The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

P65+ better than IQ180?

narikin

New member
Ok, that's provocative, but:

I recently met up for an afternoon with a very high end art photographer who swore that for his purposes (lets dumbly call it "walk around photography") the P65+ was far the better back - less color casts, less fussy about light entry angles, MUCH longer battery life, etc.

Both he and I were on Alpa TC's with IQ180's, and we both miss our P65+ backs, and kind of wish we hadn't traded up.

Then I had some emails with yet another high end art photographers (I'm talking about people who have major international museum shows) who also uses Alpa/Phase, and says the same thing: life was easier with the P65+.

That makes 3 of us. I see a pattern!

(I guess one point being: if you are looking for great used back and work with a technical camera: look hard at a P65+)
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
Clearly the colour cast thing is an issue for some - I've lost count of the number of posts I've read on here both prior and subsequent to buying an IQ180 for myself.

Rather than missing your P65+, do you wonder if you'd have been better off trading up to the IQ160?
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
P+ backs do have better battery life than IQ backs, primarily because of the screen differences; the P65+ display is small and simple, the IQ display large and interactive. The P65+/IQ160 have less color casts with tech cams than the IQ180 because of the fatter pixels. The IQ180 has more resolution and smoother tonality because of the smaller pixels. Fortunately you get to pick your own set of desired benefits vs drawbacks; that's why Phase offers you choices :)

For me, life is DEFINITELY easier with IQ technology than it ever was pre IQ.
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
See Ed Cooley's work. He's used IQ180 and he is absolutely not a "walk around photographer". I think he is one of the very best photographers.
Is it about the back? I've just thought out loud.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I decided to switch from the P65+ to the IQ160 and see a huge difference in the ease of working. Then again the same sensor. Still pleased that I didn't go all the way to the IQ180. Just me thinking outloud.....
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
The IQ backs have features I wanted, so for the same price, I went IQ140 instead of P65+. The extra pixels are not much of a draw, but the larger sensor definitely is. The IQ160 would be my perfect back... but it is priced accordingly.

--Matt
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Folks wonder why I went IQ 160 instead of going for the 180 when they where released. First I did not need the extra 20mpx but this sensor was proven to be good at the time on tech cams. Not any extra cash helped too. But all in all i think the160 is the best all around back you can get. Thought that than still think that.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
See Ed Cooley's work. He's used IQ180 and he is absolutely not a "walk around photographer". I think he is one of the very best photographers.
Is it about the back? I've just thought out loud.
Besides Eds great talent he also has the lenses for that back that work with its little issues. They are not cheap lenses though. Rodie 23 and 32 are 7-8k each. 160 owners can cheat a little easier with lessor glass. Or I should say some older glass. 35XL for instance is relatively cheap lens in tech land.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
If you turn the screen off on the IQ the battery life will be as good or better. But of course the whole point is the IQ screen is actually useful for looking at the subject (expression/composition etc), focus checking, live view, exposure and color checking, alignment checking etc. So you end up using it a LOT more than a P+ screen which was really only good for basic framing, confirming the flash fired, and a histogram. I find in practice when I go to shoot for an afternoon that I need to put two batteries in my pocket rather than one battery in my pocket.

The IQ180 does not work well with Schneider wides, especially with movement. If you want/need to use Schneider wides then the IQ160 makes more sense. It works fantastically with all Rodenstocks and the mid-and-long Schneiders.

To me I think the topic would be better named "60mp sensor better than 80mp sensor if using compact wide angle lenses on tech camera" - which I would agree with. Notably Guy and I were one of the very first (maybe the first outside of Phase One) to test the 80mp sensor with a variety of wide angle lenses.

If given the choice of an IQ180+23HR+32HR or an IQ160+28XL+43XL I'd pick the IQ180 kit every time. If I had to pay for them, or more to the point if paying for the IQ180 meant I had to not get another lens I wanted then I'd be very happy with the IQ160.
 

gazwas

Active member
If given the choice of an IQ180+23HR+32HR or an IQ160+28XL+43XL I'd pick the IQ180 kit every time. If I had to pay for them, or more to the point if paying for the IQ180 meant I had to not get another lens I wanted then I'd be very happy with the IQ160.
Or as I looked at it, I could choose an IQ180+23HR+32HR or if you want 98% of the image quality and a heap load of cash in the bank, stick with the ridiculously cheap (considering it cost the same as an IQ180 24 months ago) P65+ that still uses the current chips of the IQ range and a few used Schneider Digitar lenses that nobody wants anymore. ;)
 

torger

Active member
Although I have not had experience with these backs, I'm quite sure I'd prefer the P65+ ahead of IQ180 too. The P65+ does well with the Rodenstock retrofocus lenses too of course.

I'm of the opinion that the IQ180 is not a good tech cam back, its just too much color cast, and 80 megapixels is just overkill in a situation when there are other more important aspects to focus at (like *less* color cast, longer exposure times). My own shooting style in terms of composition and DoF also makes it hard to make good use of that extra resolution, I do one-shot images at f/11, diffraction onset is plenty at 6um pixels already :). Focus stacking is not my thing.

The other aspect is that I've heard so much good of the reliability of P+ series in tough field conditions, cold conditions not the least, while I've seen less impressive things about the IQ-series reliability.

It seems like digital backs tend to be a bit buggy the first year or so, so the IQ-series may eventually get as good reputation as the P+ on the reliability aspect, but as for now P65+ would be my choice if I was up in that price level.

If not considering reliability the IQ160 would be ideal in terms of use, but you get to pay a lot of money to get that iphone-swoosh upgrade ;).

In a way I also think it is about showing what features we want. Is it more important with 20 more megapixels than being flexible with movements and lens choices? Is it more important with a smooth user interface than a back that can be trusted in tough outdoor conditions?

The 32 HR is sort of an example of what monster lenses have become because of the development in the wrong direciton (according to me). The 32 HR is so large and heavy it can easily break around the copal shutter which is not design to carry such weight. Just to get ultra-resolution with retrofocus. Making wide distortion-free lenses with (fairly) normal designs thanks to large pixels with low color cast and no mirror box was one of the unique features of the tech cam genre. I'd like to see more of that, not less.

I'd pick a non-retrofocus Schneider lens over a Rodenstock monster any time I find Schneider's quality to be good enough for my needs. I find beauty in a simple well-balanced system.
 
Last edited:

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
The other aspect is that I've heard so much good of the reliability of P+ series in tough field conditions, cold conditions not the least, while I've seen less impressive things about the IQ-series reliability.
Where have you seen this??
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
The other aspect is that I've heard so much good of the reliability of P+ series in tough field conditions, cold conditions not the least, while I've seen less impressive things about the IQ-series reliability.
Where have you seen this??

It seems like digital backs tend to be a bit buggy the first year or so, so the IQ-series may eventually get as good reputation as the P+ on the reliability aspect, but as for now P65+ would be my choice if I was up in that price level.
I'd agree that nearly every back/body I've seen ship (from every manufacturer) in the last 5 years have had bugs at first shipment. Heck even the D800 and 5D2 had some issues in their first batch. I'd say these issues have been fully address in 3-4 months compared to the 1 year you estimate, but we agree on the underlying premise anyway.

The only significant issue I recall for IQ field usage was the battery/power-system wasn't initially tuned well for very cold temperatures (it would report empty even when it still had juice) which was fixed pretty quick.*

I'd say things have been rock solid since firmware 2.x (and we're currently on firmware 3.x).

Note the IQ started shipping in mid 2011. Which means we're past even your conservative 1 year mark.

*I'm not ignoring the continued lack of support for USB (that's just a field reliability issue). And all indications are this will be addressed soon too.
 

torger

Active member
Where have you seen this??
The cold problem I've read about on this forum, I think that thread ran during 2012. Seen some other smaller issues but would have to search to find them. Maybe it is rock solid as you say with the latest firmware -- they done it before with P+ so why not now with the IQ -- but I guess it will take another year or so before P+-like praise starts becoming visible on the forums. I think it is safe to say that if you are used to DSLR products you're in for a surprise concerning how "well-tested" new MFDB releases are. If you want to turn it to an advantage it is that you actually get value add features on firmware upgrades, which only very rarely happen in DSLR products.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
I think the P65+/IQ160 sensor is the sweet spot for tech cameras, mostly because the IQ180 can be more demanding on lenses, and hence the selection of lenses is better with the P65+/IQ160, although more new lens releases may change this albeit at a premium price.

When the IQ series was announced, there wasn't a Phase One sponsored upgrade path for the IQ160 for those who already had the P65+. It was the IQ180. It was a sweet deal for sure, and didn't make financial sense to get the IQ160, extra pixels be damned.

The IQ180 (and her sisters) are all about usability, and in my experience my MFDB has been rock solid and an absolute blast on the Cambo WRS tech camera. I haven't noticed any battery power issues, though I bought more batteries in anticipation of more chimping and swiping. I find myself using no more battery power than I did with the P65+. Watch the B&S forum for a brand new Phase battery in the box, and maybe a couple more.... :)
 

stephengilbert

Active member
Hey, I could use an extra battery. I was hoping for one of those customized Libby batts with the cool labels, but let me know ....
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Hey, I could use an extra battery. I was hoping for one of those customized Libby batts with the cool labels, but let me know ....
Better yet, Steve---c'mon up to CI in Carmel Feb 2013, and I bet I can get Don Libby to give you an autographed edition of this new Phase battery! :ROTFL:

I've got one battery new in the box---I can set it aside for you if you want.

ken
 
Top