that Support Case!
You would, of course, expect the Sony cameras to be supported would you not?
Grant0 -
[quote="NNN636157713839780379" wrote:
I would have thought that, as the likes of the Panasonics FZ200 and FZ1000, the Sonys RX10 series and the RX100 series and other similar cameras are all supported, the FZ2500 (FZ2000) would be as well. Guess I was wrong.
We are actively working on supporting the FZ2500/FZH1/FZ2000, but I can't give you an ETA at this time.[quote="SFA" wrote:
Popularity certainly, measured partly by the number of requests for support registered through Support Cases.
Other factors might include availability of the camera in question for in house evaluation and development and then any odd characteristics it might have that add to the work required to have it support to the standards that C1 aspires to. (Sorry that's vague but only Phase know what their criteria are for deciding whether they can effectively support a camera and feel comfortable that the job can be done well.)
About right 😉0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
We are actively working on supporting the FZ2500/FZH1/FZ2000, but I can't give you an ETA at this time.
Many thanks, Christian Gruner. That is great and positive news.
It might be a good idea to have a list of cameras/lenses you do not yet support but are actively working on supporting in the near future on your website, just so users out there can plan ahead a little. Or maybe an extra column on the list of cameras you already have on you website which can have a check mark indicating "Working on support".
Just a thought.
Thanks.0 -
[quote="NNN636157713839780379" wrote:
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
We are actively working on supporting the FZ2500/FZH1/FZ2000, but I can't give you an ETA at this time.
Many thanks, Christian Gruner. That is great and positive news.
It might be a good idea to have a list of cameras/lenses you do not yet support but are actively working on supporting in the near future on your website, just so users out there can plan ahead a little. Or maybe an extra column on the list of cameras you already have on you website which can have a check mark indicating "Working on support".
Just a thought.
Thanks.
Yes that does sound like a great idea but I would take a decent sized bet with you that it would likely open up a large can of worms that leads to endless speculation (which is not acceptable according to forum rules) and rancorous comments about why camera Y has support when camera X which was announced 3 days earlier (and is obviously really good because the poster immediately ordered one on the day of announcement) has not yet been supported in latest release.
I think it would just be easier to accept that it is very likely that most mainstream models that are not Medium Format are likely to be supported. Some may take longer than others to reach that point for a number of different reasons.
It would really interesting, for example, to know how many Panasonic buyers are avid RAW image shooters and look beyond whatever software is supplied with the camera. I get a strong impression, reading reviews and comments, that people like the Panasonics for their video capability mainly with the ability to take some decent still images as a nice to have feature.
I could be wrong. No doubt there are some analytics data sources somewhere that could illuminate the subject matter.
The some sorts of observations might well apply to other manufacturers and camera body categories.
For example for a specific purpose at the time I bought a Canon Pro1 - an early bridge camera that shot RAW and had a longish lens for the time. The lens was classified as "L" specification and the camera was expensive when new. So all of the attributes that might have it considered to be a "Pro" camera as the name suggested.
I have no idea how popular they were but the concept was not developed by Canon as it originally existed so I guess they decided it was an idea that did not quite work as they had hoped - perhaps something to be bought by Pro's as a sort of backup unit. I wanted it because it could be used tethered.
Whether it would have made sense back in the day for a third party software developer so provide full support for all of its functions I have no idea. Probably not - at least not to the extent that Capture One sets out to achieve at this time.
I seem to recall that the application available to me were Canon's own (though the latest versions of that do not support the camera as I recall) and one or two others that used the Canon SDK and maybe relied on independent vendors for interpreting RAW files.
Things have moved on. Camera sales have boomed then crashed. Picking the volume sellers, the winners and the also rans in the market is probably not easy these days and user expectations for their results are higher.
It may be best not to promise anything in case the promise turns out to be undeliverable.
Just my opinion of course.
Grant0 -
Hi,
I am also waiting ungently for an update that supports RAW files of the Panasonic FZ2000. The update to 10.0.1.23 that came some days ago still does not solve our hopes. ☹️0 -
Not in 10.0.2 either. They are working on it though, so I guess we all have to be patient. 0 -
Hmmmm.... they are actively working on supporting the FZ2500/FZH1/FZ2000 since more than three month... ☹️
For a new and very popular Camera that was released in September last year it is a long long time for waiting to support it.
I made a payed upgrade from CaptureOne 9 to 10 only with the hope, that new Cameras will be supported, and I am not very glad about it. All other products like Adobe, AcdSee and Silkypix already can handle the RAW files, only CaptureOne not.
Bad bad bad... 😭0 -
Still no support for the Lumix FZ2000... ☹️
I temporary used the way to convert all RAW files with Adobe DNG converter to go on working with C1, but the color is not matching in this way, and other features of C1 are not available... so this is no longer an option to work with...
I have tried and done some work with the new Version of Silkypix and I was very very happy that they are supporting the raw files of the Panasonic Lumix FZ2000 from the beginning and now with a new software version that have much more options.
So I think there are unfortionately more and more reasons to change my favorite RAW converter... ☹️0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
12件のコメント