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!

Phase One IQ250 - 11 things you need to know, and Q&A

Shashin

Well-known member
Now, one thing I would be interested in is color. There seems to be a trend to weaken the Bayer filters to get better signal. The downside is color fidelity. I get much better color from my 645D than my RX-1--both have nice color, just prefer the 645D. Whether that is this Bayer filter thing, I am not sure as there are more factors that could be going on here.

The other interesting thing is an engineer from Pentax about a year ago in an interview expressed a wish to make a mirrorless 645D. Well, with CMOS, this is possible. Hard to say whether it was wishful thinking or a slip of the tongue. Ricoh has very deep pockets, far deeper than the competition. Mirrorless MFD is an interesting idea. Not sure if I would be totally on board, but interesting nonetheless.

The 50MP is really not a real jump from 40MP--12% increase in linear resolution. I'd rather 40MP and keep the pixel area and save filling up my hard drive so fast. Photography is light dependent, it is not plagued by it. This tiny pixel rush is not impressive. No matter how you slice it, it is easier to count photons in bigger buckets.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well not full featured live view like a Sony A7 or Canons/Nikons makes me wonder . But it's Gen 1 so will see
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
My harsh take:
IF (like me) you prefer a 2:3 frame ratio, this camera has slightly higher pixel size than D800 or A7r, the same DR, and on the long end will give enough extra pixels to print 1-3" longer depending on print resolution. But you'll have to use it on a Phase body and with lenses that have no IS, not my idea of fun, or on a technical camera but not with you lovely landscape wides...

That's how it stacks up against my needs at first sight. I'm always willing to be persuaded otherwise...
I was wondering when someone would bring up the different aspect ratios. I'm in the other camp as far as 2:3 is concerned and find it fine for landscapes but typically too tall for portrait shooting. I'm far more comfortable with 3:4 ratio (actually I prefer square but that doesn't get you far these days!) and the 2:3 traditional DSLRs such as my Nikons don't quite gel.

When it comes to resolution comparison I think people will need to compare like for like using the same aspect ratios on both cameras.
 

tjv

Active member
Here's hoping the specs that Hasselblad release are different, in the sense that I live in hope that that their offering is more tech camera, wide lens and movement friendly. How knows, they might have their sensor specced differently to achieve different end results? I doubt it, but I cross my fingers…

Considering I can't afford to buy one anyway, it's a little unfair for me to comment; but I was hoping for more here. I was gunning for true full frame 645 and focus peaking with live view. In other words, the ultimate back to aspire to that I could bolt onto my Linhof Techno. It's fair to say that I still dream of the IQ260, but the future should hold exciting things if they can build on this.
 

markymarkrb

New member
Phase mentioned that the IQ250 has been thoroughly tested for the past few months. I would guess that means that Sony probably delivered the sensor to them over a year and a half ago. I wonder what is sitting on their desk for the IQ3… I am still waiting for the right replacement for my IQ180 and I haven't felt the pull yet.
 

torger

Active member
What's needed for us tech cam fans is that Sony becomes interested in developing CMOS that has wide angular response. I don't think that exists yet. May require radically new design with millions of dollars in development cost.

Small sensor compacts would gain from it as it would make wide angle lens design simpler lighter smaller and sharper, so it's not impossible sony would try such a thing without thinking about mf. I don't think the tech cam market can drive such development on its own, and even if phase one might have the muscles they don't seem to have any interest, same can be said about Hasselblad as their own systems don't require wide angular response due to loooong flange distance
 

MaxKißler

New member
...
My only regret is posting a crop of one file processed to my taste - it's a poor way to show off the high-ISO quality on this back. We have D800 vs IQ250 high ISO comparisons which I find favor the IQ250, and in general I can tell you that I (and I can only speak for me) will be very happy using ISO6400 on the IQ250 for my wedding shooting. But it seems best at this point to wait until Capture One 7.2 is out, our demo unit is in the office for testing by us and our clients, and we can share raws rather than processed-to-taste very small crops from very large files.
...
Don't worry about it. It has nothing to do with the product you're selling. IMHO ISO1600 just doesn't look good on any camera. If I had to shoot in very low light without a tripod, I'd rather take a 35mm camera but not because I think ISO performance is better but because of less mirror slap, image stabilization and faster lenses.

When I was testing the A7r I was shocked how bad the files started to get at ISO1600. Just my opinion.


EDIT: The Pentax 645D has good ISO performance at 1600 though.
 
Don't worry about it. It has nothing to do with the product you're selling. IMHO ISO1600 just doesn't look good on any camera. If I had to shoot in very low light without a tripod, I'd rather take a 35mm camera but not because I think ISO performance is better but because of less mirror slap, image stabilization and faster lenses.

When I was testing the A7r I was shocked how bad the files started to get at ISO1600. Just my opinion.


EDIT: The Pentax 645D has good ISO performance at 1600 though.
Depends on the camera, the 1Dx makes great ISO1600 shots, in that anything from ISO100-1600 looks basically the same.

Add me to the tough crowd list, I think the IQ250 features are compelling for a back half the price (certainly not 35k?), since ultimately all you're getting is better low light and live view than an IQ140 or similar.

I initially jumped from my seat when I heard the news, but this is fast not becoming the holy grail I was waiting for, so I guess it's down to waiting for the A7XL from Sony that will no doubt come out 2 years after the others had the lion's share.

Edit 385: Also, video recording has to become a must, there are videographers out there who would kill for just a box that would let them capture MF-format video (65mm as it's known there), and it could become a whole new source of revenue. It's a market where $35k for a camera body is considered inexpensive.
 
Last edited:

tsjanik

Well-known member
..................................

EDIT: The Pentax 645D has good ISO performance at 1600 though.
Indeed it does. I rarely need to use it, but here's an example at 1600 (cropped). Mostly luminance noise which gives a film-like quality I like. I am still very happy with the files from this sensor. Still, it will be interesting to see if a 645DII appears and what sensor is used and which form the body takes.
Tom

_IGP9295 by tsjanik47, on Flickr
 

malmac

Member
So does Sony's new 50Mp sensor being larger than 35mm mean that Sony, at least for the time being, have set an upper limit of 36Mp for the 35mm format?

So what resolution will the new Nikon D4X sport, I wonder?

Mal
 

Shashin

Well-known member
You know, this is an embarrassment of riches. We buy a new palace and we are amazed at the size and the fittings. Then, after a year or two, we grow bored with it--the grass is not green enough and the 2,000sqft closet does not hold enough shoes. So, we buy a bigger palace. Suddenly the old place is flubbed off as a run-down trailer home. The reality is the old palace is still great. At least it must be is the current fat-pixel back thread is any indication.
 

MaxKißler

New member
I cannot commend on the 1DX as I've never tested it. I can only speak for the cameras I'v ever considered buying and unfortunately this was not the case with the 1DX.

You know, noise itself is generally not bothering me, it's the loss of detail that is an annoyance.

Perhaps my opinion in this regard will change as soon as I'll try to process images from cmos sensors the way Anders suggested; Less color noise reduction to preserve more details and clarity.
 

MaxKißler

New member
You know, this is an embarrassment of riches. We buy a new palace and we are amazed at the size and the fittings. Then, after a year or two, we grow bored with it--the grass is not green enough and the 2,000sqft closet does not hold enough shoes. So, we buy a bigger palace. Suddenly the old place is flubbed off as a run-down trailer home. The reality is the old palace is still great. At least it must be is the current fat-pixel back thread is any indication.
True. Maybe some of the rich people here would like to buy a new sedan and send me their old one...
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
So does Sony's new 50Mp sensor being larger than 35mm mean that Sony, at least for the time being, have set an upper limit of 36Mp for the 35mm format?

So what resolution will the new Nikon D4X sport, I wonder?

Mal
Actually I feel it's very telling that the 45 to 54Mp Nikon D4x is closer to reality than I realized. Times they are a changin

Paul
 
Last edited:
I was wondering when someone would bring up the different aspect ratios. I'm in the other camp as far as 2:3 is concerned and find it fine for landscapes but typically too tall for portrait shooting. I'm far more comfortable with 3:4 ratio (actually I prefer square but that doesn't get you far these days!) and the 2:3 traditional DSLRs such as my Nikons don't quite gel.

When it comes to resolution comparison I think people will need to compare like for like using the same aspect ratios on both cameras.
+1

I crop my Canon 5D MK III images into 4:5 aspect ratio. 2:3 is too tall to my eyes in vertical orientation.
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
To me, as an exclusive landscape photographer, ISO of 35 is all I need. From time to time, I may use slightly higher ISO. Only on occasion, I may use the Nikon D800E for ISO over 200.
If this IQ 250 cannot be used with a Tech Cam, it is too expensive compared to the D800E or Sony A7R. I probably will wait for DX4, but do I need one? My lenses can't even keep up with 36mp.
It is kind of funny there is no information about the tech cam when the back is almost available. Phase One has had this sensor for many months. I have a hard time believing they don't know whether there is a limitation of the back with the tech cam.
My pictures still look (awesome) the same with my P25+!

Pramote
 
Last edited:
Top