MF realities and limitations

[Guy Mancuso]

Justin the big key on high noise and trying to avoid it in most cases just being dead on with exposure is the main key . But i should add these MF files do have a lot of pushing around to them. Maybe keyword for most all the systems is robust files. I know Jack will slide in a ISO 800 and push it and i have also with nice results. There not noise free but they are good and C1 with the Phase files is the best program for them. So don't overlook that part get C1 and you will with your back. This will also be alot about subject but tungsten usually is the worst and those stage lights are all tungsten. My results made me quite pleased and not even looking at a DSLR system anymore.

 

[Bob]

I am not sure that I need higher frame rates. Something about 1-2 seconds per frame seems to be ok for me.
It takes me a bit of time to frame focus and push the button. I have a D3, and it can certainly shoot at a high frame rate, but if anything I think it hurt my style rather than helping it.
-bob

 

[Brian304]

My .02 on image quality. Frankly, there is not a huge difference between even teh P25+ and the P45+. Guy and I noted this on the last workshop; since we were instructing, we'd grab and shoot whoever's camera and lens was tethered to the computer. So for every set we have a lot of side-by-sides with the P25+ and P45+. At the end of the day, even at 100% I needed to look at the exif to tell which back was used. My point here is that I don't think the resolution difference between the P30+ and P25+ or even P45+ is going to be as significant as having the overall larger sensor behind your lenses.

For sure if you think you'll need ISO 800 or 1600 regularly, I'd go for the P30+. OTOH if you think 400 is plenty, and don't need speed, then the P25 or P45 non-plus would be relative bargains. P25+ or 45+ add an extra layer of features, higher res rear LCD and one stop ISO, which is why I chose the plus.

As for the $1600 150/2.8, it is likely a manual lens -- Mamiya did make a 150/2.8 manual focus for the old 645. FWIW, they also made a manual 200/2.8 and 300/2.8 which are both stellar optics, but I don't know about the 150/2.8 manual focus version as I've never shot it.

Oh, and I have sold my 210 AF since I had the 150 and 300, but it was a stellar optic, being very sharp wide open on down.

Hey Jack and Guy,
So at what print size would you notice a difference between the 25 and 45 (non plus) at iso 100 and 400?
I know I can bin the 45 to tone down the noise, and it allows me to be sloppy.....
thanks
Brian

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I will let Jack answer this one since he prints way more than i ever will. My guess would be after 20 x30 though the P45 will show it's stuff better

 

[Uaiomex]

I'd like to dip further into this subject.
I'm planning on going into digital MF soon. My own brainstorm revolves around wether P25, P25+ or P45.
I like to print big, mainly 24X30". I understand the +series can take longer exposures. One minute (daylight with neutral density filter) would be enough. What would be the smartest way for me. Yes, money matters.Thanks
Eduardo

I will let Jack answer this one since he prints way more than i ever will. My guess would be after 20 x30 though the P45 will show it's stuff better

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I a would lean towards the Plus if you can. Wish I had a chart of the differences between the Plus and non Plus. Doug you out there

 

[lance_schad]

Ok here are the features of a Phase One Plus back vs Non-Plus


•1 Hour Exposure - The patent pending XPose+ technology enables noise-free exposures of up to 1 hour. Create fantastic images using extreme light painting or capture great architectural designs at night time.
•Live Preview - The scalable focus window supports an effective workflow on large production jobs between the photographer, the art directors and the stylists.
•Level Meter - The unique and patented high precision level meter ensures a perfect horizontal setup.
•Extraordinary color reproduction - Opticolor+ is a unique image processing algorithm delivering high color accuracy in deep shadows and perfect skin tones.
•Noise-free capture - The Dynamic+ technology ensures less noise at all ISO settings and break limits on the ability to work in very low light.

The Plus series of backs feature an extra stop of ISO .

Note some of the non-plus P21,P30,P45's have live preview enabled.

L

 

[Jack]

Hey Jack and Guy,
So at what print size would you notice a difference between the 25 and 45 (non plus) at iso 100 and 400?
I know I can bin the 45 to tone down the noise, and it allows me to be sloppy.....
thanks
Brian

The 45 will print a 33x44 with the same detail as the 25 prints say a 24x32. At ISO 100 and 200 I doubt you will see any difference between a plus and non-plus; you *might* notice a bit of a difference in larger prints on noise at 400.

 

[jmvdigital]

I'm stuck on the 30+ or 45+. I like the extra stop from the 30+, which would be a benefit for me. I like the extra pixels of the 45+, the lack of microlens for future use, resale value is also higher, and reduced crop factor. What to do... what to do... Not sure if the 45+ would be a wise move for ISO alone, at the same time not sure if I should skimp to the 30+ and regret it later when I'll want that extra bit of quality.

Guy/Jack/Brad... would you guys say there is any visible difference between the 800 ISO of the 25+ and the 45+? From the physics of it, he 45 has smaller photosites, ergo more noise. But then again, I think the 30+ has the same photosite size as the 45.

 

[jmvdigital]

Something I hadn't thought about either... how much does the 1.3x crop of the 30+ affect the depth-of-field versus the lesser 1.1x crop of the 45+? I assume the 45 has a slightly shallower depth-of-field for the same FoV... but how big is the difference visually?

 

[Uaiomex]

Thanks Lance and Jack.
My main personal trend is urban, seascapes and landscape photography. Recently, I've been after long exposures.24X30" is fairly standard for me. I've managed to print (lots of PP, but it works) nicely at this size with my 5D. So, I drool at the mere thought of shooting with a double frame PhaseOne or other DMF back. My gear are (is?)a 500CM and 4 CF objectives.
After reading your posts (Guy's and others too), I'm pin-pointing now between the P25+ and P45. In your opinion, would the P25+ look as good as a P45 printed 24X30"?
What is the longest clean exposure with P45 non-plus?
Thanks in advance
Eduardo
(b

The 45 will print a 33x44 with the same detail as the 25 prints say a 24x32. At ISO 100 and 200 I doubt you will see any difference between a plus and non-plus; you *might* notice a bit of a difference in larger prints on noise at 400.

 

[Jack]

Justin:

There is no easy answer here, and you are essentially down to 'splitting pixels' D) in an effort to determine which best suits your needs.

A few added comments:

1) The P30+ has the same size pixel as the P45+. As such, if one uses pixel size as CoC for their DoF calc, then both the sensors deliver the same effective DoF. Yes, the P30+ has a theoretical added enlargement factor using a slightly shorter lens to get to the same size print as the P45+, but the fact that we do not have infinite focal length choice essentially negates this consideration.

2) Micro lenses do affect native image quality at the pixel level; they slightly soften the image and slightly lower inter-pixel contrast in the mid to upper tones. Added sharpening and a bump in contrast during raw processing bring these back in line, but when Guy and I did the direct comparison tests, we both agreed that the final file detail ended up somewhere between the P45+ and 25+. So, by the time you backed up the few steps with the P30+ required to get the same framing as the P25, the final files were essentially equal for detail. The difference in mid-upper contrast requires a bump to correct which has a negative effect on the total dynamic range, and the P30+ netted visibly less detail in the lower shadows than either the P25+ or 45+. While it was difficult to measure this loss empirically, we 'guesstimated' 2/3 stop less DR.

3) No real difference in noise between the P25+ and P45+, however the P25+ tends to show moire more frequently.

4) If money were no object, I would own the P45+ for maximum detail and print output size and a P30+ for capture speed and higher ISO.

 

[Jack]

In your opinion, would the P25+ look as good as a P45 printed 24X30"?

Print detail will be very hard to differentiate at 24x32, and either will be an order of magnitude more detailed than your 5D at that size.

I cannot speak to long exposure noise on the non-plus backs because I've never tested that.

 

[Don Libby]

Justin

I’ve been shooting with a P30+ for about 18 months and love it. The largest size print I’ve made so far has been a tad over 34x64 on canvas which was a result of a 2 shot merged panorama. I’ve been shooting and loving the 28mm since late last year and have constantly gotten great results.

That said, I might be upgrading to the P45+ only because I might also start shooting a TC (I’ll be testing next week).

If you’re sure you won’t be shooting a TC go with the P30+ you won’t be sorry. Listen to Chris and you won’t go wrong either.


don

 

[jmvdigital]

Don, excellent! I'm glad you're having a good experience with the 30+. I'm in limbo right now, mostly dictated by cost at this point. If I can swing the 45+, I'm there. If not, back to the 30+ I think. What is your impression of the low-light capability of the 30+? Any 1600 ISO images (with crops) that you'd be willing to share?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Here Justin some P30 plus stuff. Happy reading. LOL

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1896

 

[jmvdigital]

Guy, right on cue with great reading material... again. Thanks.

Sheesh, still stuck. The 30+ is fabulous at high ISO. The one or two 800ISO shots I've seen from the 45+ have been significantly less inspiring (one in that thread).

 

[Don Libby]

Don, excellent! I'm glad you're having a good experience with the 30+. I'm in limbo right now, mostly dictated by cost at this point. If I can swing the 45+, I'm there. If not, back to the 30+ I think. What is your impression of the low-light capability of the 30+? Any 1600 ISO images (with crops) that you'd be willing to share?

Justin

Sorry but I can't help you out on low-light with the P30 as I normally don't shoot above 100. The only time I shoot low-light is when I'm doing lightening and I've been using my Canon for that as it's just faster.

The reason I decided on the P30+ above the P45+ (at the time) was I felt that the P30 was just a better buy; more bang for the buck so to speak; the reason I'm making the switch to the P45+ is if I decide to make the move to the Cambo WDS and I'll know the outcome of that little drama by the end of next week.

My suggestion is that unless you are convinced you'll never move to a TC then wisest move might be to pick up a P30+; you'll always have the upgrade path to either the P45, P65 or whatever Phase has by then.

The major thing that's holding me back from just ordering the upgrade is that I want to see how well my Mamiya 28 is going to play with the P45; of course I might also find I no longer need that lens if I'm shooting wide with the WDS. Again, I'll know for sure by the end of next week..

Bottom line? You won't go wrong with either ...

don

 

[jmvdigital]

Jack, I see you had posted some 800 ISO comparisons from your 45+ (and then you and Thierry had it out, haha) on an older thread when you first got your 45. But those images don't show up in the thread any more. Any chance you could hook up some fresh 800 images w/crops? Nothing special needed. Greatly appreciated.

 

[Jack]

Here is the P45+ at 1600 -- or more precisely captured underexposed 1 at ISO 800, then pushed 1 during raw conversion. It is a screen capture at actual pixels resolution: