That's simply not true. They are a dealer-oriented company in your part of the world, in certain other parts of the world the photographer deals directly with P1.This is especially true of Phase One which is a dealer-oriented company.
Chris
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!
That's simply not true. They are a dealer-oriented company in your part of the world, in certain other parts of the world the photographer deals directly with P1.This is especially true of Phase One which is a dealer-oriented company.
As far as I understand one needs to run the back in 16 bit mode to get the full dynamic range, and then it will write a slightly different file format. The DCraw/Rawdigger guys (or perhaps me...) will probably have to reverse-engineer that before it can be fully analyzed. The files available for analysis now are in the old 14-bit-expanded-to-16-bit format and cannot hold the full dynamic range, if it exists. So the final verdict on this needs to wait.Can someone comments on the DR test in the LL forum that shows DR ís only 13 stops?
I think it says something about the size of the tech cam market. It's big on forums like this, but the mass of users use the DF/XF systems and that is what Phase One focuses their limited testing resources on. They're afterall a quite small company.I've known that for years. And it's precisely my point: why is it left to the dealers to do the essential tests, post-launch?
Some counter-arguments:Of course Phase One has tested this back, quite extensively, including with Tech Cams. But camera manufacturers, as a general group, do not release large volumes of test images especially when third party components (e.g. Rodenstock lenses on an Arca body) are involved. For instance you don't see Canon releasing gigs of raw files with Sigma lenses or Nikon releasing gigs of raws showing skintone when combining their cameras with various brands of LED lighting.
Maybe because Phase wants to sell their new XF system and the lenses also in the first place ?Some counter-arguments:
1) https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/new-phase-one-100-mp-back-on-the-alpa
How is it then that Alpa had no difficulty releasing test images made with 3rd party components? - Alpa don't make the IQ3 back and they don't make the Rodie lenses! What's good enough as a business practice for Alpa is not good enough for Phase One?
.........
Ray
It's painful, but I realize that you may be right. The trend is evident, but on the other hand camera systems seem to take decades to die in any caseWake up and see the truth: classic techcam is a dinosaur and the meteor has already striked.
Hi Dan,Can someone comments on the DR test in the LL forum that shows DR ís only 13 stops?
I cant wait for more test, how far is it from 1st gen IQ back.
Readout noise and well depth stole it. The bit depth sets the maximum possible DR for a pixel, but analog signal to noise is the usual limiting factor.P1 state it has achieved 15 stop of dynamic range, then they say also it's a true 16 bit output, but with 16 bit by math, the dynamic range is 16 stop not 15, so who stole the missing stop ?
You're probably right, Stefan. But I've no skin in the tech-cam game, so I've no waking up to do. My conversation is centred on how Phase One operate.Maybe because Phase wants to sell their new XF system and the lenses also in the first place ?
And second because the tech cam shooters are a tiny fraction of those using it on fixed bodies anyway.
So I also doubt there will be any new techcam lenses AT ALL. Schneider has closed their lens department on 31.December and Rodenstock is probably not sellling enough to devellop another round of new Retrofocus wideangles that will work better with such highres backs.
Why do you think Alpa is also pushing the FPS so hard and releasing adapters for all kind of NON-Tech lenses ?
Copal has ended support for the tech lens shutters and Cambo released a modified 24mm Samyang to get the actus into wide angle.
Wake up and see the truth: classic techcam is a dinosaur and the meteor has already striked.
Regards
Stefan
Ray,Readout noise and well depth stole it. The bit depth sets the maximum possible DR for a pixel, but analog signal to noise is the usual limiting factor.
Ray
Right, pure white is the saturation point so all extra DR goes into shadows, also sensor DR is separate from the ADC being able to resolve that DR. Having a 15-stop sensor with 14-bit ADCs will just give you really clean shadows since some of the noise will be below the limits of the ADC's ability to "see" it. conversely, having a 12-stop sensor on a 14-bit ADC gives us the noisy shadows we all knew and loved since before ~2012.Readout noise and well depth stole it. The bit depth sets the maximum possible DR for a pixel, but analog signal to noise is the usual limiting factor.
Ray
Micro lenses ?Here is a comparison shot. Again, I just try to see how the 2 backs (100MP on top, follow by IQ260) pictures look at near image circle with LLC correction.
Ouch. That's appalling.Rodenstock 32mm at F11, 10 degree drop, 2 shot stitch with LCC applied. The top corners are near the image circle. Full size file on the 4K screen is quite stunning. Still looking through the rest of the files.