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!

IQ3 100MP owners/users impressions

Jamgolf

Member
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!
 
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.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
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
 

Jamgolf

Member
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:

tjv

Active member
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.
 

etrump

Well-known member
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.
 

Chipcarterdc

New member
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.

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
 

Attachments

Paul2660

Well-known member
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
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
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.
 

Dan Santoso

New member
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.

1.jpg
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
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
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
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.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
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.
 

Jamgolf

Member
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?
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
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
 

Jamgolf

Member
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:

kdphotography

Well-known member
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
 

etrump

Well-known member
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.

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.

View attachment 119260
 

dchew

Well-known member
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!). :grin: :chug:

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:
Top