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

[dougpeterson]

Would Upgrades be available from 280 to 380?

This is a "cross grade." Historically Phase One did not offer any official crossgrades, and this was met with derision by the market. They have listened to that feedback and are providing crossgrades to the IQ3 until the end of August. Contact your local dealer for pricing and particulars.

 

[dougpeterson]

What are the differences in functionality between the IQ1, IQ2, and IQ3 backs on the XF body?

Phase keeps saying Credo back will have the same functionality and support as IQ1 backs, which implies some reduced functionally. Would that reduced functionality extend beyond WiFi related features?

I'm happy with my IQ180 and am OK without WiFi, but I hope I can take advantage of all the other aspects of the new XF body.

Go to our IQ3 page. Select IQ1 vs IQ3 features.

 

[T.Dascalos]

There are three kinds of possible customers to any maker that makes a modular system...
1. Those that are approachιng the system as a complete offering.
2. Those that are interested to invest on the maker's camera body and (as a consequence) lenses.
3. Those that are interested to invest on the maker's digital (image area) offerings only and consider to adapt them on their existing cameras...

I believe that there is good information for 1&3 above... But none on 2... Soooo, Lets suppose that one wants to buy a Sinarback 86H and considers to adapt it on an XF body.... (Sinar makes adapter plates that mechanically are compatible with m645) ...can he do so? Will his back work? Will he be able to have multishot captures on an XF? ...or is H5X the only (6x4.5) platform in current production that he can use? (I've asked the same on another forum from yesterday, but no luck for an answer yet....)

 

[jerome_m]

Not interested (Re: Phase One News)

The new Phase One XF body appears to be a nice camera and a welcome upgrade on the old Mamiya-based bodies. However, as an Hasselblad H user, I don't see any particular feature that would compel me to change.

Is there any comparison of the XF camera with, say, the H5X feature by feature? All I could see from a quick read is that the XF can meter with the waist-level finder (the H5 cannot) and includes a built-in transmitter for Profoto strobes. And, of course, that it has a focal plane shutter, as the 645D had.

I may have missed a few points, though. Please correct me if I did. Is there a comparison list somewhere?

 

[rhern213]

Go to our IQ3 page. Select IQ1 vs IQ3 features.

It seems there are many features of the IQ3 that are software based, which we don't have in the IQ1. (Auto ISO, Exposure Zone, Clip Warning, etc..).

Are there plans for any of these features to be added to the IQ1 as future software upgrades?

 

[T.Dascalos]

It seems there are many features of the IQ3 that are software based, which we don't have in the IQ1. (Auto ISO, Exposure Zone, Clip Warning, etc..).

Are there plans for any of these features to be added to the IQ1 as future software upgrades?

It seems to me that P1's decision is one of "closing" the system (much like Hasselblad did in the past) although not to the same extend since "in company" backs are (to some extend) interchangeable. From that POV, I think that there will be a tendency to differentiate the features offered between different backs, so that there is "pressure" on customers to upgrade...

I believe that P-series backs have been left out of compatibility with the XF on purpose, so that third party backs (which would work on any body that a P-series back would work) would also be excluded.

IMO, that is a dangerous decision for P1... The market has shown in the past (as happened with Hasselblad) not to like closed systems. It seems that a good part of photographers, (especially those that are used to have the "freedom of choice" for the type of film they would use) don't like being "trapped" within a maker's choice future path for them.

 

[tjv]

Agreed, I think it's a strange decision to "lock out" the older P backs. Doesn't seem either logical or warrented to me, especially considering the open system rhetoric. It's the same mount, after all, as the IQ backs and they were still selling new not that long ago.

It seems to me that P1's decision is one of "closing" the system (much like Hasselblad did in the past) although not to the same extend since "in company" backs are (to some extend) interchangeable. From that POV, I think that there will be a tendency to differentiate the features offered between different backs, so that there is "pressure" on customers to upgrade...

I believe that P-series backs have been left out of compatibility with the XF on purpose, so that third party backs (which would work on any body that a P-series back would work) would also be excluded.

IMO, that is a dangerous decision for P1... The market has shown in the past (as happened with Hasselblad) not to like closed systems. It seems that a good part of photographers, (especially those that are used to have the "freedom of choice" for the type of film they would use) don't like being "trapped" within a maker's choice future path for them.

 

[kdphotography]

IQ1 series, I can believe that there are limitations on integration with the XF body that may be software based, and IQ1 users should/could possibly enjoy. For example, there were firmware update added features meant for IQ2 only, the same added features were not promised for the IQ1, but they worked the same for many IQ1 owners anyway. There just may be some minor hardware differences in the IQ1 and hence poses difficulties with uniformity of guaranteeing some of those features, hence no promises. (e.g., some IQ1 MFDBs needed minor hardware upgrades for USB3). We'll see. But I don't expect much more integration for my IQ180. Stellar AF performance and a capable body and I'm happy.

I can understand why P+ MFDBs are not brought into the XF fold. Other than sharing MFDB heritage, there was a major change in tech, both hardware and software, going from the P series to the IQ series---plain and simple. There was a lot of criticism leveled at Phase One to leave that old Mamiya body design behind, "give us a real modern body and start anew," yet when the new body arrives, Phase is caught in a catch-22 and criticized for not "holding onto the past" or basically what I see as restricting Phase One to merely offering yet another generational improvement to a very aged design Mamiya body, like a Phase DF II. No thanks.

And maybe that's what Phase needs to do, maintain the DF+ body line, maybe update the DF feature set for generational improvements and offer that body for its P+ backs.

ken

 

[jerome_m]

Schneider 35mm LS full-res sample files

These were shot with the IQ380, and that is not yet supported in Capture One 8.3 so we can't share the raw files. The sharpening on this TIFF may be a bit heavy handed for some, so shoot us an email and I'll be glad to send you the raws once there is a public version of C1 which can open them.

It seems that this lens has quite a bit a field curvature: the castle in the middle is sharp, but the houses and trees on the left or right borders less so and the tree leaves which are considerably closer from the camera are in focus.

 

[T.Dascalos]

Agreed, I think it's a strange decision to "lock out" the older P backs. Doesn't seem either logical or warrented to me, especially considering the open system rhetoric. It's the same mount, after all, as the IQ backs and they were still selling new not that long ago.

It seems that they excluded the P series only to "close the system" from third party backs. The thing is, that there are so many (successful) pros around using Phase back on Hasselblad H body, that they'll turn them against company choices... In addition, that way, they've also excluded the ones that are using multishot backs to enter the system... (since that means that one can't use the XF body)... Not very wise at all... It seems that H5X goes completely the other way around as to offer an "open" camera platform for any back...

OTOH Sinarbacks, (that are currently the standard for fine art multishot work) are left out of P1 support... It won't surprise me if Leica (the owner of Sinar) looks for a new MF platform as to both replace m645 incompatibility or to "bridge" the Sinar series with the S-series... Surely IMO, Leica is the firm to watch... They can either buy Hasselblad, or resurrect Contax (now that they offer the adapters), or make a new camera platform as to bridge the use of Sinarbacks with the S-system (with common lenses)... If they do... I can see P1 in very serious trouble indeed.

 

[Nik]

Doug, was the price for XF body only announced ? I can't find it.

 

[Mgreer316]

Doug, was the price for XF body only announced ? I can't find it.

Yep, it's a ridiculous (IMO) $8,000. I say that because the body alone costs more the the Pentax 645z with includes the same/similar 50MP Sony sensor in the IQ350. To get that from Phase you've gotta add another $30K+.

 

[Mgreer316]

I've read about the Profoto integration, but nothing about full TTL compatibility with the B1 or B2. Any word?

 

[dougpeterson]

Yep, it's a ridiculous (IMO) $8,000. I say that because the body alone costs more the the Pentax 645z with includes the same/similar 50MP Sony sensor in the IQ350. To get that from Phase you've gotta add another $30K+.

I don't expect many will be buying a body by itself. It is significantly less when bundled with a back, or when upgrading from a DF/DF+. Also you're significantly off on your pricing for a CMOS version.

An XF IQ150 kit with Schneider 80LS lens has a list price of $32,990. Alternatively the IQ140 kit with Schneider 80LS has a list price of $20,990. And upgrade pricing is available from nearly any previous medium format system.

Either way a P1 kit provides several major advantages over the 645Z:
- a line of 10 modern-design autofocus Schneider leaf shutter lenses with flash sync of 1/1600th*
- very fast, robust, and professional tethering
- support in Capture One including their world-class color profiles
- retina touch screen interface with the best set of image review tools on the market including focus mask, exposure warning, raw-file clipping indicator, zone exposure heat map, draggable guides, and toggle-able black and white review mode
- automatic perspective and keystone correction
- advanced body features such as the seismograph mode
- waist level viewfinder (including spot metering and autofocus)
- built-in wireless control, review, and editing (IQ2 and IQ3 only) with fast speed and native integration
- professional support with knowledgable dealers and options to purchase with a 5-year warranty that includes free loaner during any repairs/service.
- wide network of rental house, digital tech, and assistant availability and knowledge
- compatibility with view cameras and tech cameras

The 645Z also has some unique advantages like weather sealing. I'm happy to take an XF kit into light or moderate rain but I would not step under a water fall with it or take it into a hurricane. It also has multiple AF points, though they are very close to the center of the frame, limiting their practical utility. Each system has its pros and cons, and the price of entry for the 645Z is clearly a big pro for that system.

*The 240LS syncs at a "measly" 1/1000th.

 

[dougpeterson]

I've read about the Profoto integration, but nothing about full TTL compatibility with the B1 or B2. Any word?

No current TTL support. But P1 is very interested in feedback on what the most important features and functions are to its clients. So if this is at the top of your list make your voice heard!

 

[T.Dascalos]

Yep, it's a ridiculous (IMO) $8,000. I say that because the body alone costs more the the Pentax 645z with includes the same/similar 50MP Sony sensor in the IQ350. To get that from Phase you've gotta add another $30K+.

Yep... but You can't split the back to use on your view camera off the Pentax.... so you'll need another 10K for a CFV-50c... and then have two backs which is not convenient is it? ...is it? ...is it? :facesmack:

 

[Mgreer316]

No current TTL support. But P1 is very interested in feedback on what the most important features and functions are to its clients. So if this is at the top of your list make your voice heard!

Definitely. If they had that functionality then I would need to spend the time to meter stuff. What I like about how Profoto has implemented this is that you can shoot TLL, make adjustments, then lock those adjustment and shoot manual. Makes the process much faster.

 

[roanic]

I don't expect many will be buying a body by itself. It is significantly less when bundled with a back, or when upgrading from a DF/DF+. Also you're significantly off on your pricing for a CMOS version.

Is there an upgrade path from a DF body? I thought it was only from DF+?

I have an IQ260 with a DF body, and the XF definitely looks like an amazing body. But frankly, 8k for it just seems a bit ridiculous.

By curiosity, I read that the only differences between the IQ3 and IQ2 is the ability to share the battery -- is it really all? (i.e. will the firmware upgrade on an IQ2 bring the advanced camera menu, exposure zone tool, for example).

 

[T.Dascalos]

Is there an upgrade path from a DF body? I thought it was only from DF+?

I have an IQ260 with a DF body, and the XF definitely looks like an amazing body. But frankly, 8k for it just seems a bit ridiculous.

By curiosity, I read that the only differences between the IQ3 and IQ2 is the ability to share the battery -- is it really all? (i.e. will the firmware upgrade on an IQ2 bring the advanced camera menu, exposure zone tool, for example).

But having only one battery is really important.... if one fails you don't have to check twice!

 

[stephengilbert]

"Share the battery" is misleading. The camera and back use the same type of battery, and if the back's battery -- for example -- is low, the back can draw power from the camera's battery.

But the camera will not function with only one battery in place.