Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 106

Thread: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

  1. #1
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    This set of questions is for the owners of IQ3 100MP and those who have had an opportunity to use it for more than an afternoon.

    • Has it affected your photography? If it has, how so?
    • In what areas (important to you) does it improve upon your prior digital back?
    • Has the upgrade been worth while for your photography?
    • Anything else you've learned or have come to appreciate/dislike about the back?


    Lets hear some real world feedback - if you will.

    "Happy Father's Day" to the fathers among us.
    Cheers!
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    595
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    It has lots of great improvements over the CCD:

    a) Live View instead of Dead View - tilt/shift easier to use + focus easier to nail = generally sharper images;
    b) Significantly less likely to to run into tiling issues;
    c) Extraordinary long exposure (and no more corner issues as the CCD) - significantly better dynamic range and also being able to disable darkframe noise reduction;
    d) Owning the king of the sensors generates more passion/satisfaction and fulfillment for photography, preventing the purpose of owning expensive medium format digital gear from being defeated by these new 35mm format gear.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    No dark frame + XF = (0). Can't be done as you can't get to aerial mode on the XF. Only on tech camera or Phase One Aerial camera.

    Hope this will be fixed via firmware in the future

    Paul C

  4. #4
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    A few things I hope from this thread:
    - I hope the replies talk in terms of specifics not generalities.
    - I hope we get the real world scoop on the 16bit color, dynamic range, long exposure, resolution, noise quality, the quality of prints etc.
    - I hope we see some photos.
    - I hope this will not be about CCD vs CMOS.
    - I hope this will be a friendly thread.

    Not too many of us own the IQ3 100MP, so I understand that the participation will be a bit low, but I am sure readership/interest will be high.

    Its been ~6 months since its release so the time is right to get some specific user feedback.

    Cheers!
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 19th June 2016 at 14:33.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Like you, I own a Credo 60 and use it exclusively on a technical camera, in my case a Linhof Techno. I'm pretty happy with the Credo, but imagine the following features of the IQ3 100 would be brilliant:

    1: Live view
    2: better DR, especially lifting tone in the shadows

    I do a lot of 1min exposures with the Credo and it's more than adequate, but I know CMOS would bring technically better results. The dark frame really pisses me off, so I'd love the 100's ability to disable it if it doesn't lead to poor performance.

    I'm interested to hear people's impressions of tech wide performance when doing big shifts, I.e. Stitching 1:2 panos with moderate fall of the back.

  6. #6
    Senior Member etrump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Biggest change for me is the ability to shoot at higher ISO when necessary. If a little breezy shoot at iso 200 or 400 without thinking about it. A huge change to my approach during less than ideal conditions.

    Of course live view is a substantial improvement when focusing. You would be surprised how much time it saves.

    Dynamic range is noticably better than he IQ180 and could easily be 3 stops. I still bracket all my shots but most if the time I don't need it. With C1 hdr sliders I can acheive what would have required two exposures in a single 3100 frame. Basically bring up the shadows and a touch of curves to make things natural and your done. Shadow noise depends on ISO of course but seems well managed throughout.

    To my eye, the colors are much more natural in outdoor scenes out of the box. Not as big an improvement as kodak to dalsa but I find it takes almost no post work on colors.

    Prints in the IQ180 looked excellent and the 3100 prints are that much better. In fact, even at double resolution from c1 the prints are visually excellent. The micro contrast seems to have also improved but I can't tell if it is the 3100 or the new C1 engine.

    After 5 years with the IQ180 I was ready for the upgrade and the 3100 did not dissappoint. Hope that helps.
    Ed Cooley Fine Art Photography
     
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    In my own shooting, I'm not sure exactly why I would ever want to disable the dark frame subtraction. I.e., I don't know what the advantage would be to doing so.

    In any event: even if you could disable it with the XF/100, I don't think you'd want to because you'd likely get something like the image below.

    After much analysis and discussion with my dealer, it appears that dark frame subtraction was somehow turned off on mine (even though there's no option for doing so). The result of a long exposure with dark frame off was that images appeared as below. Neither I nor the dealer are sure how dark frame got turned off nor why having it off resulted in these artifacts. But "power cycling" the camera (by removing both batteries and disconnecting and reconnecting everything) fixed the issue. Dark frame subtraction is now on and this problem has not recurred.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    No dark frame + XF = (0). Can't be done as you can't get to aerial mode on the XF. Only on tech camera or Phase One Aerial camera.

    Hope this will be fixed via firmware in the future

    Paul C
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    With any modern Digital camera, most will take a dark frame with an exposure at 1 second or longer, Phase claims that the dark frame is taken will all exposures and with shorter exposures the dark frame may be cached and re-used (that is at least how I understand it).

    All CMOS sensors I have used, from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji all can handle a simple 1 second exposure without needing a dark frame, as the dark frame is mainly being used to kill out stuck pixels, and noise. And same cameras allow you to turn long noise exposure on or off allowing the photographer to make the decision.

    The CMOS Phase backs, will work in Aerial mode, on a tech camera, and they don't leave the color lines your image showed, so I am really not sure what happened there. I have used the 50MP and 100MP on my Arca in Aerial mode and for reasonable exposure times of 1 sec to 10 or so, at base ISO the frame is fine. There are some firmware issues it seems where a back left in Aerial mode from a tech camera and re-attached to a XF, can have issues, as the XF is not making the change back from Aerial. The XF does not support Aerial mode. My dealer has recommended to me that if I use the 100 on a tech camera in Aerial mode, to manually change out of Aerial mode before I move back to the XF.

    As for why, if you stack images, which I do a lot of of, the mandatory dark frame creates a gap, and the gaps are hard to get rid of, and there are times mainly late evenings, where, if you are pushed down to a 20 or 30 second shot then waiting for the dark frame each time cuts down dramatically on the number of shots you can take, also the dark frame is leaving the back on and active thus possibly generating more heat. You can miss a lot of opportunities waiting for the dark frame to finish.

    Right now where I live the day time temps are around 99 to 101 degrees with 100% humidity, really terrible conditions for shooting any digital camera for an extended period of time. If I was to work with the 100MP back in these temps, I would surely want the dark frame as I can assume the noise will be excessive. However in the spring/fall and winter when the outdoor temps are more reasonable, then I would still like the option to turn off the dark frame process.

    Paul C

  9. #9
    Senior Member Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,404
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    121

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by etrump View Post
    Biggest change for me is the ability to shoot at higher ISO when necessary. If a little breezy shoot at iso 200 or 400 without thinking about it. A huge change to my approach during less than ideal conditions.

    Of course live view is a substantial improvement when focusing. You would be surprised how much time it saves.

    Dynamic range is noticably better than he IQ180 and could easily be 3 stops. I still bracket all my shots but most if the time I don't need it. With C1 hdr sliders I can acheive what would have required two exposures in a single 3100 frame. Basically bring up the shadows and a touch of curves to make things natural and your done. Shadow noise depends on ISO of course but seems well managed throughout.

    To my eye, the colors are much more natural in outdoor scenes out of the box. Not as big an improvement as kodak to dalsa but I find it takes almost no post work on colors.

    Prints in the IQ180 looked excellent and the 3100 prints are that much better. In fact, even at double resolution from c1 the prints are visually excellent. The micro contrast seems to have also improved but I can't tell if it is the 3100 or the new C1 engine.

    After 5 years with the IQ180 I was ready for the upgrade and the 3100 did not dissappoint. Hope that helps.
    I agree with Ed, especially re the high ISO and colour performance. I shoot a lot of wildlife hand-held and the IQ3 100 high ISO is a game changer for me. Previously I'd use my Sony a7 gear for such subjects, but the SK 240 on the 3100 allows cropping such that I can get the equivalent of a 500mm lens with all the DR and other advantages of the XF. (Except for the weight of course.)

    The hyperfocal feature I use constantly with the 35 and 55 mm lenses. And Live View is excellent!

    Yes, I'm taking better photos because of the features plus the fact that 100 mpx really makes me work for the highest image quality.
    Bill CB

    www.billcaulfeild-browne.ca
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    268
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Hi All,

    I am sorry but have to ask for troubleshooting in this thread about IQ 3. I suspect focus mask is not accurate with my new 3 100. As you can see in the test image, the foreground which out of focus still have some green mask. The tree also has the most mask although it is not sharp. Focus was on middle ground wall. I had some experience where the focus mask appear in the area that was not in focus.


    Is this normal? how to fix it? My focus mask setting value is 40.


    Thanks.

    Name:  1.jpg
Views: 2199
Size:  571.1 KB

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    I don't use or trust focus masking. Live view with a loupe is my trusted method for critical focusing. Even then, its easy to have a bias near or far if the object is strictly two dimensional. I believe that focus masking is contrast dependent which is why it favored the trees to the low contrast area of your image.

    Victor

  12. #12
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    This is simply a misunderstanding of what focus mask actually is and how to best use it... very understandable given the inaccurate marketing-oriented name "focus mask".

    It is (like all similar indicators on any camera, also called "focus peaking" or simply "peaking") a micro-contrast detector. If the subject doesn't have contrast it won't be highlighted by the mask, even if it is in sharp focus. If the subject has lots of micro-contrast then it will sometimes be highlighted by the mask even if it not completely sharp.

    Reasons the subject may not have micro-contrast (focus mask can't tell the difference between these reasons):
    - it is out of focus
    - blur for non-focus reasons*
    - subject is dark because it's dark subject matter
    - subject is dark because it's under exposed
    - subject has little or no texture (e.g. smooth surface)

    *soft lens, low quality filter in front of lens, subject motion blur, camera shake, fog

    So Focus Mask does not show, in an absolute sense, what is in focus. But it's still incredibly useful.

    Here are ways you can use the indication in focus mask with extreme precision and accuracy:
    - compare similar subject matter in a single frame
    - compare the same subject matter between two different frames (A:B testing)

    I call the latter the "Differential Focus Mask" technique.

    If the roof was not parallel to the frame in this image, you would be able to see, with great accuracy and precision, where the plane of focus intersected the roof.

    You could also lower the focus mask threshold and compare a series of focus points in focus mask to see which frame shows the greatest/largest/most-prounced mask on the foreground (even if it is less, in the absolute sense, than the amount shown on the more textured background). This A:B testing is especially useful if you have a physical focusing system in which you can define and easily return to each point. For instance on the hyper precise helical of the Arca Swiss R series you can focus at 10,11,12,13 and then see that the third image was the sharpest for your desired subject and then return (with precision and ease) to 12.

    It's also very helpful when doing any Scheimpflug movements are being applied, such as tilt or swing.

    If you have more questions, or are not having a good experience with focus mask even with the above experience I'd strongly suggest working with your dealer to explore your technique/approach. Applied correctly focus mask is an incredibly powerful tool.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  13. #13
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Chipcarterdc View Post
    After much analysis and discussion with my dealer, it appears that dark frame subtraction was somehow turned off on mine (even though there's no option for doing so). The result of a long exposure with dark frame off was that images appeared as below. Neither I nor the dealer are sure how dark frame got turned off nor why having it off resulted in these artifacts. But "power cycling" the camera (by removing both batteries and disconnecting and reconnecting everything) fixed the issue. Dark frame subtraction is now on and this problem has not recurred.
    It's more accurate to call this an error in the back's dark frame handling.

    Simply turning off the dark frame (using aerial mode) will not normally cause issues like this. On the CMOS backs disabling dark frame increases noise in a relative sense (in the mathematical sense that 0.002 is an increase from 0.001) but in most shooting situations the absolute amount of noise is still very low.

    We are lobbying for the removal of this user-interface limitation.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  14. #14
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Thanks for the contributions so far.
    I am curious about IQ3-100's live view. By all accounts its much better than the CCD backs but is it good enough to judge critical focus without tethering to surface pro or to an hdmi monitor? Or do owners still carry a Surface Pro?
    Also, does relying on live view exclusively mean that you now need to carry 10 extra batteries?
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    I think it all boils down to eye sight. I am near sighted, and have older eyes. So on a long day, the IQ monitor gets a bit hard on my eyes, and I find I am pulling out the S2. But, you can easily determine 100% focus with a XF and lens. The image will just pop in to focus. The areas that will cause a problem, (for me) is that as you scroll around, the refresh is a bit slow and it seems to get slower as the card fills up, might just be my back or mind. Where as on the S2, the refresh is 100% instantaneous or close to it. So when working a complicated shot with DOF issues, I now prefer the S2.

    I have heard that the Liveview HDMI is excellent, much better than the view on the back's LCD, but have not tried, it mainly due to the cost. And there is no way to use the back's screen for moving the HDMI image around, you are dependent on the HDMI monitor for that. So I am not sure how fast the scrolling is on the smaller LCD externals.

    One other point, again based on my experience, the Live view on Arca is difficult, as the Arca focus helical has such a fine delineation, its very hard for me, to sometimes gauge focus, especially on distance objects. With the XF and a lens, the focus has much less delineation and you can clearly see the image just pop into focus.

    Is it any better than the IQ250?, no I don't see being any different. In fact it may be a bit slower, especially when zooming around the screen at 100% view. HOWEVER, the wifi on the 100 is vastly IMPROVED, like night and day over what I was used to on my IQ260. You hit the IQ from the iPad much fast, and the number of dropped connections is much less. The view at 100% is still a bit fuzzy, (still amazed that a free game can take full advantage of the retina screen on iPad or iPhone, but Capture Pilot still has the same issues I saw with my 2600, so you have to zoom back a bit to really see the file.

    Also, the 250 live view, seemed a bit better in low low light. I have used the 100 now in a couple of really low light shoots, late evening, and the Live View starts to get a bit noisy, and hard to determine focus. Resulting image is fine, just the Live view, no as bad as say a Nikon D810, which IMO is pretty worthless in low light with Live due to noise.

    Phase may be continuing to tweak the 100, with improvements under the covers, so the ones shipping now may have some improvements that standard firmware releases won't fix.

    Paul C

  16. #16
    Senior Member DougDolde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Joshua Tree, CA
    Posts
    292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    I'm impressed that anyone can afford this "price of a decent car" back. I can't
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #17
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by DougDolde View Post
    I'm impressed that anyone can afford this "price of a decent car" back. I can't
    I was under the impression you shoot with an IQ180 + XF+ SK40-80mm.
    A pretty fun to drive car can be bought for the cost of that kit - belive me
    But that isn't the subject of this thread - so I'm not going there.
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 23rd June 2016 at 21:12.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,218
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Live view on the IQ3 100MP is very usable on the back. It's nice having an assortment of tools available to choose from. I've opted for using the SmallHD with Sidefinder in lieu of the Surface Pro. There are some limitations, but the advantages of smaller size and less weight make the Small HD and Sidefinder very attractive over the Surface Pro, albeit not with all the tools of C1 Pro at your disposal. No more tethering for me with the tech cam. Live view makes all the difference in the world along with the SmallHD Sidefinder. First option is to use only the LCD on the back. If I need or have the time, I will use the SmallHD and Sidefinder. The Sidefinder removes the glare issue present with all devices with screens, including the Surface Pro.

    ken
    www.houseoflandscapes.com
    www.kendoophotography.com
    www.carmelfineartprinting.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Senior Member etrump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    What are your shooting parameters, focus mask setting, etc. Not nearly enough information to help you.

    The only time I see this is using a high iso snd the back sees the noise as micro contrast.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Santoso View Post
    Hi All,

    I am sorry but have to ask for troubleshooting in this thread about IQ 3. I suspect focus mask is not accurate with my new 3 100. As you can see in the test image, the foreground which out of focus still have some green mask. The tree also has the most mask although it is not sharp. Focus was on middle ground wall. I had some experience where the focus mask appear in the area that was not in focus.


    Is this normal? how to fix it? My focus mask setting value is 40.


    Thanks.

    Name:  1.jpg
Views: 2199
Size:  571.1 KB

  20. #20
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post
    This set of questions is for the owners of IQ3 100MP and those who have had an opportunity to use it for more than an afternoon.

    • Has it affected your photography? If it has, how so?
    • In what areas (important to you) does it improve upon your prior digital back?
    • Has the upgrade been worth while for your photography?
    • Anything else you've learned or have come to appreciate/dislike about the back?


    Lets hear some real world feedback - if you will.

    "Happy Father's Day" to the fathers among us.
    Cheers!
    A few qualifiers: I've had the back now for only about 3 weeks, and I have had zero confluence of time and good light. Plus I've been consumed by a winning team (Go Cavs!).

    Managed to get out over the weekend because I saw this spot and thought the clouds would put on a show, but they all completely disappeared.

    Anyway to answer your questions:
    • It has changed my photography by streamlining the process in the field. The shot below is a two image stitch with tilt (sk60xl). Would have taken much longer to zero in on the shifted composition, and would not have been able to be sure about focus without live view.
    • I don't think I could have gotten the moon detail and been able to open up the shadows like this with the IQ180.
    • I'm not sure yet. So far so good, but it is a big $$ upgrade so I don't think I will really know for probably a year.
    • Lumariver, Lumariver, Lumariver! Ander's app makes tilt a fun exercise.
    • I wish the back would kill mosquitos. It should also pop up a window whenever I press the shutter after using live view and say, "Hey dumba$$, flip the lens shutter bypass lever back before you push that button."


    Dave

    Last edited by dchew; 24th June 2016 at 15:08.
    davechewphotography.com
    Likes 7 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Nothing new of substance to add except to say to Dave Chew:

    Two IQ100 owners from northeast Ohio, woohoo! I'm from Cleveland (although I now live in Pittsburgh).

    Back to our regularly scheduled programming....
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #22
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by dchew View Post
    Plus I've been consumed by a winning team (Go Cavs!).
    Congrats on the new back. It sounds like you are satisfied and looks like you are putting it to good use.
    More importantly congrats to NE Ohio on first victory in half a century
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  23. #23
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Those of you using the IQ3-100 on a technical camera, what are your observations vis--vis shifts with your tech lenses.
    Any concerns or disappointments?
    Can you please list the maximum acceptable shift (in your judgement) for each of your lenses?
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 25th June 2016 at 19:33.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    595
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post
    Those of you using the IQ3-100 on a technical camera, what are your observations vis--vis shifts with your tech lenses.
    Any concerns or disappointments?
    Can you please list the maximum accptable shift (in your judgement) for each of your lenses?
    I had a thread about detailed testing results: IQ3 100MP technical camera tests: color cast, mazing artifact, tiling issue, DR etc

    To sum up in short:

    The most concern and worst case stress test is mazing artifact when shooting under narrow band light source conditions (e.g. white wall indoors) and the sensor is shifted in the direction along its shorter edge.

    23HR: 5mm up to be mazing-free (but this lens isn't supposed to be shifted on a fullframe sensor)

    40HR: 15mm up to be mazing-free

    75XL: to be tested, but I don't expect any problem with this lens.
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #25
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    In general, for my purposes the acceptable shift is the same as my IQ180. I tested them both together a few months ago before I traded in the 180.

    40hr: 12-15mm. Note I very rarely shift the 40hr but I did test it.

    60xl: 18mm. The shot above was 18mm.* I am very pleased with how the back handles this lens. The LCC seems to correct all cast with no desaturation. Note I use the center filter. Larger shifts might be possible but I would have to buy another camera to find out.

    90hrsw: >18 mm. May not require an LCC for some shots.

    Sk150: > 18mm. LCC for snow only.

    Dave

    *It is cropped slightly, but only for "artistic" reasons. The sky was very even out to the edge.
    davechewphotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #26
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    795
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    122

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post
    Thanks for the contributions so far.
    I am curious about IQ3-100's live view. By all accounts its much better than the CCD backs but is it good enough to judge critical focus without tethering to surface pro or to an hdmi monitor? Or do owners still carry a Surface Pro?
    Also, does relying on live view exclusively mean that you now need to carry 10 extra batteries?
    Used my new back for the first time on a shoot a couple of days ago. Took my arca swiss system. As one who was pretty adept at using Live View focusing on the IQ180 and 380, I think focusing on the back works fine, but it is dependent on your eyes. Mine are pretty good for a 62 year old, but I always carry a strong pair of cheap reading glasses and and it's pretty helpful being able to get really close to the screen when focusing. Live View focusing on this back is a real game changer for me. I also like having the useable option of ISO's more than 35, after testing I feel up to 200 won't be an issue at all, 400 is still good and even 800 might be useable depending on the scene.

    Live View focusing on this back is quick and accurate, I don't think the batteries will be an issue because you aren't in live view for long. ON the tech camera I also use live view for composition, and I also have WiFi turned on. In the two hours I was shooting I used the equivalent of about 1 battery worth of power. Granted I'm not a prolific shooter, but on the image below I was waiting for about 45 minutes capturing various frames to try and get enough data to stack and get rid of the people coming down the ladder. So the back and wifi were on for all of that time.

    Regarding the surface pro, I think with this back there are better alternatives. In my case I used capture pilot on my iPhone 6s+. Screen plenty big enough, easy to zoom into 100% and focus the camera. I also like that even though the camera was about 18" off the ground, I was standing next to it composing and focusing. Since I was in the middle of a stream it was nice not to have to kneel down in the water to see the back.


    Arca Swiss rm3di, Rodenstock 40mm lens, 4 seconds at f/11.5, iso 50
    wayne
    My image gallery
    My blog - cwaynefox.com
    my store - Pixels Foto & Frame
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 8 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #27
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Thanks everyone for some fantastic feedback so far. Lets keep it coming.

    In the past couple of weeks I have been reading IQ3-100 user feedback in blogs, forums, reviews - even some direct communication with owners. It is very interesting to observe that not a single user has overly emphasized the resolution-gain going from 60/80 to 100 megapixels. Detail/resolution gain is noticeable but my point is that no one has emphasized it as the main benefit.

    I'll try to summarize the feedback so far...
    ++ Every single owner has said live-view is a game changer for achieving critical focus
    ++ Ability to shoot up to ISO 400 without much thought is a game changer

    Other positives…
    +Much improved dynamic range
    +Smoother color transitions and better color out of the box
    +Significantly improved wifi
    +Decent amounts of shift/rise/fall are possible after LCC corrections in C1
    +Long exposures
    +Better print quality
    +Detail/resolution

    Not very positive(s)…
    ~dark frame disabling
    ~Shadow noise not as stellar as some had hoped

    Negatives...
    -none (well may be price)

    New/unusual workflow improvement possibilities...
    +SmallHD with sidefinder view via HDMI out sounds intriguing (no reflections in bright/daylight)
    +iPhone 6S+ via wifi as a vaible alternative to Surface Pro
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 27th June 2016 at 06:50.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    595
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post

    Not very positive(s)
    ~dark frame disabling
    ~Shadow noise not as stellar as some had hoped

    Negatives...
    -none (well may be price)
    Hi, I think you have perhaps misunderstood (or have been misled by) some previous posts.

    Indeed being able to disable darkframe NR on the IQ3 100MP is an advantage. This is because you don't get severely degraded image quality as if you disable darkframe NR on a CCD digital back.

    Shadow noise is also a great improvement over the CCD as this is the key fact of greatly improved dynamic range.

    Regarding price, yes this is perhaps one of the most deal-breaking negatives - Pentax may well use the same sensor for a much cheaper camera body ruining the pride of Phase One and Hasselblad. Another disadvantage may be the size and weight when you compare it against a Hasselblad X1D (but maybe the oversized design of the IQ3 100MP digital back keeps the sensor cool for long exposure).

  29. #29
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Hi, I think you have perhaps misunderstood (or have been misled by) some previous posts.
    Indeed being able to disable darkframe NR on the IQ3 100MP is an advantage.
    You are right, being able to disable darkframe is an advantage.
    I was trying to document Paul's concern but it's poor choice of words on my part.
    What I should have said is "inability to disable dark frame when using XF" instead of saying "dark frame disabling".

    Regarding shadow noise, I put it in neutral zone because I've read some comments where user/owner perhaps had much higher expectations and in relation to their lofty expectations the shadow noise was not as good as they had hoped. That might differ from your opinion, but I just did not want to put it under "positives" just because its not unanimously positive so I put it under "not so positive(s)".

    Since I have no opinion on the matter myself, my intention is to simply consolidate the user feedback to a concise readable form.
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 27th June 2016 at 19:55.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Dark Frame, can be only disable via Aerial mode, which only works on a Aerial camera or tech camera, thus for DF, DF+, or XF users, this is a considerable concern. NET, all other brands allow the USER to make the decision to turn this on or off. It's also safe to assume that other companies trust that the user in knowledgeable to understand:

    a. what this is
    b. that you might not get a clean a frame as with it on, however the user is willing to make that decision

    Noise at higher ISO's.

    It could be better, at least to my eyes. I had hoped to see ISO 400 and 800 at least on par with the most current DSLR offering from Nikon or mirrorless from Sony. I see 400 as improved greatly and very useable, 800, not so sure.

    However both of these ISO's do show vast improvement of the equivalent CCD, from the IQ260 or IQ380, as one would expect, but I don't see them on par with other modern CMOS chips of smaller size (again surprising to me). The one area that does stand out as a positive for me is the ability of said ISO's to hold much better color range and saturation, which the CCD backs never could do.

    Very pleased however that the highlights at 100 and 200 (ISO) have quite a bit of leverage.

    Paul C

  31. #31
    Senior Member Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,404
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    121

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    Dark Frame, can be only disable via Aerial mode, which only works on a Aerial camera or tech camera, thus for DF, DF+, or XF users, this is a considerable concern. NET, all other brands allow the USER to make the decision to turn this on or off. It's also safe to assume that other companies trust that the user in knowledgeable to understand:

    a. what this is
    b. that you might not get a clean a frame as with it on, however the user is willing to make that decision

    Noise at higher ISO's.

    It could be better, at least to my eyes. I had hoped to see ISO 400 and 800 at least on par with the most current DSLR offering from Nikon or mirrorless from Sony. I see 400 as improved greatly and very useable, 800, not so sure.

    However both of these ISO's do show vast improvement of the equivalent CCD, from the IQ260 or IQ380, as one would expect, but I don't see them on par with other modern CMOS chips of smaller size (again surprising to me). The one area that does stand out as a positive for me is the ability of said ISO's to hold much better color range and saturation, which the CCD backs never could do.

    Very pleased however that the highlights at 100 and 200 (ISO) have quite a bit of leverage.

    Paul C
    Re noise at higher ISOs. I recognize we all have our own standards as to what is acceptable. I find ISO 800 eminently usable for what I do, and ISO 1600 is entirely acceptable when I have to go there.

    When I first got the IQ3 100 I did a series of shots at all ISOs and then printed them to 36 inches wide (my most often "sold" print size). Using my Canon IPF printer, I could discern virtually no difference IN PRINT between ISO 400 and 800, and even 1600 was not at all a problem.

    Of course, I'm talking only of noise and not DR, which is less at high ISOs. Just my 2C worth.
    Bill CB

    www.billcaulfeild-browne.ca
    Likes 7 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #32
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    I've used my IQ3-100 for a couple of months now, on a couple of road trips under varying lighting conditions, and here is my real world feedback and my answers to my own original questions:

    Has it affected your photography? If it has, how so?
    Yes it has - quite positively. My keeper rate has gone up considerably. My confidence in being able to pull off certain shots has increased. I am also venturing into the types of photographs which I previously considered somewhat futile, since I know this digital back is far more capable.

    In what areas (important to you) does it improve upon your prior digital back?
    IQ3-100's far better low-light/high-ISO performance has opened up many many more photographic opportunities. Being able to use faster shutter speeds in windy conditions, or longer exposures at night have really changed my approach and results I'm getting are exceeding my expectations.
    I have also stopped carrying my Surface Pro with me, since I consider the excellent live view to be sufficient. I still like to use the Surface Pro, just that it is far more convenient to not have to carry it, therefore I use it mainly at home when I am experimenting/learning.

    Has the upgrade been worth while for your photography?
    Absolutely. I was very nervous about this, but I am absolutely satisfied with the decision.

    Anything else you've learned or have come to appreciate/dislike about the back?
    I think the files are just extremely malleable. I have been surprised by the amount of pushing around I can do and the degree to which the files hold up. This has probably been the biggest surprise for me. I also have been quite positively surprised by the battery life. My 32HR has been my go-to lens and I am quite happy with the 10mm rise/fall/shifts that I do for almost every single shot. LCC cleans up the files beautifully and this has been a really pleasant outcome for me.

    I basically concur with what everyone else said already, but wanted to share my thoughts as well for future prospective buyers.
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 7th September 2016 at 11:55.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Odds are that there must be some considerable variances between IQ100's.

    I personally don't see much improvement in DR over my CCD at base ISO, sorry, I wish I could say I did. I expected much more shadow recovery, then what I am seeing. Net 1 stop Max and many times not even 1 stop. This is at 50 and 100 (as they are pretty much the same from what I have read).

    Was expecting to see more recovery like the Nikon D810 has, 2.5 stops at 64 ISO, fully useable. Not the case with my back, however as others are reporting that it can be done, I will assume that once I again, I more than likely purchased a bit early on the curve?

    What I do see is that when exposed correctly, higher iso in the 200 to 800 range is very useable. By exposed correctly, I just mean not much push if anything slightly overexposed. This gives a very useable image. But push a 200 to 800 shot, can't be done way too much noise.

    The CCD backs I have used even in good light still showed considerable saturation loss and some details lost in the 200 to 800 range. Unless sensor plus was in use.

    I basically expose to the left with this back, as my back seems to recover highlights much forgivingly than pushing up shadows.

    There is good comparison on LuLa by Wayne Fox showing a push from ISO 50, and the details,color, saturation that he still has, I can't get there with mine, as I have mightly tried. So odds are some fine tuning has been done since the first back.

    Paul C

  34. #34
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Tuning/tweaking of the backs after initial release could possibly be a factor, however I wonder if it could be to that significant degree.
    It could also be a matter of 'beauty being in the eye of the beholder' i.e. what looks great to one person might feel lacking to another.
    I am after all not a pro, so my thoughts/opinions/enthusiasm should be consumed with a grain of salt

    To me, the highlight recovery seems very smooth and natural (improved) and the file does not look blotchy or posterized. Shadow recovery is a bit of a learning-process. I had a photo a couple of days ago where I recovered the words PRADA out of complete and pitch black darkness. But there have been other times when I thought I'd be able to do some shadow recovery, which I did, but then did not quite like the final outcome.

    Maybe some of the characteristics can/will be improved via firmware updates or Capture One updates.
    Last edited by Jamgolf; 7th September 2016 at 11:57.
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  35. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    787
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    I can do an addition test soon, but from my experience the IQ3100 has a LOT more DR compared to my IQ180. I don't want to say that the Iq180 has no shadow recovery, however, compared to the IQ3100 it really feels that way.

    Paul when did you get your back ? I got mine in March.

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher View Post
    I can do an addition test soon, but from my experience the IQ3100 has a LOT more DR compared to my IQ180. I don't want to say that the Iq180 has no shadow recovery, however, compared to the IQ3100 it really feels that way.

    Paul when did you get your back ? I got mine in March.
    Hi Chris.

    I received it in Mid to late April.

    Paul C

  37. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Paul...... you did pique my interest with your post. I underexposed a 200 iso file by 3.5 stops and although there was some noise it was easily a very usable file. I have a habit of exposing slightly to the left as I hate anything blown out so I'm used to pusheing slightly. I certainly wouldn't be in the habit of pushing any file 3.5 stops..... my usual push is under 1 stop. If I were to use higher iso's then I would be much more careful with exposure. The highest iso I usually use is 400 and then sparingly. I usually always shoot at 100. Love the back, love my Actus, love my Schneider lenses..... life is good - all 14.5 lbs of it.

    Victor

  38. #38
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    377
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    I just remembered doing a test some time ago and reported my results in this thread (post #148).
    IQ3 100 H Cambo 1200 Rodenstock 23,32,90 Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,764
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Personally I find the files extremely flexile when working in C1. One can push the sliders all over the place without a problem. As I am just getting used to C1, I find using it not as difficult as I thought it might be. Sure I go over the PS6 from time to time, but images taken with my old Pentax 645Z from same locations are inferior to these files as they should be considering the expenditure. But then again I have easily had this much tied up in Leica M bodies and glass with 1/4 the resolution to work with, not to mention way less DR.

    Glad I made the switch, however getting used to 5 lenses plus XF+100 in a back pack is the main problem I am having, but at over 70 I just keep on trekking and never look back. I am having fun again and my keepers seem to be plentiful.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    48
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    To say it simply, it is a game changer in so many great ways.

    Earlier this year Graham and I were shooting at Silo City in Buffalo, NY (USA) in difficult light conditions and at times in hazardous areas. The live view for focusing is fantastic. The menu on the back is simple and to me rather intuitive. I was shooting in T mode on my Cambo WRS 5000 with many exposures in the 14-45 seconds range. The back performed marvelously. Having the time of exposure displayed on the back was so darn helpful as I adjusted the exposure time either up or down in capturing the "keeper" image. Using a hand held light meter for this shoot was impossible. I was shooting at ISO 100 because nothing was moving in what I was shooting, so increasing the exposure time enabled me to avoid any issues that might have arisen had I increased the ISO. I felt the battery duration was excellent. The people at the professional post processing house that does my post work were amazed at the detail captured in all of my images. These guys see everything, mostly from big name pro photographers. I'm an amateur.

    I have yet to encounter a situation where the back didn't meet or far exceed my expectations. I cannot say enough good things about the back.

  41. #41
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    543

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Day one with my new IQ3-100 and all I can add to this conversation is, and excuse the profanity, holy s$$t!!!

    First shoot tonight and missed the good light so it was horribly in shadow. Blew out my first shot by three stops. Recovered completely in C1

    Not only recovered, but full of detail and contrast too! Next shot in pano was exposed correctly and I was able to stitch as if nothing had happened.

    Despite being on ramen noodles until the next month, and then living on Amex bonus points after I pay the the bill, I'm seriously impressed!!

    Real DR is beyond what I'd expected btw. Very impressed so far.

    pics to follow ...
    Last edited by GrahamWelland; 19th October 2016 at 14:53.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!
    Likes 8 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #42
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    543

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Oh, and Ken Doo & Dave Chew, yes you told me so and your predictions were indeed on target.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #43
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Oh, and Ken Doo & Dave Chew, yes you told me so and your predictions were indeed on target.
    Spending other people's money is one of our favorite things in this forum!

    Good news Graham. If the Ramen noodles get boring try peanut butter squares: A piece of toast smothered in peanut butter, cut into four pieces. Yum.

    Dave
    davechewphotography.com
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Good move, Graham..... when you use it on your Actus you will be amazed with the ES. I would never be without it. Am in the Dolomites now - my first excursion with the new back and its working like a dream. I have found that a loupe and 2 second delay the best workflow method versus trying to use an Ipad and capture pilot for focus and triggering..... very clumsy and not near as accurate as a loupe.

    Victor
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #45
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Day one with my new IQ3-100 and all I can add to this conversation is, and excuse the profanity, holy s$$t!!!

    First shoot tonight and missed the good light so it was horribly in shadow. Blew out my first shot by three stops. Recovered completely in C1

    Not only recovered, but full of detail and contrast too! Next shot in pano was exposed correctly and I was able to stitch as if nothing had happened.

    Despite being on ramen noodles until the next month, and then living on Amex bonus points after I pay the the bill, I'm seriously impressed!!

    Real DR is beyond what I'd expected btw. Very impressed so fsr.

    pics to follow ...
    Glad you're loving it!

    We look forward to the images.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tucson/Carmel/Jackson Hole
    Posts
    4,247
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Day one with my new IQ3-100 and all I can add to this conversation is, and excuse the profanity, holy s$$t!!!

    First shoot tonight and missed the good light so it was horribly in shadow. Blew out my first shot by three stops. Recovered completely in C1

    Not only recovered, but full of detail and contrast too! Next shot in pano was exposed correctly and I was able to stitch as if nothing had happened.

    Despite being on ramen noodles until the next month, and then living on Amex bonus points after I pay the the bill, I'm seriously impressed!!

    Real DR is beyond what I'd expected btw. Very impressed so fsr.

    pics to follow ...
    You always have a place to stay if you're in Tucson!

    I've had the cousin to the IQ3-100 the IQ1-100 and can agree with everyone. I would have opted for the IQ3 if I were still using the Cambo however this is perfect for me.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  47. #47
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    543

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    These are literally the first two images shot in the wild.

    I completely blew exposure as I trusted the XF AE initially but adjusted them for subsequent shots. Both first two images over-exposed, dropped the first one FOUR stops, the second by 2 stops and combined them as a pano. Bear in mind also these were shot in available darkness post sunset in a shady creek. This is just for illustration of the DR that really impressed me. (I don't normally miss exposure by this much )

    2 min @ ISO 400, 75-150 @ 75mm f/8 & 1 min for second shot.

    As Shot:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Untitled 2.jpg 
Views:	34 
Size:	558.8 KB 
ID:	121934

    adjusted to match:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Untitled.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	660.3 KB 
ID:	121935

    As combined in a pano.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	[Group-0]-CF012566_CF012567-2-images.jpg 
Views:	48 
Size:	1,014.9 KB 
ID:	121936
    Last edited by GrahamWelland; 19th October 2016 at 13:34.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!
    Likes 11 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #48
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    543

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Interesting 'problem' I ran into this weekend when printing on my HP Z3200 24in printer ... the native size of the 100mp files at printer's 300dpi preferred print resolution exceed 24in on the narrowest side!! So for me, every full size print is a down-rez or printer interpolated dpi for the driver. I must admit that this is a nice problem to have.

    Oh, and NO Ken Doo/Don Libby that doesn't mean that I need a new & bigger printer!!
    Remember: adventure before dementia!
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #49
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Interesting 'problem' I ran into this weekend when printing on my HP Z3200 24in printer ... the native size of the 100mp files at printer's 300dpi preferred print resolution exceed 24in on the narrowest side!! So for me, every full size print is a down-rez or printer interpolated dpi for the driver. I must admit that this is a nice problem to have.

    Oh, and NO Ken Doo/Don Libby that doesn't mean that I need a new & bigger printer!!
    I saw the new 64" Epson (P20000) at PhotoPlus. Very nice!

    --Matt
    mattgraysonphoto.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #50
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    543

    Re: IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    I saw the new 64" Epson (P20000) at PhotoPlus. Very nice!

    --Matt
    Nor you Matt!!
    Remember: adventure before dementia!
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •