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

jerome_m

Member
Let me provide a use case, which will be a common scenario:

Background

I own a P40+ and 645DF. The back is fantastic. The body is poor. I upgraded the battery, and that solved many issues. However the focus capability is poor at best and I often have to turn off/on the body/back to get things working again. It can be unbelievably frustrating. In a landscape scenario I can imagine that this would not be too bad. However if you work with people, things can go south very very quickly.

(...)

I've been pushed into looking at the competition, by a business decision of Phase One. Crazy. I am now getting quotes for a Hasselblad H5D-50c and a Leica S (type 007).
I understand that you are using your particular case as an example to discuss Phase upgrade policies and sending out the message that -maybe- they should reconsider their lock-out of P-series users.

But if you can't upgrade your camera to the new XF, I don't quite understand the choice of H5D-50c or Leica S. Since you are happy with the P40+, wouldn't it be simpler and more economical to:
-get a 645DF+ while they are still available or
-keep your P40+, have the mount changed to H mount and get a H4x or H5x? (you'll still need to change your lenses, though)

There is another catch: if you want to use Capture One, then you must use a Phase back. Phase One is locking all other medium format backs from their software.

Last but not least, if you are not using Capture One, consider changing everything and only need a x1.3, 40 mpix back (as your P40+), there are plenty of really cheap options on the used market with that sensor. You could even get a Pentax 645D (same sensor...) and get pocket change for your present system. Or an H4D-40 for a little more if you need a central shutter.
 
M

mjr

Guest
I was in your position a few years back 6x6 with a Phase back, I hated the DF and used the Phase on an Alpa for a while but I wanted more flexibility and decided that I would buy something that worked right at that time rather than wait for the mythical body upgrade that had been rumoured even back then.

My thoughts are and were that the P+ body I had was designed and introduced probably 10 years ago, sensors may have been updated and changed but the architecture of the back didn't until the IQ series, I can see that building the IQ to be backward compatible to work on the DF was always going to be more reasonable than expecting a very old back design to work on future technology, obviously there is way more to a back and body working together than the way it mounts together.

My personal opinion is that it's not such a great shock that the P series won't work, I doubt very much it's a group of guys at Phase HQ sitting there saying "screw them" it's just it's a different piece of kit that works in a different way. I think it would be worth pricing out a IQ140 or something similar, I bet the upgrade from your P40+ won't be so painful although I can appreciate that having to consider it is a pain. I would also be happy personally to get 5 years out of any photographic equipment, even at £20k and it still having a trade in value but that's a personal thing.

I hope you get something together that works for you.

Mat
 

T.Dascalos

Not Available
The older backs were not meant to work with a digital camera so to speak, up until now back and camera were two separate entities that simply told each other when a shot was being taken.
What's wrong with that? Why MF cameras of which traditionaly the strong point was modularity and simplicity have to be turned to "larger image area DSLRs"? I don't remember anybody wanting his Hasselblad V to function as an EOS 650 or a Nikon F-801 back in the film days... Actually I doubt a Hasselblad V would be as successful as it was, if it did function like a high-tech 35mm film camera of the same days...
Additionally I believe that the MFDB market is smaller today than it was back at 2004/5 (when the first self contained 36/37x48/49 large sensors appeared) exactly because of the simplicity of the system... add to that the fact that backs where much more expensive in analogy a decade past than they are today and one may conclude that the majority of photographers want photography to be done ergonomically by the "old fashion" way....
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
in my experience with Phase, if you want to stay current, expect it to cost at least $10,000 per year on top of your initial investment. Think of it as a subscription plan. ....
Quotes like these are far and few in between. Dante needs an anchored thread where we can archive them. "Think of it as a subscription plan"---this is a gem. :ROTFL:

ken
 
What's wrong with that?
I wouldn't say there's anything wrong, just that there is only so much you can do by keeping the back and camera isolated from each other. Ideally Phase should have offered both backs and also integrated cameras for those who have no intention of using tech cams. As for backup bodies, it was only a justification for modularity because you could easily expect a Phase body to break, but I expect my 645Z to survive a nuclear war.

I also wouldn't say that the IQ/XF is simple by any means, it just has all of its features nested under a touch interface, so that you don't need a million buttons. Having used the 645Z for a while now I don't mind having physical switches for a lot of the settings though. Color me surprised if any modern high-end camera lacks a fundamental feature for the sake of simplicity.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
The P/P+ were not "locked out".

The communications protocol on the XF is entirely new. In other words the XF speaks an entirely new language. For the sake of conversation let's call the AFD/AFD2/AF/DF/DF+ language "Aramaic" and the language of the XF "Vorlon". (these are not the real names but they are easier for conversation).

New backs on older bodies
The IQ/IQ2 backs already speak Aramaic, so the effort it took to keep Aramaic in the IQ3 was reasonable. Therefore the IQ3 continues to work on the DF and DF+.

Old backs on newer bodies
The P+ was built on the P platform which was developed in 2004. It was built when Aramaic was one of the main camera languages (the others being the Hassy H and the Contax). To get a P+ to work on an XF you'd need either the XF to learn Aramaic or the P+ to learn Vorlon.

In a way that the metaphor doesn't quite convey, the "language" of the system is the foundation of the camera itself. To support the P+ on the XF the dev team at Phase One would have done the project twice, and then would have had to maintain both branches indefinitely. I'm sure there would be some redundancy, but there would also be inefficiencies since it's very hard for them to make changes in the P+ firmware at this point, so any snags would have to be fixed on the body side, not the back side.

For third party companies to make their legacy/current/future backs compatible with the XF they would also need to teach it Vorlon. Given the position Sinar is in right now I do not suspect they will. Given Hasselblad's focus on their own H platform I do not suspect they will either.

P1 continues to make backs for the Hassy V, Hassy H, Mamiya DF/DF+ and new XF platforms. The IQ380 has a new sensor which makes it fundamentally different than the IQ280 regardless of platform. Therefore it is available on the H and V. The IQ360 and IQ350 are identical to their predecessors except for the circuitry required for power-sharing with an XF. So it would be disingenuous to slap an IQ3 tag on the 50mp and 60mp when used on an H or V platform.
 

Ken_R

New member
I normally lurk in the background on this forum, but the release of the XF and accompanying conversation has driven me to add my opinion to this thread.

Let me provide a use case, which will be a common scenario:

Background

I own a P40+ and 645DF. The back is fantastic. The body is poor. I upgraded the battery, and that solved many issues. However the focus capability is poor at best and I often have to turn off/on the body/back to get things working again. It can be unbelievably frustrating. In a landscape scenario I can imagine that this would not be too bad. However if you work with people, things can go south very very quickly.

I have made an overall investment of £20,000.

I have waited patiently for a new body since 2010. I am perfectly happy with the P40+.

Upgrade

I am now in a situation where I cannot upgrade just the 645DF and Phase are retiring the DF+. I have been waiting for several years having invested in what I thought was a MODULAR camera system.

So ok, lets consider upgrading the body and back. I contacted a dealer and have been told the price to upgrade to an IQ350 / XF is £20,000 (ex taxes).

Twenty. Thousand. Pounds

In US$ thats more than $30,000 (ex taxes). And that is only if I trade in my perfectly good P40+ / poor 645DF.

I am put in this situation because Phase have cut off an upgrade for the P/P+ owners. I must be amongst many hundreds of photogs who have spent some time considering this, and have only one conclusion. That this is a deliberate business tactic by Phase One and not a technological issue. I mean come on. Get real Phase One. We can read between the lines on this one. Show us the technical reason that you cannot make the body / P/P+ backs work.

Conclusions

This is where Phase One are making a mistake. I, amongst many hundreds of P/P+ users, now know where we stand. To stay on the Phase One roadmap, long term, will cost at least £20k. I've been pushed into looking at the competition, by a business decision of Phase One. Crazy. I am now getting quotes for a Hasselblad H5D-50c and a Leica S (type 007). Remember. If I could buy a Phase One XF for my P40+, I would do it, immediately. However Phase One have made this not possible.

I'm now in a position where changing platform is back on the agenda. It really is. I cannot for the life of me work out why they would do this.

Feedback

So if any dealers / Phase One employees are reading:

1. Not allowing P/P+ owners to upgrade their bodies is creating a scenario where the competition comes back into play.
2. To avoid an equivalent Hasselblad "closed platform" PR disaster, you guys need to fully explain why the P/P+ backs won't work.
3. You should have made the XF work with P/P+ backs, but with very limited functionality. People would get that. They would buy the body and work with it. Phase would keep people invested in their system and those people would eventually be driven to upgrade. However at a pace that didn't ostracise them.

Disclaimer

I am not a "hater" or "troll". I am someone who is working logically through the outcomes of the Phase One XF announcement. I am describing a real life scenario that I'm sure is common amongst the photog community.
I think a used IQ140 and New XF camera is gonna cost you much less than £20k and that is not counting what you can get for your P40+ and DF.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I am not a "hater" or "troll". I am someone who is working logically through the outcomes of the Phase One XF announcement. I am describing a real life scenario that I'm sure is common amongst the photog community.
I guess what I am saying is that through the release of their XF body, Phase One have created a scenario where a host of their users (P/P+ owners) now have to reconsider their backs too. This raises the possibility of some of these people moving to the competition during this process.

I think you're being very fair. It's possible that you're being bundled together with other posters.

All you're saying is that if the XF had been built with support for the P+ language that it would have been an easy choice for you to buy it. But since it is not supported your choices are inherently more expensive and therefore you should also look at the competitive options.

I hope that you find an option that works well for you within your budget. Hopefully (for us) it is a Team P1 kit.

The IQ140 may share a sensor with the P40+ but it is a huge upgrade in many other ways. As would be an IQ160 or IQ150. All should be less than the IQ350 upgrade you cited.

Let us know how your search and evaluation goes, especially as regards comparisons to competitive systems.

Best wishes, and I hope P1 is able to keep you as a customer at the end of this process.
 

Ken_R

New member
I think you understand different what I'm saying Ken... Every photographer would like compatibility with everything... Now we can't have that with lenses (if one uses mamiya for instance he can't use a Contax lens) as mounts differ, but traditionally, from the film days one could use whatever film he would like on his body... this lasted with MFDBs too until Hasselblad decided to "close" the H system, but they always offered a body (H2F, H4X, now H5X) that was open to all other backs as a base platform... That was true for Phase one too up until recently and now changes.... One that uses third party back, or sometimes uses film or uses multishot "true colour" backs, he can't use the XF as a platform... So the only alternative (if he wants new) is to buy an H5X...

Now, because Hasselblad has financial problems, one may be affraid to invest on Hasselblad... So there is a "pressure" (done on purpose) from Phase One as for one to change his back too... It would be too easy for them as to retain P backs compatibility, but if they would, it would also allow older backs from Sinar & hasselblad/imacon CF to work on XF... So what they do (or plan to achieve), is 1. To put "pressure" in the market for people to change their older backs (epecially those people that use discontinued camera platforms... even Mamyia AFD) for a modern P1 back and 2. To "trap" IQ3 back users (much like Hasselblad did in the past) as to use an XF body... Now, that is what I call "closing the system" and IMO, as it happened with Hasselblad, it is a very risky thing to do because photographers (usually) want their freedom and it can turn completely to the opposite direction...

I am using Contax myself and 2 MFDBs (both multishot)... and although I have 3 bodies in perfect working order (and another listed for sale), it is reasonable to look for an alive system as a platform (both my backs have interchangeable mounting plates), I can't just change platform to ΧF though, because if I do I will also have to change the backs for phase one which is out of the question since I can't decrease the quality or detail that multishot provides.... Our point of view is different... see?
Dude which multi-shot backs are you talking about? Sinar multishot backs? They don't even have a rear lcd. The long discontinued Imacon multi-shot backs? I am sure there are very few left out there in service. (not counting the newer Hasselblad multi-shot backs because they were not made in other than H mount).

You are making all this noise because incompatibility with one of those backs? Really? :loco:

It's 2015...

Guess you got really mad when firewire 800 came out and you could no longer use the FW400 cables...well there are adapters
 

6x6

Member
New backs on older bodies
The IQ/IQ2 backs already speak Aramaic, so the effort it took to keep Aramaic in the IQ3 was reasonable. Therefore the IQ3 continues to work on the DF and DF+.
@dougpeterson - to continue your analogy how come the IQ1 can already speak Vorlon? When they were released in 2011. The IQ1 backs would need a software / firmware update to work with the XF body (maybe this is the case, I don't know). If they don't need an update, then it must just be electrical signals.

Something is not quite right here. Sorry. It's probably me! However something doesn't add up.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
The XF looks excellent, so I'm very excited seeing the next generation, and they've obviously done some great work, especially for a small team.

[...]

Still, for me neither the DF nor DF+ were helpful or intuitive tools, so it's hard to be positive about throwing an additional $8000 at this. In other words, it's tempting to just forget it. As I do Landscape Photography I've been using the Cambo with the IQ260 and just leaving the DF+ and Phase lenses at home. The XF makes me want to give it another shot, thus my dilemma.
The only way to decide if this is a good direction is to put your hands on one and evaluate the pros/cons yourself. To some extent digital back image quality can be evaluated remotely (e.g. via raw files and making prints) but evaluating this new body (ergonomics, autofocus speed/precision, user interface, build quality) really need to be evaluated "in hand". That's why we planned XF Launch Events in LA, NYC, Houston, Dallas, Boston, Philly, Chicago, D.C., San Fran, Miami, Denver, Birmingham. We hope to see you at the one in Dallas, and I hope you'll share your experience from this event on the forum.

Either way, you're about to get several new, and IMO, very useful features for the IQ260 via free firmware update. :clap:
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
@dougpeterson - to continue your analogy how come the IQ1 and IQ2 backs speak both Aramaic and Vorlon? How come you can put a 2011 IQ1 back on the XF, before Vorlon was even created.

Something is not quite right here. Sorry.
You can physically mount an IQ1 on an XF today, but without a firmware update they do not talk and you cannot take a picture.

A firmware update for the IQ2/IQ1 will come first. Betas are currently in testing. A firmware update for the credo will come a bit later.
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
Continuing with the language metaphor...

My Phase One backs don't have to talk to the cameras I use them on at all.

IQ250, IQ180, P45+ Achromatic.

All work perfectly fine with my ALPA's and my CAPCam.

Why can the XF not offer a "dumb back" mode where there is no communication between the camera and the back whatsoever? Just connect a sync cable between the camera and the back.

Et voila. Problem solved.

In fact. Question...

Does the XF fire its shutter without a back connected?
 

6x6

Member
You can physically mount them, but without the firmware update they do not talk and you cannot take a picture.
Thank you for clearing that up for me. I haven't been following the technical side of things. However my point still stands about the P/P+ owners. I do think forcing them to upgrade the back to get hold of the XF is a mistake. It will cause photog's to evaluate the whole system. Some will stay, but Phase One will loose customers because of it. Unfortunate, but a real possibility. Imagine a P65+ owner who has maybe 3-4 years of use out of their back. They have to upgrade their back, when they have no need / desire to do so. It's unnecessary cost in an already tight margin market.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Does the XF fire its shutter without a back connected?
It does not.

To work well in an SLR environment you need to provide a wakeup signal. Otherwise you'd need to use Zero Latency in which case shooting speed, time-to-screen, ISO performance, and battery life all drop considerably. Not a good solution for most applications that the XF is designed for.

To provide a wakeup signal you need proper two-way communication on camera readiness, back readiness, dark frame timing, shutter movement, intended shutter speed etc. See previous post about communication.

I don't expect to be around the forums much the next few days as we're prepping for our NYC XF Event. Hope to see some of you there.
 

T.Dascalos

Not Available
I wouldn't say there's anything wrong, just that there is only so much you can do by keeping the back and camera isolated from each other. Ideally Phase should have offered both backs and also integrated cameras for those who have no intention of using tech cams. As for backup bodies, it was only a justification for modularity because you could easily expect a Phase body to break, but I expect my 645Z to survive a nuclear war.

I also wouldn't say that the IQ/XF is simple by any means, it just has all of its features nested under a touch interface, so that you don't need a million buttons. Having used the 645Z for a while now I don't mind having physical switches for a lot of the settings though. Color me surprised if any modern high-end camera lacks a fundamental feature for the sake of simplicity.
IMO, if Contax 645 was still around and if only its AF accuracy/speed & battery life had been upgraded, it would be by far the most popular camera among MF users... and its a 22 years old design... The success/popularity of Leica S also proves that the vast majority of hi-end users are not attracted by "advanced specification" similar to DSLRs...
I believe that if there was a vote among MF users on the matter, most would say that more complex or more specified than Contax or Leica is too much...

I also believe that the camera/back integration peel, is an invention of the makers (starting with Hasselblad H3) that never convinced photographers... Lets not forget that Hassy changed owners 7 times because of the low acceptance of the H-system. (the reason why I also believe that the XF/IQ3 project will not be appreciated by many photographers).....
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
It does not.

To work well in an SLR environment you need to provide a wakeup signal. Otherwise you'd need to use Zero Latency in which case shooting speed, time-to-screen, ISO performance, and battery life all drop considerably. Not a good solution for most applications that the XF is designed for.

To provide a wakeup signal you need proper two-way communication on camera readiness, back readiness, dark frame timing, shutter movement, intended shutter speed etc. See previous post about communication.

I don't expect to be around the forums much the next few days as we're prepping for our NYC XF Event. Hope to see some of you there.
ALPA make a perfectly decent wake up cable - I believe you actually sell it with the A-series, no? This isn't rocket science.

People buying these things are not stupid. They would totally understand that some camera functionality would not be available when shooting in dumb-back mode.

Even a zero latency approach would - I am sure - be perfectly acceptable to those who want to use their P+ backs on the XF. It's better than locking them out completely.

XF: Do you speak Vorlon?
Back: Hmpfheydnh
XF [to self]: Hmm. Oh well. No problem. I'll switch to deaf and dumb back mode.

(With regards an "SLR environment", my backs also work just fine on my Fuji GX680. Again. No direct communication available between camera and back required).

This is not a technology problem.

This is a corporate decision made for marketing purposes. Pure and simple. This camera has been in development for years. There really is no excuse for dumping customers with legacy backs who been eagerly awaiting this new camera.

Shame I won't be able to use my Achromatic+ on the XF - it would have been great. Imagine how cool it would have been to have an automatic IR focus adjustment option on the XF? Focus normally using your eyes, then when taking the shot, automatically adjust focus to account for the fact you're shooting IR.

(And no - I won't consider downgrading my Achromatic+ to a 260 Achromatic.)
 

T.Dascalos

Not Available
Dude which multi-shot backs are you talking about? Sinar multishot backs? They don't even have a rear lcd. The long discontinued Imacon multi-shot backs? I am sure there are very few left out there in service. (not counting the newer Hasselblad multi-shot backs because they were not made in other than H mount).

You are making all this noise because incompatibility with one of those backs? Really? :loco:

It's 2015...

Guess you got really mad when firewire 800 came out and you could no longer use the FW400 cables...well there are adapters
Dude, I use a Hasselblad CF-39MS (4X only) and a Sinarback 54H FW (4x or 16x)... Both will make any single shot back pale on a still... Some of us choose the Sun when it comes to night and day difference... :p
 

Mgreer316

Member
I guess we'd all love it for Phase One to come along and say listen folks, our previous DF/DF+ bodies had some flaws and didn't integrate well with your digital backs. I'll tell you what, we'll let you exchange your IQ1/IQ2 series backs and DF/DF+ cameras for the new cameras for, oh say, free or maybe $500 or $1k or $3k. Wouldn't that be nice.
Don't go to the extremes Graham. I'm not talking about upgrading for $5. I'm also restricting my issue to upgrading of the camera body, not the backs. The DF is flawed. It simply does not work right for many people. The XF is essentially a fix for the DF IMO. Therefore, it's pricing and upgrade path should reflect that. IOW, from my perspective the XF is a special case due to the issues with the DF. And yes, many a company have given special provision to their clients when those clients have suffered through the use of inferior product.


Well, it isn't going to happen. Not only that but I challenge anyone to come up with any other commercial situation where this type of situation has come up? It doesn't happen.

I don't mean to sound like an apologist for Phase One but as someone in the commercial field generally I can tell you that organizations just don't give away new hardware technology for free. Anyone who says that they do are just paying for it in another way such as through paid maintenance/support programmes.
Also, I have to add, we're dealing with a luxury/premium brand. A get things from Cadillac, Jaguar, etc. that I don't get from Chevrolet. IOW, the expectations are MUCH higher when you're shelling out much more money. Nobody expects Phase to give stuff away. But I do expect them to recognize when their product hasn't performed to a level that it's priced at and to rectify the situation as soon as they can with reasonable solutions. IMO, it's unreasonable to charge your current users an additional $6k to get a workable camera body so they can reliably use the extremely expensive back they invested in. That's all I'm saying. Value your current customers more than that. Keep the body at $8k for new customers, but allow the current DF users a significant credit to upgrade as recognition of the DF ills.
 

jagsiva

Active member
Windows 8 did not really cut it for most, here comes Windows 10 as a free upgrade for those users....so it does happen. Not suggesting that P1 should be handing out free cameras, but I agree that there should be some accounting for having a dud for so long.

http://www.howtogeek.com/218880/windows-10-is-almost-here-heres-what-you-need-to-know/

Also, based on what has been written here, it sounds like the P+ backs have a physical limitation on the connecting hardware. Surely, this could have been addressed with some kind of adapter, after all P1 has been doing this for all manufacturer's backs for eons.
 
Top