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 News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
wow no more support for the contax? :(
From our Phase One IQ3 article...

Wait, Where’s Contax?
Digital Transitions LOVES the Contax body. It had great German glass, an optional waist level viewfinder which provides metering, simple intuitive operation, super durable mechanics, minimalist design, and uses a compact, inexpensive battery. The newly released Phase One XF body ticks off literally every one of those boxes while adding things the Contax never had, like a sync speed of 1/1600th.

Still, there is something special about the Contax system; if nothing else, the nostalgia factor can’t be beat. Unfortunately it has been years since this body was made new, and supplies of used bodies and parts/service/repair are waning. As of today Phase One will no longer make Contax mount digital backs. Here at Digital Transitions we’re so sad about this that we’re throwing a wake for the end of the era of Digital Contax. Shoot us a tweet if you’d like your words of remembrance to be read there.

Phase One will continue to provide service and support for the Contax backs it has sold for many years to come. As an indication of how seriously Phase One takes support of discontinued products look no further than the Phase One FX+ scan back, which was only end-of-life’d last year, more than15 years after it’s initial release.

Digital Transitions still has a few more NEW Contax digital backs, the last that will ever be made. We expect to sell through this supply within two months (maybe faster when word gets out) so contact us today if you’re interested in purchasing or demoing a Contax digital back.

By the way, if you love the Contax 80mm f/2 lens (and who didn’t??), stay tuned for our article titled “Big Buttery Bokeh on the XF: the Contax 80/2, Zeiss 110/2, Schneider 110/2.8, Schneider 130/2.1, and Mamiya 80/1.9” in which we mount a Contax 80/2 to the XF with great results.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Hi Doug
Do you have to shoot sensor+ for long exposures are can you shoot at full resolution.
Long Exposure Mode and Sensor+ mode are independent functions. You can use either, both, or neither for any given frame.

So yes, you can shoot long exposures at full resolution.

How do the cmos 50 megapixel at 100 and 3200 iso compare with the IQ380 at iso 200 and 3200 at long exposures.
I will have raws to post of the IQ380 Long Exposure soon. It's quite good.

I would not recommend ISO3200 for long exposures on the IQ380.

How does the IQ380 compare to the 350 if you use a lot of shift on say the Rodie 32 and 40.
The IQ250 and IQ350 will perform the same as each other.
The IQ380 and IQ280 will perform the same as each other.

All four work well with the Rodenstock wides. Please see our Tech Cam Test.

Is the screen improved from the previous (already good) IQ2 series?
Same LCD Screen. Several new features on the screen, and tighter integration of that screen with the screen on the XF body.
 

hcubell

Well-known member
To me it looks like an extension of the IQ backs, mixed with a bit of RZ and Contax - two of my favorite cameras.

Of course everyone is welcome to their own opinion about aesthetics.





Functionality of the interface, while still subjective, is perhaps a bit less abstract. If you like the IQ interface (simple Scandanavian design, customizable, touch screen and button hybrid) then you'll love the interface of the XF. Here it feels like a very natural extension of the IQ.
Great information, Doug. One area of concern is sheer physical mass of the XF with a back mounted. It appears to be built like a tank, but does it feel like a tank? In terms of the feel of the XF in hand, how does it compare with an H or a Leica S? What are the comparative weights? This is less of an issue in the studio, but it is for carrying it around in a backpack.
Thanks.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Great information, Doug. One area of concern is sheer physical mass of the XF with a back mounted. It appears to be built like a tank, but does it feel like a tank? In terms of the feel of the XF in hand, how does it compare with an H or a Leica S? What are the comparative weights? This is less of an issue in the studio, but it is for carrying it around in a backpack.
Thanks.
XF with standard viewfinder: 1390 grams
XF with WLF: 1020 grams
IQ3 Digital Back: 695 grams

Like the IQ it is nearly all metal and very well built. Hand feel, IMO, is very good and well balanced, the new grip is a complete rethink from the shallow style used on the DF/DF+. But of course this is subjective, so join us at one of our DT XF Events in LA, New York, Chicago, DC, Boston, Miami, Houston, Dallas, Denver, Philly, San Francisco, and Birmingham and try one out.
 

Mgreer316

Member
If the XF doesn't currently support the Credo, I hope this us to long lived. I've been waiting and waiting for an upgraded (if I'm more harsh, "a reliable") body and the XF looks like what I've been waiting for. If I won't ever be able to use it that would completely suck.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Doug,
I have a 120mm Phase macro lens; any ideas how much better the new 120mm Macro lens may be in comparison?
The 120LS and 120D are the same lens, but with a refined chassis and a leaf shutter. It provides the same quality but with faster flash sync speed (1/1600 vs 1/125).

In the case of the 35LS and the 35D the new 35LS is a completely new design and offers a large improvement to sharpness and quality.
 

miska

Member
I am intrigued by the new CMOS AF sensor.
Is this an imaging sensor doing contrast detection ? Or something even smarter, like the Canon Hybrid AF (some pixels are phase sensors, some do contrast detection) ?
Any ideas about the "potential" of this AF system ? I would expect something like face detection (or probably even "focus on the closest eye", using "eye-detection"). I'm sure that could be really cool for fashion shooters, especially if P1 can introduce a face autofocus-on-the-eye on a moving subject.
But perhaps it's something completely different ?
 

f8orbust

Active member
Obviously a lot to like, but a few stand out issues for me are:

1. A WLF but you can’t rotate the back. Doh. But, who knows, maybe a rotating back is on the drawing board in the years ahead.

2. No Contax mount - kinda understand that but so many of those cameras and great glass out there.

3. No P+ support on the XF - that’s a biggie. Obviously it would have been a PITA to offer full support, but you would think P1 could have engineered a simple ‘trigger’ signal.

4. No vertical grip.

5. Their line up is now looking as muddled as GMs before the crash of ’08/'09. So (deep breath) we have the IQ140, IQ150, IQ160, IQ180, IQ250, IQ260, IQ280, IQ350, IQ360, and IQ380 ... with the same chip between the 150, 250 and 350, the same chip between the 160, 260 and 360, and the same chip between the 180 and 280.

6. CCD not CMOS. Makes you wonder if its economically viable to get a custom 80MP CMOS chip fabricated, or if they’ll just piggy back on whatever Sony produces for the broader market. Which, sadly, means chips that primarily perform well on DSLRs.

5. Pricing. I know, I know it’s on old rant. Still, the price per pixel on a P1 back is now only 1/6th the price it was 17 years ago. By comparison the price per pixel on a ’35mm’ DSLR is 1/30th the price. That’s what a lack of competition gets you.

Jim
 

Mgreer316

Member
Jim, I want to piggyback on to #5. IMO and from my perspective, there's "premium" and there's "ridiculous". I think Phase pricing borders on ridiculous. If the XF's focusing system pans out, I will upgrade my DF body. But $8000 for the body is criminal. We can't compare to DSLRs. I get that (but the Canon 5Ds sure us going to make things interesting). But the Pentax 645z is a different story. At roughly $8k, a similarly equipped Phase system with essentially the same sensor is slightly over $40k. If they continue to get it, more powerful to 'em. I'd do the same thing. But it just seems to me that at some point they'd her more price competitive.

Going back to the DSLR comparison, at least medium format digital backs are superior to what DSLR sensors can capture. How significant and noticeable that is is debatable. But IMO, it can't be debated that medium format bodies have been VASTLY inferior to DSLR bodies. I want to evaluate things further but I think that's probably still the case with the XF in comparison to something like a Nikon D4 or even lower level DSLRs like the D750 or equivalent Canon models. Yet the XF is still priced much much higher.

Phase, your digital backs are best in class. So I get their pricing. But your camera bodies aren't even close. I just wish you'd price them more consistently with their capabilities.
 

Egor

Member
1. Upgrade Path$? Specifically DF+ to XF if DF+ less than 6months old?
2. Seriously: less than 24hours notice to stop what we are doing and get down to LA to see this stuff (and you and Lance, of course ;) ) ...if I had known, woulda coulda...

Congrats on what looks like an excellent new camera body! You have a winner there and will try and make it down.
 
Last edited:
Please quantify and clarify.
I'd like to know too. Seeing as this looks very much like a regular sensor, it probably uses contrast-detect instead of phase-detect, similar to that in the A7R, difference being that regular CDAF has to use the same sensor to both focus and shoot, but this one is full-time AF. Contrast-detect AF is definitely much more accurate than regular methods, but as everyone knows it tends to be slower, which is why many cameras also offer on-sensor phase detect AF now, but then again, this one is full-time duty. Just speculating.
 

Lobalobo

Member
6. CCD not CMOS. Makes you wonder if its economically viable to get a custom 80MP CMOS chip fabricated, or if they’ll just piggy back on whatever Sony produces for the broader market. Which, sadly, means chips that primarily perform well on DSLRs.

Jim
It's interesting, though, isn't it, that Phase One just partnered with Alpa (albeit on kits that don't include the option for movements)? The partnership does suggest plans for new backs that work well with a technical camera, at least down the road, or why bother with Alpa so soon before announcing a new DSLR system. Absent movements, there may be little point in using a technical camera instead of a high-end DSLR like the new XF (or Hasselblad X). Perhaps the large format lenses are enough better to justify the tech camera even shooting flat-planed, but I wonder. (Still shooting 4x5 film, myself, but hope springs eternal that I'll win the lottery, or otherwise get lucky, and buy one of these systems.)
 
It's interesting, though, isn't it, that Phase One just partnered with Alpa (albeit on kits that don't include the option for movements)? The partnership does suggest plans for new backs that work well with a technical camera, at least down the road, or why bother with Alpa so soon before announcing a new DSLR system. Absent movements, there may be little point in using a technical camera instead of a high-end DSLR like the new XF (or Hasselblad X).
A fully integrated tech camera with digital movements and automatic lenses... that'd be a thing of beauty. The lack of automation is always going to be a hindrance, and the only way to get any useful amount of automation is to produce a sensor/body/lens combination that all "talk" to each other, but with three different companies making each component, it's no doubt hard to organize such a movement.

Perhaps the large format lenses are enough better to justify the tech camera even shooting flat-planed, but I wonder. (Still shooting 4x5 film, myself, but hope springs eternal that I'll win the lottery, or otherwise get lucky, and buy one of these systems.)
What I'd do for a Rodie to make an SLR lens, at least some sort of tilt-shift.
 
Top