guys - cool down - and take some pix!
Opinions don't count - images do!
guys - cool down - and take some pix!
Opinions don't count - images do!
1 Member(s) liked this post
After reading through the thread, what stands out and to me is the single greatest issue, is that somehow the OP had an opinion or understanding that LiveView on the 360 (CCD) back would work outdoors, which is tragic. If Phase One has any issues to address, it might be that the marketing to the general public has been very vague on Liveview with a CCD back. My dealer is also CI and with my first experience with Live View on the IQ160 (which is really no difference than what you would get on a IQ260 or 360), the short comings were made very clear to me and I came away with a understanding of what the limitations would be to using Liveview outdoors. It's most unfortunate that this did not get clearly stated to Lars.
What Lars experienced, is classic blooming, which in bright daylight can create the effects that he experienced. The first time I tried it on my 260, I was also a bit concerned, as my screen, went bright pink, purple then green. And if you do anything to the camera, touch the back, or lens, etc, the entire process is started all over again. Live view on a CCD, in even the outdoor light that has been shown in the post, would be impossible without a huge amount of ND, ND 8 more than likely. But even with this amount of ND, the blooming still occurs whenever you do anything, zoom in, out, move around the screen, etc. And more importantly, leaving Liveview on for an extended period of time, does cause the back to get hot, and possibly overheat. If you are using this for the first time, in outdoor light, I can see that might have been going through Lar's mind. Again can't fix that now, but in general, across the board, Phase One has tended to imply that Live View on a CCD back is "usable" in outdoor light. So a lot of people, myself included, incur this to mean LiveView in general, i.e. the LiveView from a CMOS DSLR, and attempt to use it the same way, which it cannot be.
As of the files, and getting the best out of them, I am still a bit confused on the raw converter being used, if it's C1 and the files don't appear normal, I would be concerned, but it's a raw converter that is not written by Phase One, then I really can't see that being the problem of Phase One. Phase One does include Capture One DB with all their products, for free and if you want the best out of the files, then you really need to use C1. To Phase One's credit, they have continued to improve the processing on not just the new backs, but even the older backs, like the P45+. The quality of the raw conversion on my older P45+ files dating back to 2008-2010, have a whole new life to them due to C1 9.1.1. Phase One created the back, and they know what is going on behind the scenes with the raw data, I would trust them, just like the best conversions from a Hasselblad back will come from Phocus.
As a Phase One user since 2008, I realize that their products are not like Nikon or Canon or Sony, and there is a lot more individuality and possible knowledge needed to use them. It's always best to work with a dealer, at least to get your feet wet and until you pick up a good rhythm to the workflow, and I hope that in the future Lars can find another dealer to work with to see if he can have a better experience the 2nd time around if he so chooses.
I'm sorry you had a bad first experience with medium format.
Live view and high (even mid) ISO both are very mediocre on a CCD back. Since they are still very expensive it's understandable to assume or think otherwise. In the same way you might be surprised that my girlfriend and I paid $1600/month for a 240 square foot apartment (for metric readers that converts to "very very small") in Manhattan which didn't come with an actual fridge (just w mini fridge). A full sized fridge is a very very useful ammenity and it's VERY reasonable to expect that such an expensive (relative to the vast majority of apartments in the world) apartment would come with one. But the attraction/magic of a Manhattan apartment is not the fridge (location, location, location). Likewise the draw of a 60mp CCD Phase One back is not the live view or high (even mid) ISO. If you know this, it doesn't bother you (much). If you don't it's almost like a slap in the face.
Like a small Manhattan apartment a CCD back will be loved by many, but definitely isn't for everyone, neither is medium format.
Re stability/reliability - **** luck to have one die on you in a short sample period. They aren't free of quirks on occasion, but needless to say yours is not the typical experience.
If you'd ever like to try medium format again I'd suggest a CMOS back like the IQ3 100mp sounds like a better fit for your needs and expectations. I'd encourage you not to draw overly broad conclusions from your negative first experience; medium format digital can be magic.
Thanks for chiming in. What I have asked myself was if Lars simply had an overheating issue. Being a long time CMOS user I have really appreciated live view as a general solution to all viewing problems. If you come from large format format photography, I would expect that you either use a sliding back or live view. If live view is halfway implemented, I can see that you will not be very happy.
What I would consider that LV may overheat a CCD back. The one I have I never used with LV, because I never shoot tethered. But I find LV absolutely essential when shooting on tripod. So, if Lars expected LV to work as on a CMOS device it may be that it was overheated. That may also cause excessive noise.
Modern CMOS devices (with column raw converters) have very low readout noise, so you can pull an incredible detail out of the shadows. CCD-s are quite noisy. So, if you shoot intermediate ISO, protect highlights and use a raw conversion without heavy noise suppression you may be confronted with a reality you don't like. Seems that it may be what Lars has been observing.
A high quality raw image should not be in need of a specific raw converter to produce first class images. To put i plainly, I have not met any photographer in person who uses Capture One. I now a photographer in person who did use Capture One. So many photographers produce great images using other tools. That is not saying that C1 is not a great tool. But, the approach that you need to use Capture One for Phase One, Phocus for Hasselblad and Lightroom for Leica is somewhat odd. I am a strong believer that:
- Photographers should be able to choose the tools of their liking
- Photographers should own their images
- Personally, I also object to propriatorey raw formats, although I am fully aware that opinion is not shared by many
My guess is that with CMOS things are getting a bit more mainstream. Raw conversion is on sensor, as close to the source as possible. The signals coming of the sensor are bits and not voltages. Modern CMOS sensors can handle high readout rates without generating excessive heat, although increase of thermal noise have been observed on cameras like the A7rII. In essential, I would expect modern CMOS based MFD to deliver similar image quality, per square millimetre as any modern CMOS sensor using column ADCs (*)
(*) Most modern CMOS devices use on chip Column ADCs. That means that there is an ADC for each column of pixels. That ADC would be a simple but accurate ram type ADC. A 6000x4000 pixel CMOS sensor would have 6000 ADCs working in parallell, so they can have long conversion times. Low readout noise is a typical feature of column ADCs. Some cameras like Nikon D5 and Canon 1Dx don't use column ADCs, but they also give up dynamic range. Latest generation Canon sensors (D80) seem to have column converters, too.
I note that no one has commented yet on which brand of tripod Lars might have been using.
This ought to be worth a few posts, don't you think?
5 Member(s) liked this post
Thanks for making that clear. I don't think Lars needs to go to 100 MP CMOS, 50 MP CMOS delivers the same benefits but without the extra sensor surface and resolution.
As a physicist, sort of, I am not a believer of magic, so I don't believe MFD can deliver on that. But I do believe they can deliver on things measurable if they are made in state of the art technology.
I'll just say that I love my Credo 60 and use it exclusively on a Linhof Techno. Amazing piece of gear. Not perfect, but what is? Never one single issue or hickup in the field or otherwise. A positive comment to help offset the negativity!
1 Member(s) liked this post
[QUOTE=Guy Mancuso;689081 Final statement I left MF because I had too , I have had a wife with 3 different cancers over the last 6 years. This was not by choice to sell it all but I feel extremely dropped out from the folks that shared my passion for it. Like I said are you dead or alive Guy and one reason I did not go to this particular venue. This is not about the members here but the industry which I totally supported .[/QUOTE]
I realize that I'm a new member here and you don't really know me from a hole in the wall, but I just wanted to mention that for whatever it's worth, my thoughts are with you and your wife. I've lost a few family members to cancer and I know the process that the family goes through. It's all consuming, very rough and it's not something I would wish on anyone.
I hope that things have/will work out for you, your wife and your family.
2 Member(s) thanked for this post6 Member(s) liked this post
With all due respect, the fault of the ability of non-manufacturer raw converters not producing images of the same quality as the manufacturer's raw converter is with that software vendor, not Phase One. It has been stated time and time again by Phase One themselves that they consider the imaging pipeline to be a combination of the MFDB AND Capture One - I've had Lars Noorgard say it to my face, and to participants at the IQ3 100 launch that the only way to assess the true quality of Phase One files is via that combination. He was very frustrated by the adverse feedback feedback of files produced by ACR for example - which is an Adobe issue, not a Phase One Capture One issue. The onus is on the Raw converter software creators to try to get the best from the files, just as Phase One has done for it's non-native conversions for Nikon & Fuji (and Canon) which I continue to find are just so much better than ACR for example and even Nikon Capture too IMHO.
Regarding your experiences of not knowing photographers who use C1, well I can publically state that ALL of the Phase One medium format photographers I know DO use Capture One and ditto for Sony & Fuji X-Series to get the best from those image formats. (Personally I'd use Capture One Pro for absolutely all raw images if it supported my Sigma Merrill cameras too since it's the one format that is missing for me). So you see it rather depends on your sample set when generalizing doesn't it?
Rosebud ...4 Member(s) liked this post
" " 🚫
2 Member(s) thanked for this post
Have to agree with Graham here. Phase one backs and C1 are honey and biscuits. Can't have one with out the other. It's a total package and I have been using it for close to 15 years now with every camera I have owned and honestly time and time again it has beat the output on ACR every time with canon, Nikon, Sony , and Phase. Should add some Leicas as well.
Okay truth be told had them for dinner tonight. Lol
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
www.guymancusophotography.com1 Member(s) liked this post
Please note that what I wrote that: "I have not met any photographer in person who uses Capture One". That is quite true, never said that I don't know persons using C1, just that I have never met any of those persons in person. As a matter of fact I don't know a single MFD photographer in person and I have never seen an MFD used in the field. Just to say that both MFD and C1 seems to be rare with photographers I physically have met.
MF is a bit more than Phase One. There is also Hasselblad, who have Phocus, Leica and Pentax. AFAIK Leica and Pentax users can not use C1 unless tricking around with DNG conversion. But Leica and Pentax users are still happy shooters, with great pride in their systems. What software do they use?
If users like Lars and me are a bit stubborn and want to use a tool of our choice I think there should be some respect for that. I do understand that Capture One would deliver some magic. You can say that if you don't want to use C1, don't buy Phase One, buy a Leica or a Pentax instead.
I would expect that MFD "magic" is coming from lenses and the larger sensor surface. Those parameters are not dependent on raw processor.
So, I don't have an issue with C1, expect I don't want to use it.
This place needs a "dislike" button.
9 Member(s) liked this post
www.gigi-photos.com1 Member(s) liked this post
I use Raw Therapee, LR and PS with my P45. Very happy with the results.
But then I remembered this quote... and refrained from commenting ...:
If no one is using MF gear, why the need for weekly (or more) versions of this discussion?
Can't I use an MF camera without somebody who doesn't telling me how outdated it is?
Maybe I like outdated. I've got a 1959 car.
2 Member(s) thanked for this post6 Member(s) liked this post
Sorry, mine shows quite the opposite.
1 Member(s) liked this post
But it's still outdated: no computer, no LCD screen.
1 Member(s) liked this post
I also rarely participate in group events and marketing fairs. As I already said, from personal experience, the marketing in equipment fairs is a bit too heavy on the "we all belong to the same exclusive club" stance for my taste.
(Note that I never picked on dealers in this forum. As long as they clearly identify themselves as dealers, I have no problem with them participating in the discussion.)
1 Member(s) thanked for this post
You've been fortunate, Jerome. And not to imply that you are an extremely rare bird, most users carry along perfectly fine without a hitch. But many do encounter - something. The majority of our supportive time and efforts as a dealer are spent troubleshooting, diagnosing, testing, inspecting, confirming, etc. This goes for software, as well as hardware. All these elements come into play not just when one of our clients contacts us with a problem, but also, at least the testing/inspecting tasks, occur before you even receive your equipment from us. And also before you receive your repaired equipment. Are you getting a good lens? Are you getting a good sensor? Has the repair really resolved the issue? Yes, we've seen a repair come back and right out of the box, the same exact thing it went in for is still occurring. We've seen issues with both new out of the box and gear coming back from repair. Rare, but we've seen it, and common enough that we don't want a client to encounter that, hence the degree of hands-on we perform.
This idea that all a dealer does is send a piece of equipment to the manufacturer so the manufacturer can fix it is - in our case, anyway - extremely inaccurate. It relegates the dealer to the level of the postal service. I don't have a strong relationship with anyone at the post office, they just deliver my mail. But i do have a number of strong and trusting relationships with various other vendors that I personally do business with. I trust these individuals on a professional and even personal level. And I might not need them beyond what I have paid them to do, but I have chosen them because in the event I do have to trust, I want to be able to trust them. It feels like an advantage to me. And it means something to me to know that I have a good feeling about this person or company that I am giving my money to. I feel better about giving it to them, and I don't (potentially) feel like a fool for having given it to someone else.
But I'm fully human. Sometimes a box will show up at our office for me from Amazon. And the team gives me a hard time about it, and I'll say "I know, I try not to. I'm not proud about it.", and they laugh.
Since when does not needing something mean that it isn't good to have? My wife Rachel doesn't need a new lawnmower, but yes, she surely would take one. You might not ever need a dealer. Then again, you never know. It's natural to feel like a product should just do what it is supposed to, and if it doesn't, it gets fixed. But it doesn't always work out that way. As a consumer, I don't need a dealer, but if something happens, I want one, and I want the best one.
Lurk mode off.
Steve Hendrix is the best in my experience. Experience, knowledge, follow up, ease of communication (even on Easter Sunday eve!) and all around good guy. While I have yet to need any repair work, he is always there to answer questions and make suggestions. Even if my thick head doesn't always take his perfect advice.
PS- no matter how many people come here to piss in my MF cereal, you won't convince me your 4,000,000 MP 135 camera is in the same ballpark as my MF gear. Anyone with eyes rather than test charts can see this. Is 135 improving? Sure. Does it have advantages? Sure, always has even in film days. Does it provide the same level of emotion, connection and wow factor? Not a chance. Will it catch up with MF? Physics is physics, sensor size is sensor size, no replacement for displacement.
Lurk mode back on.
6 Member(s) liked this post
As an answer, I have what? The thinly veiled suggestion that I am, to say the least, foolishly underestimating the risks. I also get two full paragraphs on the ethics of buying cameras, complete with a suggestion that I should not be proud about my behaviour.
As I already said: I shall probably never need your services, for the obvious reason that I live on another continent. Therefore, I have no knowledge of your business and I'll refrain from commenting on it. But there is one thing I shall say: would I live in the USA, self praise and thinly veiled insults would not convince me to enter in a "relationship" (as you call it) with your business.
Funny, how many posters feel the urge to defend the(ir) dealers. Isn't that the essence of a dealer: to be a nice, knowledgeable, customer oriented guy? I am sure the dealers who post here are the best in their fields, but that isn't really the point …
The point is that the MFD cameras are very expensive and that rises the questions and doubts of the OP. Why are they so expensive: high RD and general overhead cost in relation to productions numbers, higher costs of labour in Europe (here a small advantage of Pentax) and different marketing and customer service models. Whereas the first points are difficult to overcome (Sony not included), the last one is variable and handled quite differently by PhaseOne, Hasselblad, Leica and Pentax, being PhaseOne the most luxurious. If a dealer states that these "few days where good friends and clients get together to play with the latest photographic gear" where the "ridiculously small fee of $349 doesn’t even come close to covering the expenses of the event", what he says is that there is a heavy subsidy employed which is payed either by the dealer or by PhaseOne/Alpa .... This means that it has to be covered in another way: the price of the product. I would be really curious to know which are the differences between Hasselbald, Leica and PhaseOne as regards dealer margins, maybe CI can give us a hint as they deal with all 3 brands.
If you like this kind of events and also like a tailor-made customer service, this business model is fine, and it should be as you have already payed for it, if you use it or not. I personally don't like to pay for services I may or (probably) may not use.
If I had a problem with my Leica S, I would contact directly the customer service at the Leica headquarters in Wetzlar, no need at all to deal with my dealer.
And if I needed the extra customer service, I would buy the "Leica Protection Plan" (24 hours exchange), which - by the way - is nearly 20% of the equipment cost.
Last edited by siddhaarta; 20th April 2016 at 11:45.
I'm sorry you took offense Jerome. You posted a reply to someone who recommended having a dealer, and went into some detail about why he felt this. And you responded that you had not needed a dealer in 5 years seemingly as a sort of rebuttal. I guess if you didn't mean it as a rebuttal, you would have said something along the lines of "And I've had the benefit of equipment that hasn't brought me any trouble" or something along those lines.
But you didn't, your point seemed to be aimed at diminishing the importance of a dealer because you had not needed one in 5 years, and I don't think you can call foul when you make a statement like that ... to make some point, seemingly, and then have an issue with me providing context on what a good dealer (sorry if you think I'm self praising) does beyond handle the administrative processing of a repair. I espoused the benefits of having a good dealer, or of having trusted and valued relationships with any vendor, and I believe that professionally and I believe that personally. I have as much legitimacy at expressing that opinion as you do yours.
My reference about pride was meant humorously and ironically (and to actually point fun at me), which seemed to escape your notice. It certainly wasn't pointed at you or anyone else, and I didn't mean for it to be taken that way.
Sure, traditionally, a dealer may be nice, knowledgeable, customer-oriented, but these are vague generalities that have quite a range of variance in terms of performance, execution, and dedication. And when combined with high end and modular systems, just being nice and customer oriented isn't good enough. IMO. If you're in a part of the world where you have the option of dealing directly with the manufacturer, that's great. Typically dealers have more contact with end users (at least we do), can identify and solve more problems, and remove the option of the manufacturer denying there actually is a problem. And yes, we've encountered this at times with every manufacturer you mentioned. Also - keep in mind, the only thing the Protection Plan does is provide extended warranty service for a defective component. Believe me, if that was all that our tech team needed to take care of, we'd shave 65% off our service/tech workload.
The Carmel Workshop is actually a unique event in the context of the type of events CI produces. The point of the workshop really is to create "a few days where good friends and clients get together to play with the latest photographic gear". Dave, Ken, and Don get together every year to create this event, and the majority of attendees are in fact, repeat attendees, with a handful of newer attendees. Dave loves doing them, it is a good time. We receive no compensation from Phase One or anyone for the production costs and expenses.
Our typical workshops of course have a much higher entry fee, but usually that also involves bringing in paid for presenters/photographers, and often includes lodging, and other expenses, etc. The point of those workshops is certainly to break even, and then if any attendees do decide to make a purchase at some point, hopefully that happens enough to make it a worthwhile and profitable venture. Just being able to have face to face with clients and end users is as much a driving force as anything else. You have to keep in mind that the main office for Capture Integration is in Atlanta, which is a fine place, but hardly the center of the photographic universe. We have a few locations. But we rarely have any direct in person contact with the majority of our clients. This is a downside to modern remote technology. And Dave and I (and Chris) all come from backgrounds in our past where we spent 3 out of 4 weeks traveling, knocking on studio doors to see what problems we could solve. Actually, there are upsides to modern remote technology too! :-)
But we do miss that direct in person contact. And the workshops are very much a result of that driving force. But any expenses for a workshop are incurred only by Capture Integration (other than travel expenses for any manufacturer personnel who may participate). We're subsidized nothing.
As far as Hasselblad, Leica, Phase One are concerned, this is not unique to Phase One dealers. There are workshops that are hosted by Leica dealers, by Hasselblad dealers.
But there are relatively few product or category specific dealers vs the more generic, we sell everything camera store/dealer, so it is natural that a category specific dealer would invest more in workshops that support the adoption of those products, whether featured manufacturers contribute to expenses or not.
Sounds to me like everyone needs to turn off their computers, take their favorite camera(s) and go shoot. Goodness!
2 Member(s) thanked for this post4 Member(s) liked this post
I personally am very attracted to PhaseOne products but would not buy them because of the included service costs. Another thing would be if they lower the price, say by 35%, and offer an extra "PhaseOne Protection Plan" and a second "Dealer Expert Package", say on an annual basis, which I could buy as an extra.
But I fear, this will never happen.
which I explicitly cited. I also said that I had no problem with dealers participating in the forum.When you buy MF you NEED a dealer...
Some photographers need the services a dealer can provide, some don't. Conversely, some dealers provide good services, some provide service that rather systematically pushes their customers in the direction of maximum profit for them. And I am free to say that in a discussion with you, because I never use your services, so you should not construct that sentence as a criticism of your business, because I simply do not know anything about you and your business. So I cannot be talking about you.
In the context of the cited discussion, I felt it was important to remind the readers that not everybody may need the services a dealer can provide. For example, one can simply buy a used camera from another user and be happy about that. That's what I did. And no, I did not buy my camera from Amazon: Amazon does not sell MF cameras in Germany.
Of course, when one does not bring his or her business to a dealer, one should not expect to (ab)use their services: I don't pester my local dealers with requests for firmware, demo camera or lenses, courses, etc... Conversely, some people may prefer to get this kind of service and then choose to buy their camera from a dealer. It's one or the other and I have no problem either way. But in the context of the discussion above, and taking into account that getdpi is an international forum and that not all members have access to the services typically provided by dealers, I felt it was necessary to express that alternatives exist.
Thank you Jerome (and Siddhaarta).
I think for the sake of the forum, it's not necessary to carry on further. I understand your perspectives.
Really, given that this thread had such a rocky start to begin with, I feel that if there are some legitimate elements from the OP that there is interest in discussing, it might serve everyone better to pull one of those that are near and dear to you and start a new thread with that topic.
My history with MFD dates back to 2007, and I have never used the services of a dealer other than to purchase the cameras and lenses.
I’m currently on my 5th Phase One back upgrading from the original P30+ to my current IQ180. Add into the mix an older Kodak. No issues with any until recently. The IQ180 began acting up to the point I spent several hours on the phone with my dealer as we attempted to figure out the issue. The back had to be sent to the mothership where it’s been for several weeks now with a delivery date back to me within a week or so. That’s the first real problem I’ve had in all the years of owning a digital back.
To be totally honest I also had a slight problem in November last year when a screw came loose on the card cover. I thought I broke it however a quick phone call to my dealer and I found the screw is captive in the hinge that had fallen inside and hidden. I was able to find it, and fix it while on the phone.
Is a dealer absolutely a necessity? Depends on how you shoot, where you shoot and when you shoot. I like the idea of knowing I’ve got a person to contact if and when I need them.
Anything that is made by man (or woman) can and will break eventually. Doesn’t matter how much you spend or where you brought it from and I don’t mean just cameras.