I meeting representatives from Leaf next week to do a test and review of the new Credo 50.
I meeting representatives from Leaf next week to do a test and review of the new Credo 50.
If you could steal a tech cam and test live-view focusing with tilt, it would be very nice...
There not bringing a tech cam. But maybe CI can send one
IQ250 Live View Quick Demo - DT Blog
I still think for tilt that focus mask is a better solution, but live view can be helpful as well.
Thanks for the heads up. I'm interested in hearing about your experiences with it and your opinions.
If wide angle tech camera use, with movement, is core to your need then none of the 50mp CMOS backs are the ideal choice.
Do you have any rumors regarding the upcoming CMOS sensor in 645 fullframe size (around 54x40mm in size like the IQ260/IQ280)? If you would have to guess, roughly when would you expect to see announcement from Phase One? I currently hear about rumors expecting July 2015, which is just beyond the 12-month Investment Protection Plan of my IQ260. In such case it is probably best for me to sell my unit early.
Is there no yellow-banded new Rodenstock ultra wide angle lens announced during Photokina 2014? Does that mean wide angle movements on tech cameras are stuck with IQ260, with no future for a hope of CMOS from SONY?
Started shooting this today and will continue with a tech cam the rest of the week. Not giving it away but I'm very impressed with live view on it and makes it very functional to use. Seriously after owning 5 backs I can't tell you shooting at ISO over 400 are unheard of and live view to boot makes this a Wow right out of the gate. I'm talking clean High ISO.
I have the Alpa viewfinder that I'm not even going to put on. Eliminates any need for it or even a iPhone setup. Gotta love that right there
They even sent me a Disto and that will stay in the bag as well.
I fully agree that the CMOS brings a lot to the game, the use of the higher iso's as you mentioned. Key.
The 1.3 crop still gives me a bit of consternation, as having the full wide really makes a difference for me here in Arkansas.
It will be most interesting to see how the movements look, on the 40mm, at 12mm to 15mm of shift. Looking forward to your detailed review.
From Doug's tests made with the IQ250 and the Rodie 40 you can often get good results in the whole image circle, but depending on subject you may get visible crosstalk artifacts (desaturation of colors and mazing in demosaicing) outside about 65mm image circle.
Depending on how important color and tonality is for the photographer, and how good the photographer is at detecting degradation of those, and how much shift range that is desired the appreciation of this sensor+lens combination will vary.
Doug's stitch test in the library is an excellent benchmark test that anyone can look at. The IQ250+40HR image looks great at first look, it's not until you start comparing with the IQ260 shot you realize that the color is not stable, it desaturates, and when you look at 100% you see that there are demosaicing artifacts here and there. Personally I see this as a big issue for a system at this level, but others can be more forgiving. To me color stability is more important than sharpness or even noise as you can see it on a distance, while sharpness and noise is a closeup thing, but another photographer may see things otherwise.
Anyway, as the Credo 50 uses the exact same sensor as the IQ250 I think there will be no new behavior to document with this lens combination. Ie at first look it will look great, and at a deeper study you see the limitations.
12-15mm of rise with horizontal orientation will most likely yield good results in most conditions with this lens. From Doug's tests I see quite good color stability (according to my eyes), but a little of demosaicing mazing. On a distance it will most likely look great. If you shift further to say 20mm you start to have visible loss in color fidelity, but if that happens to be a gray overcast sky it probably won't matter.
As Admiral Farragut said in the battle of Mobile Bay, "Damn the Crosstalk, Full Speed Ahead"
I feel that a lot of the issues can be corrected in post, not all but a lot of them. It's for sure an issue that each photographer has to work out.
The Rodenstock 40 HR-W should shift well into the 18mm range on the 1:3 crop of the IQ250, and hold excellent details. That's about the max I want tend to use and 12mm to 15mm is more the average.
Based on my experience with the Sony A7r and 40 HR-W:
In post, I have found, that to my liking, I can recover a lot of the loss in the greens and deeper colors, red, brown, yellow etc.
Where I have issues will be a solid blue sky on a 12mm shift with the 40mm here the blue tends to take on a hue issue that before C1 Vr 8 is hard to correct. If the sky has clouds to help break up the sky the "my eye" finds this a lot easier to work with. Now with C1 vr 8, and WB in the local adjustments, I find that I can work better on the images that show this effect.
Are they exact, no, but do they work? Yes.
The solid blue sky also tend to give me fits with the IQ260, not as bad as I noticed with the Sony, but again C1 Vr8 really adds to the equation to fix this.
Okay guys sounds like some heavy shifting is needed and I'll go up to that cowboy town which has lots of sky and detail in the wood. No worries I share the raws too, so you folks can process as well. I will tell you this outside crosstalk stuff I'm very excited what I seen so far. I really had my doubts on MF CMOS but that's seems to be not the case so far.
Let me add something here as I learned a few things yesterday. Don't assume even though they all use the same sensor that they act the same way. Each company or division of a company does all there own recipe on how these sensors perform on there back end. Most OEMs lock there engineers in a room to design based on the base sensor Sony fabricates to there own fine tuning to it. Each company or division may do things different than the others. This is stuff we as end users never know about is how the design process is done in those early stages of the sensor build. Sony only acts as a fabricator of the sensor but each company has there input on how they want that done. This stuff is honestly beyond my technical ability is to understand how that comes about and not always if ever public knowledge . We as end users may see differences when we finally output the files from different sources . So I hate to assume too much here
“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” — Ansel Adams1 Member(s) liked this post
Lol I know I have a lot of work to do first and I'll put it in a formal review as well.
Although I doubt it, the Sony sensors used Phase One / Leaf / Pentax / Hasselblad could have different CFAs which would lead to color differences even if the same profiles are applied. Long exposure performance surely differ as it's much about heat of the surrounding electronics. However there's a lot less black magic to integrating a CMOS than a CCD as CMOS delivers a digital signal while the CCD is analog. Thus I would expect less differences than for backs sharing the same model of CCD sensor.
What surely won't be different is crosstalk performance as that depends on the physical pixel structure, and I cannot imagine that that would be different, because that would mean delivering different sensor technology all-together. But well, it does not hurt to test! Excited to see the results.
When you do shift testing, I'd recommend to include a really extreme shift too like to the edge of the image circle so you really push it (say 30mm if your tech cam has that range). I would expect a quite mild onset of artifacts for medium shifts, possible undetectable in sky. Say if we get a test with 15mm shift and we see no visible crosstalk artifacts one could get to the conclusion that maybe it can do the whole image circle, but we would not know. So then it's better to also include one all the way to the edge so we really get the answer :-)
couple of ??'s
does the credo raw work well with C1?
how good is the LCD display compared to the IQ's?
The color profiles created for the Credo in C1 continue the legacy of Leaf Color.
Just a tease for now. I need to write, process and shoot a little more.
Details Alpa STC with Tilt adapter, 40mm rodie
Shot this as a 3 shot stitch at full movements of 18mm left , center and 18mm right. Processed in C18 to the best of my ability with a new back still working all the settings. Now I'm not so sure 18mm is the smartest setting here and maybe 15mm would be better. I am getting some serious lens falloff but I went for broke here and this is a lens limitation on image circle versus size of sensor. Its sharp all the way out there for sure. But I think 15mm maybe the max. on it. I shot a 15mm series today this was from Friday
I did crop slightly on the right to cut off a car nose.
Now I will say this for the back its sharp as a laser and gets every bit of resolving power from that Rodie. Color is sort of to my taste, the scene was warmer.
FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL FORUM MEMBERS . I WILL NOT BE POSTING 100 PERCENT VIEWS TO KEEP YOU FOLKS FROM WETTING YOUR PANTS. GO BUY SOME DEPENDS FIRST.
Same here. I think the case is the WB is set lower on these backs and higher on Nikons. But I agree and one reason I got away from Nikon was there cooler color. My Sony is a lot more similar to this Credo and other CCD backs tends to be a little warmer. I actually like that myself. We need to remember also most landscape images are shot at lower kelvin temps in early morning and late afternoons as well. Color balance is a funny thing you correct to pure color temp than your landscape images will lose that warm morning and afternoon glow and that's what you want. I worry about this far more with people but landscape I always say go to taste. I'll WB off something than cool it off ir warm it up with kelvin when doing landscapes. Really there is no wrong here, it's what looks good.
Victor good trick sometimes is color editor where you could warm up say this building and hold the blue sky with color editor.
I'm hating this review already. Not having this kind of MF kit anymore just hurts when I shoot these things. The IQ is just amazing.
Priolite Ambassador | Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
It is especially these 3 shot stitch images the file goes on forever.
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
www.guymancusophotography.com2 Member(s) liked this post
Given all of the negativity with regards to wides is is fairly amazing that the sky has remained very consistent in color rendition. I don't ever shift 18mm as the most I want is a 2X1 image (when shifting horizontally) which results in about 10mm shift in each direction. That keeps everything pretty crisp and without any artifacts 60mm and beyond (on an IQ180).
I have a very slight magenta cast on the far left. I tend to think 15mm is better but I don't want to write off 18 either as I think I can get it even better.
Are you folks WB the LCC image before running the correction or after. I WB after the correction on these.
I'll be uploading all my files for folks to play with. But I agree even 15mm with a Rodie 40 is pretty dang good if not great.
From memory the Rodie 23 was 3mm, my 28 was about 7mm, my SK 60 was the best at least 20 or more. I'm sure owners of the 40 can answer the max on it.
The good news here is I have yet to see anything ugly yet. Everything looks as good as or better than the CCD counterparts with the bonus of live view and high ISO. This is the future
Guy, just to clarify - were these vertical stitched shots, or horizontal? It's supposed to matter, as far as I understand the situation. I agree - these look outstanding, I look forward to seeing the downloads.
Alpa TC • STC | IQ140 | 24XL • 35XL • 120N-ASPH
These are vertical stitched shots from left to right than I immediately after the shoot series I send the back to the far left and run my LCC. In all it takes about 90 seconds. I open the shutter 1 stop for the LCC so the histo is at least in the middle for the LCC. Some folks go brighter and go to the far right. I never noticed that it actually mattered.
Btw with live view I left the viewfinder home, the Disto home and I would not spend the money on th iPhone setup. Put all that money for that stuff towards a lens or in this case with the Alpa STC the first thing I would buy is that stitch adapter so you can do rise and fall and shift at the same time. Its a big bitch to me Alpa just does not have both movements standard in the body or at least give you the dang adapter. Other than that I really like the Alpa but today I had to tilt the dang camera up to get a building in the frame and do a stitch . So now I have to fix the perspective in CS6. Pisses me off its not standard. It's why I bought Cambo but I love the Alpa too. It's my only knock on the system. Sorry Alpa fans but you know I'm right . Lol
But a good plus is you can move the backs very fast to stitch with Alpa. I like that setup
I'm being told there is a stitch adapter for the Max but not the STC . Alpa folks help out here.
On the STC the only shift is the rear shift. You can rotate 90 degrees for rise/fall but you don't have the option of both rise/fall AND shift.
I traded my Max when I got the STC. These days, I want a Max again ... but not the size of it. Even I, an Alpa bigot, would concede that this is an advantage of the Cambo & Arca relative to the STC at least. That said, I still wouldn't change out my Alpas for either
Rosebud ...1 Member(s) liked this post
Thanks Graham . I have been switching back and forth for different shots. It's not every shot you need it but architecture type work it's really nice to have both. Guess I would buy a Max unit than
I have the tilt adapter on the STC. Be nice if they could do a combination with the tilt adapter. Heck even 5mm of rise would be huge. Bet they could do it too.
Just make a sliding feature with a knob to lock it. Make it free form
If I need both I just rotate at the nodal point and use rise on the STC. I throw it all into PTGui and it comes out like a dream.
Love it. Lol
Live view is great from the CMOS sensors, as are the nice touch screens on the IQ and Credo MFDBs. But you still can't get away from middle-aged and tired eyes on the relatively small screen on the MFDB when working on location.
Enter tethering to the Surface Pro 2 or 3 with a USB3 enabled MFDB---just like that Credo 50 that you're asking your wife (and banker) about this afternoon.
The Surface Pro is small yet powerful----and a natural extension of the IQ or Credo touchscreen. Double-tap to zoom, drag a finger, focus mask, and live view of full resolution raws with C1 Pro.
You know, Don Libby has a Surface Pro 2 he's getting ready to sell. And he's just down the road from you...
My problem is I need that attached to the tripod. I walk around far too much sometimes to hold something but yes tethered is awesome and I do like it working like that.
For a sideways panorama like this I think you would get more shift with a vertical back than horizontal, ie the image you show is made in way to make the back perform as good as it can, or if we're lucky it's the other way around and it can perform even better. Did you have time to test large shifts in both vertical and horizontal orientation?
Another observation is that the bush in the center has more saturated color than the tree to the left (and also the small bush to the left). Is that a true representation of the scene, or has the sides lost saturation?
I took a look again at Doug's library shot and it holds up quite well in this range, so I think it should work quite fine. The 32 is a bit more problematic, but still can handle quite some range. Colors are not entirely stable though in either of them making it a bit scene dependent. Most often it's a slight desaturation effect, but there can also be a small color shift. It can be very hard to see that it's happening though unless one has a reference shot to compare with in constant light. In Doug's case he had IQ260 shot in parallel, where you could see some yellows in the ceiling being the same in the IQ260 and different on the IQ250. Could me a post-processing issue though, I had not the raw files for his 40HR shot so I haven't been able to analyze them fully.
Last edited by torger; 29th September 2014 at 23:07.
The back only goes to 18mm either way on a Alpa STC. It has no rise or fall to add more shots . 3 shots and your out , I did not do a horizontal back going up and down. It would perform the same as a vertical going sideways . This image is a little hard to tell since lots of shadows but I see no loss of color saturation in another one, actually it's quite good. But the back is in vertical position going 18mm on either side of center. That's the most extreme movements I can make with a Alpa STC and I only have a 40mm. Now not sure what your meaning is in regards as to back perform as it could. Is that not what we always want anyway. I'm kind of lost on your comment.
I'll be honest I'm not going to get into all this crosstalk business at all. The files will be available for folks to try and process themselves. My sole purpose is to review the back and my main interest is how well it performs and its new functionalities on high ISO and live view. Going on looking for problems is not my priority, if it comes up in normal type scenarios than fine let's talk about it but this is not going to be a head chopping block review out of the gate. Let's find the issues in the images and I'll be happy to expand on what I see or what I don't see. At the moment I see no main issues except maybe lens falloff at 18mm shifts but I think we can find a solution, sure a center filter would help a great deal. But honestly I'm Not going to focus on crosstalk unless it jumps out at us.
Btw bushes here have different saturation even from the same family type. We have received a lot of rain lately so things have greened up. So not very accurate to go by. I have several building shots in full sun that look good in regards to color saturation between the other shots. One other thing is I have to watch the light falloff on the outside images. They do need to be adjusted just like other CCD backs do. 100 percent is not always accurate.
Btw, when I bought my Alpa 40HR there wasn't a center filter option for it from Rodenstock. Did I miss something? Trust me, if there was stuff for that 40mm I'd have it - I've got it from the HPF rings, tilt adapter, Alpa hood etc but no mention of a center filter ...
What I meant with the comment is that you might get a different result with a different orientation of the sensor. I have no interest in chopping heads either, my interest is to thoroughly document how well this CMOS sensor behaves with the wide angle alternatives. I'm interested knowing when it performs well and when there may be issues.
I understand you're limited in testing abilities from the gear you have, it's okay. Do the tests you like.
Why I'm pushing this is because it's an extremely interesting alternative for view/tech camera users, a lot of folks wants live view badly. So bad that one might run to conclusion a bit too quickly. I don't want to scare people off, just make people be cautious. At some point a really thorough wide angle test would be nice, but that requires having lots of costly gear available which few have unfortunately. I've noticed a large variation on how picky people are about color and tonality issues so documenting exactly how the system performs would be helpful for people to make decision if the CMOS back is for them or not.
Doug's library test is good though, probably good enough for most people to make a decision. One thing missing in that however is the same stitch made with a vertical sensor too so one could see how it performs for vertical shots. Anyway, for those of you considering this back for wide angles do take a look at those files. Download the IQ260 32 HR shot and use as reference, and compare with the various IQ250 shots (HR40, HR32 and even SK35 is available, the SK35 shot is great to learn how to recognize crosstalk artifacts). Compare saturation, is colors more saturated closer to the center than farther to the sides? Look at the reference IQ260 shot and notice which colors that are the same around the ceiling, and then compare with the IQ250 shots and look for color variations. Colors that are the same in the IQ260 shot in various positions in the ceiling varies a bit on the IQ250. The variations are more severe farther out. Maybe the shift range you're interested in is okay.
Then consider that in landscape shots the effects will most likely be smaller than what you see in the library, as nature often has less saturated colors. One can also be of the opinion that colors accuracy and tonality is less important in nature as differences in light and moisture can get natural variations that look similar, and the viewer would not know how it looked there.
My guess is that most users will be happy with the HR40 performance. A bit fewer with the 32HR, but many still. Haven't seen any wider angle tests than those, except for the SK28 (which doesn't work at all of course). If you're not of the stitching kind a 40mm lens would be a bit long for the 44x33mm sensor, but possibly you would not need wider than 32mm. It's possible that the 28HR perform quite well too, as it could be more retrofocus than the 32HR.
There is a real possibility that quite a few users would be pleased with the performance of the CMOS on the Digaron-S 28, Digaron-W 32 and up. That opens up for a view/tech camera revolution. Thus it would be super-cool at some point get a thorough test of these lenses. I could do such a test of course, and I would combine very technical tests with real world testing to cater all tastes, but I'm unfortunately not in the position to come by gear for testing.
Oh, link to Doug's test: http://www.digitaltransitions.com/bl...camera-testing