Reasons for sale
I wasn't going to do this but I have had so many requests by PM (and a couple here) to say why I'm selling that I thought I'd go ahead.
Firstly: let me stress up front that I am amazed at Phase's achievement in producing the IQ180. I have no real absolute complaints about it, neither have I experienced any serious frustrations with reliability or stability. So I am not selling it because there is anything 'wrong' with it. The new screen and processor have finally accompanied the sensor range into the 21st Century and when the DF body does the same thing, it will all hang together beautifully.
Now my reasons:
1) I was not expecting the hassle with the LCCs on wider Schneiders. In giving with one hand Phase took away with the other, reducing the available movements and making even unshifted files look subtly 'processed'. I know that there's a new algorithm but I just can't be bothered to enter another round of testing and analysis to see how effective it is, nor do I want to be gamed into yet another round of gear switching into longer technical glass or other manufacturers' glass.
2) I have never liked the DF body. I know some people can focus it on moving objects in the dark but I can't! And it locks up a lot when using MUP and a cable release (known bug apparently). It has bad shutter lag too, and generally feels indecisive and unresponsive - for example, in MUP mode, which you often have to use because the base ISO of 35 and the need for certainty on focus often mean tripod use and slow shutter speeds, the DF body insists on a brief attempt at focus before the shutter actuates even when set to MF. So it is hard to feel that you and the camera are working together.
3) Whether used on the DF or on a technical camera, and despite focus mask, one nearly always needs to use a tripod if one is to get sufficient DOF to ensure focus and yet keep at low ISO which, for best quality, you need to do.
4) Lack of live view makes 'exposing to the right' impossible other than by iteration. One of the main advantages of the sensor is its phenomenal DR but if you risk losing a stop of that because there's no live view histogram, then you give up some of that advantage. On a Panasonic GH2 for example, using the histo means you can nail the exposure all the time with incredible ease and accuracy and that in part at least closes the DR gap.
Right, that's the negatives. They form about ten percent of the reason. The rest is down to my changing work and shooting needs plus my perception of where the next generation of cameras will fit into that.
Some context:
I have an M9 which has amazing glass, not only technically but also in terms of its beautiful descriptive powers. It took me literally years to get a set of glass that focusses accurately on my body, through iterations of M8, M8.2 and M9 and I am now 'there' and this accurate pairing, in combination with the lack of AA filter, can give me the very 'clean' look of MF when I need it and at a fraction of the bulk. Sure, you can't blow it up so big but my printer goes to 24" wide and prints to that size can be very beautiful. I also nearly always print smaller these days. Nonetheless, in the Big Clear Out I might even sell the M9 now (I will never sell any of the glass) and await the next generation of M using Leica gear.
I have a 5DII which I used to use for most of the other bases (zoom, AF, flexibility etc) and it is an extremely good camera with no poetry in its soul. I might sell it but keep the better glass, in anticipation of the next generation of Canon DSLR, which I am willing to gamble will give me the extra resolution and DR boost I'd like to have.
I have a Fuji X100 which I will probably sell because, much as I like the files, it behaves indecisively. Nuff said.
I recently sold my 'second home' setup, a Nikon D7000 because it rarely got the focus exactly right and because IMHO none of the DX zoom glass is good enough for the sensor, which has great DR. No point having great DR if nothing is sharp.
So as you can see, I have a lot of gear (I know I amongst friends on this at GetDPI!) and am having that 'time for a reshuffle' feeling. Why?...
The joker in the pack is the Panasonic GH2 I recently acquired to replace the Nikon, with 7-14, 45-140, 100-300 and 20mm pancake. My attention was drawn to it by a famous rapper turned film maker who let me have a go with his, and then by Mark Dubovoy's piece over at Lula about taking it and an S2 on safari.
Everything they say about it is true. Whatever the limitations imposed by the small sensor, and despite the variable abilities of the 45-140, this is a frickin' awesome setup. I just got back from a two week trip around Greece and Turkey, pure vacation but I knew there would be some great photo ops, and you can get the whole setup, including an iPad with Snapseed on it, into a Billingham shoulder bag. And let me tell you it was enormous fun and enormously great to use. The ergonomics are fantastic, the exposure abilities are spot on, the focus is very fast and nearly always accurate and even the higher ISO is often useable. The accuracy of the EVF and the 14-600mm equivalent zoom range means little cropping, the F1.7 pancake means you can use it handheld in dark places, the brilliantly thought out interface means you pretty much never miss a shot because of a need to fiddle. etc etc.
Now let me make it clear: I am not replacing an IQ180 with a GH2 but boy, did that GH2 crystallise for me what I really like in a camera and what draws my creative juices to the fore! Let me stick in a small example here (in fact, two)
OK that one is a) a crop and b) I had to make one of my rare trips to Photoshop to remove part of the diving platform but this next one is as-shot other than some very tarty treatment in Snapseed.
Then how's about this one, taken with the longer zoom on the spur of the moment as the action suddenly unfolded. Again given the trick treatment in Snapseed (sorry about this, I never, ever, ever have Fun with Filters and Borders but Snapseed and the iPad made me do it...) but the original is easily good enough for print publication had the buildings been more famous...
Pause for breath.
A couple of years ago I had a job to photograph a Very Famous Person. I am a landscape and sometimes street photographer and I hate doing portraits but I had good reasons to say Yes. I took along the whole Phase setup, a million reflectors, cube, tripod, two assistants, blah di blah. Lovely north facing light, which failed as soon as my allotted 15 minutes began. Subject looked in horror at huge setup. After 11 minutes I grabbed my 5DII with 24-105 zoom in desperation and dragged my subject next door, sat him down and made him smile. That one shot has been used globally. Not a great shot, but not a bad one. None of the 'fancy gear' shots got used.
So I guess what I am trying to say is that I have tried all this Big Gear and it just doesn't work for me. I have about five shots from the past few years of digital MF that I would save in the event of a fire.
Now, much as I want to say, like an impotent lover, 'it's not you, it's me' I don't actually think that is totally true. I haven't put in my 10,000 hours to be a truly expert MF photographer but I am 50 and I had my first MF studio camera at the age of 20 and I have shot my fair share of 4x5 so my technique is probably 'good enough' by now, at least a lot of the time. And I still don't get the results I want and some of that is down to the intimidating form factor, retrograde ergonomics and action-delaying technical requirements of shooting with MF digital.
In fact I'd go as far as to say that there are only about four main reasons I might choose MF over, say, a top of the range Canikon.
* DR
* Resolution
* Ability to use a tech cam
* Desire for extremely narrow DOF
Of these, MF gives up some of the DR advantage (which is narrow over the best Nikons in any event) by requiring an exposure technique of such exactitude to achieve it that much spontaneity is lost. The extra resolution is the Killer App but really, how often is it needed? I know there are some uses for which it is vital and I know that some print buyers go over their purchases with a loupe, but mine don't. As for the ability to use a tech cam, well, look at all the uncertainty going on around what the IQ 180 lets you do compared to a P65+... And as for DOF, I can get many of the DOF effects I want on a MFT sensor and all of them on full frame.
So, long dull ramble, sorry but several people did ask! For those who want an executive summary:
* There's nothing badly wrong with the Phase gear. A few niggles but basically it is amazing, state of the art and the best you can get.
* I personally want smaller, lighter gear that allows me to have it with me more often and use it more flexibly and I think the next generation of gear from the mainstream manufacturers will allow me to have that with 'gap closing' performance
for my needs...
All that expensive MF stuff sits, reproachfully, in a locked and heavily insured cupboard. I drag it out with a sigh, lug it around, set it up, tweak and fiddle.... and that process mostly kills my subject stone dead.
In my hands, it takes the most beautiful pictures of corpses.
:ROTFL:
Tim
ps for anyone interested in just how schlocky you can be with a GH2, Snapseed and an iPad the rest of that set of shots is
here...
I can only ask for clemency. I was on holiday Your Honour.
