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 long exposure issue - shadow filled with red color cast

Ha, I guess so, at base ISO with normal exposures pushing shadows 100 is perfectly doable, on an underexposed shot at 30 minutes, you're asking a lot.
Mat
So many haters of aerial mode... Sure, I just set the IQ3 100MP at normal mode with the XF+ body, and set the IQ250 at aerial mode with the Alpa body.

Phase One's specifications? Of course the IQ3 100MP is now "within Phase One's specs". What about the IQ250? It's now running "out of Phase One's specs".

13.JPG

Let's do the long exposure! Shouldn't we expect better shadow noise from the IQ3 100MP? Why is it pink again?

11.jpg

I also attach RawDigger screenshots just to prove that the IQ250 even had a slight disadvantage for shadow exposure.

12.JPG
 
Void... can you please post your support case number under which your dealer has logged these raws/reports/issues with Phase One? I'd like to check out some of the raws and dialogue.
Hi Doug, I'll have to ask for permission from my dealer first. Though you may have access to all dialogues it's a good idea that I ask them first. Though this is totally irrelevant for this thread. I prefer to focus on the IQ3 100MP now as I wish Phase One could make it a greater digital back, not just a great digital back. Whatever Phase One plans to do with the corner issues of the IQ260 and the IQ3 80MP I no longer care about these CCDs.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Hi Doug, I'll have to ask for permission from my dealer first. ....
Now this I call, "bullshit."

There's nothing to hide, nor is there any need for confidentiality. You have no problem plastering the forums here with your files and gyrations---yet when it comes to another dealer or a very capable tech (Doug) checking the files and dialogue, you balk?? It's your support case number.
If there is such a significant and profound issue as you claim (so far you seem to be the only real complainant thus far) and you wish the IQ3 100MP to be a "greater back"---cut the ****. Be open forthright and disclose. To hell with any purported need to ask your dealer. It's your support case with Phase! If there is an issue, you seem to have no problem with hitting the forums. How about a little transparency?

The real silliness is that it seems very very few actual owners or users photograph and push the files as you do. If that truly is your expectation, then good luck to you, and I hope you find a camera system that works for you. I don't think the IQ3 100MP is it absent a firmware update. Maybe Hasselblad's special recipe will work for you when they finally release their 100MP back. Or you might just have to wait for the IQ4 series...

I'm outta here. Good luck to you.

ken
 

tjv

Active member
I can't push my Credo 60 to +4 stops, +100 shadows and max contrast with half hour exposure without seeing noise and banding. I think I'm going to open a support case with Leaf because I should be able to forget about the laws of physics and logic when exposing photos with gear that costs this much. While waiting for them to reply in the form of a firmware update and public apologiy with the CEO being tar and feathered then paraded down the main street in Copenhagen in the nude, I might go out and take photos in the way my equipment was designed to operate. Who knows, maybe I might enjoy the process.
 
M

mjr

Guest
"So many haters of aerial mode... Sure, I just set the IQ3 100MP at normal mode with the XF+ body, and set the IQ250 at aerial mode with the Alpa body.

Phase One's specifications? Of course the IQ3 100MP is now "within Phase One's specs". What about the IQ250? It's now running "out of Phase One's specs".

Let's do the long exposure! Shouldn't we expect better shadow noise from the IQ3 100MP? Why is it pink again?"


Who has said they are a hater of aerial mode, certainly not me, it does what it is intended to do really well, it allows reusing of a dark frame in situations where you want rapid, short duration shots in aerial situations which can transfer to handheld and other situations when you need that ability, the key here is that it's reusing a dark frame that is adequate for the shot duration. You are using it way beyond what it was designed for and then complaining it doesn't work as you want it to, well that's just the way it is surely?!

I personally don't think that expecting excellent shadow performance on 30 min shots pushed 4 stops and with +100 shadows is reasonable, bearing in mind that even with that massive boost, the sections of the image you are showing are still really dark, it's just not reasonable to expect perfection in those situations from a camera pushing around so much data. The issue is your expectations rather than the back's performance in my opinion. As you state, the 100 is running within Phase One specs so surely common sense dictates that what you are doing is outside those specs.

It's not unreasonable to want a piece of equipment that is as expensive as the 3100 to perform better than anything else out there but it's unreasonable to complain about it when you are asking way more than is possible. I can justify the expense of a 3100 and after reading your posts, I would not hesitate to buy one if it benefitted my work but I have not yet hit situations where the 260 is lacking so I am not buying.

I'm off to do as tjv has excellently suggested and shoot my 260 as it was intended to be used and wait for the public tar and feathering, haha!

Have a nice weekend all.

Mat
 
Now this I call, "bullshit."

There's nothing to hide, nor is there any need for confidentiality. You have no problem plastering the forums here with your files and gyrations---yet when it comes to another dealer or a very capable tech (Doug) checking the files and dialogue, you balk?? It's your support case number.
If there is such a significant and profound issue as you claim (so far you seem to be the only real complainant thus far) and you wish the IQ3 100MP to be a "greater back"---cut the ****. Be open forthright and disclose. To hell with any purported need to ask your dealer. It's your support case with Phase! If there is an issue, you seem to have no problem with hitting the forums. How about a little transparency?

The real silliness is that it seems very very few actual owners or users photograph and push the files as you do. If that truly is your expectation, then good luck to you, and I hope you find a camera system that works for you. I don't think the IQ3 100MP is it absent a firmware update. Maybe Hasselblad's special recipe will work for you when they finally release their 100MP back. Or you might just have to wait for the IQ4 series...

I'm outta here. Good luck to you.

ken
There is no IQ3 100MP support case number yet because I'm still collecting raw files. I'm certainly glad if Doug will take a look into these IQ3 100MP raw files.

Regarding the IQ260 support case number, that is irrelevant to this thread. I hope those IQ260 users send their unit straight back to Phase One through their dealer, if they disagree with the way I handle this IQ3 100MP "issue". (I did not waste my time sending my IQ260 back to Phase One.)

There's no secret to hide? LUL So many IQ3 100MP users "hide" their raw files from me and don't even allow me to mention our private message conversations.

You obviously have contributed so much to this thread and have been fun and interactive. :LOL: Have a good weekend :cool:
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Voidshatter finds and issue and discusses it. Sooner or later Phase One fixes the issue. A win for all?!

Best regards
Erik


Now this I call, "bullshit."

There's nothing to hide, nor is there any need for confidentiality. You have no problem plastering the forums here with your files and gyrations---yet when it comes to another dealer or a very capable tech (Doug) checking the files and dialogue, you balk?? It's your support case number.
If there is such a significant and profound issue as you claim (so far you seem to be the only real complainant thus far) and you wish the IQ3 100MP to be a "greater back"---cut the ****. Be open forthright and disclose. To hell with any purported need to ask your dealer. It's your support case with Phase! If there is an issue, you seem to have no problem with hitting the forums. How about a little transparency?

The real silliness is that it seems very very few actual owners or users photograph and push the files as you do. If that truly is your expectation, then good luck to you, and I hope you find a camera system that works for you. I don't think the IQ3 100MP is it absent a firmware update. Maybe Hasselblad's special recipe will work for you when they finally release their 100MP back. Or you might just have to wait for the IQ4 series...

I'm outta here. Good luck to you.

ken
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi 'Void',

I got the impression that you use dense ND filters in your testing. I am pretty sure some of those are quite permissive in the IR-range. Could it be an IR-filtering issue?

As the colouring is not uniform I would associate it with beam angle. Do you get the same colouring with different lenses?

Best regards
Erik

So many haters of aerial mode... Sure, I just set the IQ3 100MP at normal mode with the XF+ body, and set the IQ250 at aerial mode with the Alpa body.

Phase One's specifications? Of course the IQ3 100MP is now "within Phase One's specs". What about the IQ250? It's now running "out of Phase One's specs".

View attachment 119808

Let's do the long exposure! Shouldn't we expect better shadow noise from the IQ3 100MP? Why is it pink again?

View attachment 119810

I also attach RawDigger screenshots just to prove that the IQ250 even had a slight disadvantage for shadow exposure.

View attachment 119809
 
Hi 'Void',

I got the impression that you use dense ND filters in your testing. I am pretty sure some of those are quite permissive in the IR-range. Could it be an IR-filtering issue?

As the colouring is not uniform I would associate it with beam angle. Do you get the same colouring with different lenses?

Best regards
Erik
I have just received another raw file from another friend. This unit has firmware 3.08.1 with serial number IG01128?. It was installed on an Alpa Max with Rodenstock 90mm HRSW. This test was done in a laboratory with controlled lighting conditions. No filter was used. It was shot in aerial mode and zero latency, with 1/60s as the first exposure since power on, and a subsequent long exposure of 30 minutes without darkframe NR. Apparently the red cast in shadow is dominant. This is so far the third unit showing this "issue", and this raw file will go to the same support case as well. It would be stupid and a waste of time to send in our units to Phase One straight away, as I'm sure Phase One can reliably reproduce this "issue" with their own units.

38.JPG
 
Update:

Another test setup:

a) Power on and couple with ALPA Schneider 75mm f/5.6 APO-Helvetar without shift;
b) Set camera mode to aerial and zero latency;
c) Shoot an image at 1/60s;
d) Shoot LCC;
e) Shoot an image at 1/8s without strong ND filter;
f) Shoot an image at 2min with Lee Big Stopper (100mm x 100mm square);
g) Shoot an image at 30min with Singh-Ray 15-stop Mor-Slo (100mm x 100mm square). Bang!

IQ3 100MP demo unit (SN: IG01112?) with firmware 4.03.2:

15.JPG

And again with an IQ250 with the same setup above for comparison:

16.JPG

This test confirms that the red cast in shadow is not associated with specific wide angle lenses.
 
A win for all?!
Only if Phase One fixes it.

There's a chance that Phase One will never fix it just like Sony has never fixed the long exposure for the A7R-II.

This would certainly reduce the pride of ownership of the gear, as well as potential re-sales value of the gear. That's why the A7R-II owners tried so hard to defend the use of darkframe NR.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Even if Phase One doesn't fix it it is better to be aware of the problem than not to be aware of the problem…

Best regards
Erik


Only if Phase One fixes it.

There's a chance that Phase One will never fix it just like Sony has never fixed the long exposure for the A7R-II.

This would certainly reduce the pride of ownership of the gear, as well as potential re-sales value of the gear. That's why the A7R-II owners tried so hard to defend the use of darkframe NR.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Hi Doug, I'll have to ask for permission from my dealer first. Though you may have access to all dialogues it's a good idea that I ask them first. Though this is totally irrelevant for this thread.
I mean the support case for the IQ3 100mp, not the older support case.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Why are you exposing your dark frame at 1/60 if your final exposure is going to be many minutes? These are different by a factor of 3000x.
 
Update:

Another test setup:

a) Power on and couple with ALPA Schneider 75mm f/5.6 APO-Helvetar without shift;
b) Set camera mode to normal mode and zero latency; (this means with darkframe NR)
c) Shoot an image at 1/8s without strong ND filter;
d) Shoot an image at 2min with Lee Big Stopper (100mm x 100mm square);
e) Shoot an image at 30min with Singh-Ray 15-stop Mor-Slo (100mm x 100mm square). Bang!

IQ3 100MP demo unit (SN: IG01112?) with firmware 4.03.2:

17.JPG
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
I mean the support case for the IQ3 100mp, not the older support case.
That's also exactly what I meant and what I thought this thread was referring to.

This really is worthless banter as far as I'm concerned. Communicating with a Dealer and Phase One should have been the very first step taken here---and that's been communicated over the course of how many pages on this thread?? :shocked:

I'm now upset that I can't auto-start my AMG-GTS from the touch screen of the IQ3 100MP. Anyone else have this problem too? Off to Denmark... :rolleyes:

I'm with Mat, here. Your expectations are unreasonable. It's a simple conclusion that the IQ3 100MP is not going to work for how you want it to. That's what rental or loaners before purchase are all about. Glad you took the time to find out.

ken
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi Paul,

Did you get your IQ3 100 MP yet?

I guess that you have some interest in this long exposure with/without dark frame, too?

Void has found some issues on the A7rII, too. Personally, I seldom shoot longer than 30s and I have disabled that long exposure noise reduction on the A7rII, as it forces 12 bit readout.

Best regards
Erik


Dave's results will be most interesting from this last test.

I have a feeling personally, that Voidshatter's type of shot was never tested by P1. For them Aerial mode is for use by the Aerial cameras, and none of them would be shooting for 20minutes on a single exposure would they? Thus the back is in spec.

On the XF, you have to use the LE mode and wait out the same amount of time via the dark frame, (so again more than likely most shooters wanting this type of shot are back on 645z or 35mm) as waiting for 20 extra minutes for the LE mode to finish is just too much of a cost in time and possibly missed opportunities, not to mention added heat build up as the back is working the entire extra 20 minutes.

Very well may have been just overlooked and is a problem with heat build up or something similar.

It also may be why there is no video recording possibilities, again due to heat build up? Most Live View via HDMI session would not be anywhere near this long.

Might very well be just a limitation of 100MP CMOS. At least this generation.

Paul C
 
Communicating with a Dealer and Phase One should have been the very first step taken here---and that's been communicated over the course of how many pages on this thread?? :shocked:
Welcome back to this thread :grin: My friend already did that before he came to me, and his dealer told him that his IQ3 100MP was the only one with long exposure issues among all units sold in China, and that he should send his IQ3 100MP back to Denmark. His dealer were about to create a support case with Phase One when he sends his unit back, and he almost did that. My test results totally changed that. Now he no longer needs to send his unit back to Denmark for now.

Your expectations are unreasonable.
Really? #6 of this thread and #136 of this thread falls within your expectations? These were shot with darkframe NR on (from two different units). Please, have more fun here :salute:
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
All emotions aside, looking at the testing from Void (if I understand his parameters on the last test), that at 30 minute exposures WITH long exposure noise reduction ON, he is still getting a red cast to the files. That would not be within Phase One specs, as the back should be able to produce up to 1hour. Per his previous testing, the 100MP with Long Noise on, @ 30 minutes is also not showing as clean as the IQ250, take away the red noise and just look at the finer details.

I away from my camera for the next 2 days, but will test mine Monday with an XF with the big stopper from LEE, I am curious now as this does bring back memories of my P45+ (which had a similar issue with excessive red noise @ 15 minutes or longer), however Phase did know about this and made a fix to all P45+ cameras with a newer firmware which did take away the issue.

I have only shot my 100 up to 5 minutes, and all of those shots were on the XF with a dark frame. During the shoot I was in outdoor conditions that were not ideal for longer exposures per Phase One, as I was at 90 degrees ambient temp and 100% humidity. But the back did fine.

Paul C
 
Top