Menu
What's new
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!

Please help convince me to keep my IQ4150...or not

P

peterm1

Active member
Hi All. I have been shooting the last several months with my X2D and absolutely love it. At the same time, I was lucky enough to acquire an IQ4150 in a trade several months ago for my Leica system as well, which I use with a Cambo 1600 tech cam, and 32, 70 and 180mm Rodenstock lenses. However, due to the increased portability of the X2D (namely being able to handhold it with its amazing IBIS), and great results I have been getting from the X2D, I have been using the X2D 90% of the time, especially in situations where I can't or don't want to bring a tripod.

What I like about the IQ4150 most are the ability to shift/tilt on the tech cam, the frame averaging feature, dynamic range/noise levels, and insane resolution. However, I ask myself if it is worth having so much money tied up in the Phase One system for these features when the results from the X2D are so good. The X2D resolution is generally enough for me, the color and dynamic range and noise are great, and I could adapt tilt-shift lenses to it if I really wanted to, although I realize the results won't be quite as good as the IQ4/Cambo setup (I don't absolutely need tilt/shift but I like having the option). I do like the frame averaging feature in the IQ4, although I could use ND filters with the X2D (but know it's not quite the same).

Also, for photo travel, even though I might want to take the IQ4 system, I would likely also want to take the X2D given its greater flexibility to shoot from my car, places I can't set up a tripod, when I need to shoot quickly, etc. And I really don't want to carry both systems at the same time.

On the other hand, I have only had the IQ4 for several months and most of that time has been during the winter, so I haven't really had that much opportunity to get out and use it. There are places near me where I like to shoot along the coasts of New England where I think it would get the most use. Part of me thinks I should keep it for at least a year and then make a more considered decision.

Another option I was considering is trading the IQ4 for the Hasselblad 907x system and using that on my tech cam, so I would keep the tilt/shift benefits of the tech cam and great Rodie lenses, while not having so much invested in the system. I could also then use the 907x with my XCD lenses as well. Of course, there's a large resolution difference between the 907X back and the IQ4, and I do appreciate the frame averaging feature of the IQ4.

Finally, I don't love how I have to use Capture One for the IQ4 and Lightroom for the X2D. It would be simpler just to use LR for everything.

Would love to get anybody's thoughts based on their longer term use of the IQ4 and working with IQ4 files.

Thanks and sorry for the long post!

Peter
 
Ray Harrison

Ray Harrison

Well-known member
What's your own value equation? :)

You seem to perhaps value light(er)-weight, more portable, AF, IBIS, and so forth and it may drive more outings with that camera or the different kinds of opportunities such a combination of features enables. If those sorts of things rank higher on your list, the Hasselblad is an absolutely exceptional system and having the 907x for anything tech-cam related or some such makes perfect sense. I've never been a "One Ring to Rule Them All" camera person myself. In my MF gear, I'm less interested in the portability aspects, AF or IBIS and I really value what for me is the flexibility of the IQ4 platform. If I want portability, I've got Leica M gear and if I need AF for birds or what-have-you, some Nikon gear for that. The great thing is that so many systems today have exceptional image quality and there's a solution or system to fit anyone's needs.

I generally stay away from trying to tell people what camera system they "need" to use or why they should have such-n-such. After all, really, the only person that knows what camera you use on any given image is mostly just you and that's who it has to matter to. It's a very personal thing. But from reading what you wrote above, I couldn't articulate any sort of rationale for keeping the IQ4. Sounds like the Hasselblad is already something you use a bit more and fits with your style. The great thing is that it's very hard to go wrong :).

If I were to minimize to just one system, I'd probably ship Steve at CI my IQ4 and IQ3A backs and have him send me a crate of Leica M gear, maybe SL2 (or whatever) for anything AF. For now, I love my flexibility and the capabilities that each platform brings.
 
Greg Haag

Greg Haag

Well-known member
peterm1 said:
Hi All. I have been shooting the last several months with my X2D and absolutely love it. At the same time, I was lucky enough to acquire an IQ4150 in a trade several months ago for my Leica system as well, which I use with a Cambo 1600 tech cam, and 32, 70 and 180mm Rodenstock lenses. However, due to the increased portability of the X2D (namely being able to handhold it with its amazing IBIS), and great results I have been getting from the X2D, I have been using the X2D 90% of the time, especially in situations where I can't or don't want to bring a tripod.

What I like about the IQ4150 most are the ability to shift/tilt on the tech cam, the frame averaging feature, dynamic range/noise levels, and insane resolution. However, I ask myself if it is worth having so much money tied up in the Phase One system for these features when the results from the X2D are so good. The X2D resolution is generally enough for me, the color and dynamic range and noise are great, and I could adapt tilt-shift lenses to it if I really wanted to, although I realize the results won't be quite as good as the IQ4/Cambo setup (I don't absolutely need tilt/shift but I like having the option). I do like the frame averaging feature in the IQ4, although I could use ND filters with the X2D (but know it's not quite the same).

Also, for photo travel, even though I might want to take the IQ4 system, I would likely also want to take the X2D given its greater flexibility to shoot from my car, places I can't set up a tripod, when I need to shoot quickly, etc. And I really don't want to carry both systems at the same time.

On the other hand, I have only had the IQ4 for several months and most of that time has been during the winter, so I haven't really had that much opportunity to get out and use it. There are places near me where I like to shoot along the coasts of New England where I think it would get the most use. Part of me thinks I should keep it for at least a year and then make a more considered decision.

Another option I was considering is trading the IQ4 for the Hasselblad 907x system and using that on my tech cam, so I would keep the tilt/shift benefits of the tech cam and great Rodie lenses, while not having so much invested in the system. I could also then use the 907x with my XCD lenses as well. Of course, there's a large resolution difference between the 907X back and the IQ4, and I do appreciate the frame averaging feature of the IQ4.

Finally, I don't love how I have to use Capture One for the IQ4 and Lightroom for the X2D. It would be simpler just to use LR for everything.

Would love to get anybody's thoughts based on their longer term use of the IQ4 and working with IQ4 files.

Thanks and sorry for the long post!

Peter
Click to expand...
Peter,
For me personally, I love the process of shooting with my technical camera, the frame averaging, the crispness is my Rodenstock 32. I shoot lots of 2 & 3 images pans and the occasionally more, the technical camera works so well for this. That being said, if I did not have those needs and I did not enjoy shooting with the technical camera so much I would certainly consider going completely to something lighter and less expensive. Part of my problem in not being tempted may be my GFX, while it does everything I need, I don't really enjoy shooting with the camera. While I have never shot with the X2D, it seems like a great camera, looks fantastic, love the weight and I have a special fondness for Hasselblad.
Regarding the IQ4 files, I regularly process mine in Lightroom. I find I prefer the Lightroom workflow, but also at times will take both my IQR4 and GFX files into Capture One (I prefer C1 for detailed working with colors).
Yours is not an easy decision, seems like I wrestle with this every year when I evaluate my gear.
Good luck with your decision!
Greg
 
lookbook

lookbook

Well-known member
Hello Peter,

I don't have a Q4 but I also have a technical camera.
I also like you, have too many cameras.

Of course I also asked myself if it makes sense.
My answer to that is always - useful it is not - but fun to use different cameras.

So if you are an amateur like me, why should you count fun "when it is not necessary"?
Take the 10% fun with one camera - and the 90% fun with the other.

That's my tip for you.

Become happy : )

Uwe
 
MGrayson

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
My impression, but I don't have any hard data, is that secondary market value of Phase One backs drop quickly as soon as there is a sensor of the same MP on another camera. If you *are* planning to sell the IQ4150, consider the chip pipeline (about which I know nothing). But given how long Fuji has had 100MP 44x33 sensors, I don't think a 150MP is too far down the road.
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
I have a light portable camera system that I use the most. It brings me a great deal of satisfaction. I also have a medium-format system that I do not use the often. However, I do go back to it from time to time as it brings me a very different shooting experience. Usually, what I shoot drives that choice. Fortunately, I have that choice, so that I don't really feel that bad when my MF gear sits.

Note, I tend to use my cameras for a very long time. If you like to track the current state-of-the-art technology, then that is a different proposition.

There is one other option--get a Cambo Actus for your XD2. That would seem like the best of both worlds.
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
BTW, if you are using a bunch of strangers to convince to do something, then the answer tends to be clear...
 
MGrayson

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Shashin said:
BTW, if you are using a bunch of strangers to convince to do something, then the answer tends to be clear...
Click to expand...
I prefer "Professional photographers don't want you to know these fifteen reasons to keep your IQ4150. Number seven will surprise you!" and "Take this quiz to determine the right medium format system for you!"
(I can hear my daughters "Dad, those are from like fifth grade. RIP.")
 
P

peterm1

Active member
Thanks All - I actually do appreciate and gain knowledge from others' opinions as I reflect on my own so thank you! I will look into the Actus set up - thanks @Shashin. In the back of my head I was also thinking about the resale value sinking in the future as Fuji or others up their sensors over time @MGrayson.
 
P

Paratom

Well-known member
I dont have experience with phase but had a tech cam once with a sinar back, also use Leica S and now x2d a lot.
I also think a lot about camera systems, is it worth to shoot larger sensors etc etc.
For me I feel the x2d is so good, that I dont need anything with an even larger sensor.
I even asked myself if I need x2d , as someone owning Leica SL system and M11 as well....

I would say it depends if you enjoy using the phase and the tech cam, do you have fun using the tilt shift capabilities, do you take the time?
Personally I love portability, I love spontanious shooting, and I love high IQ and strong colors, so the x2d works very well for me at the moment as my high IQ / slow shooting camera.
 
M

Maxx9photo

Active member
IMHO, and I'll make this very simple - Keep the one that you need/use the most.

I used to have X1D2 and 907x along with 8 of the XCD lenses plus Cambo Actus and 2 Rodie lenses.

In the end, I traded up all with an IQ4/XT and only one lens (40mm) for now. I know I lose the flexibility of changing to different lenses but I don't use them all at the same time.

I almost traded back again because that lone reason but have decided, am sticking with this for now.

In the future, I might get X2D, knowing work on 2 different platforms is not ideal but to have an option is always nice!
 
Last edited:
G

Geoff

Well-known member
Its likely you are not alone in this. Many of us got into tech cameras and backs, and love the experience. There is a zen calm, a thoughtfulness, a pleasure in the experience and the shots (IMHO) are better.
Then comes the modestly priced 907, a hand-holdable X1D, then X2D with neat IBIS, not to mention Fuji and that high quality images are now possible on many more portable platforms.
So like others, am also on two platforms. CFV II back on tech cameras works well enough, but would rather a Phase back with bigger sensor and C1 processing (although not so delighted with LLC shots).
Maybe its not so much the backs but rather "tripod or not"? Although the idea of living with one camera, and a couple of lenses is a very nice thought. Probably make better work that way!
For now, not willing to change.
 
J

jng

Well-known member
This is an interesting (and yes, a first world) quandary. I, too, have both systems. Although using the Cambo/IQ setup is more work than shooting with the Hasselblad, I've never once regretted taking it along (my aching bones notwithstanding). For me, there's just no substitute for the control that the IQ4/tech cam gives me with shift, tilt, in-camera frame averaging , etc. I also prefer working with the physically larger 40 x 54mm sensor. That said, sometimes bringing along my Cambo kit is neither practical nor desirable, for example when traveling or when I just want to go about things more simply. The X2D (and X1D before it) can make wonderful images (as does my iPhone, by the way). Lately I don't find myself using either system that much, but I'm happy that they are there when time allows and inspiration strikes.

To the OP: keep whichever system gives you the most joy and motivates you to get out there and create. Or keep both! As @kdphotography (the ultimate enabler) wrote previously, you only live once!

John
 
P. Chong

P. Chong

Well-known member
Geoff said:
Its likely you are not alone in this. Many of us got into tech cameras and backs, and love the experience. There is a zen calm, a thoughtfulness, a pleasure in the experience and the shots (IMHO) are better.
Then comes the modestly priced 907, a hand-holdable X1D, then X2D with neat IBIS, not to mention Fuji and that high quality images are now possible on many more portable platforms.
So like others, am also on two platforms. CFV II back on tech cameras works well enough, but would rather a Phase back with bigger sensor and C1 processing (although not so delighted with LLC shots).
Maybe its not so much the backs but rather "tripod or not"? Although the idea of living with one camera, and a couple of lenses is a very nice thought. Probably make better work that way!
For now, not willing to change.
Click to expand...
I find the IQ4 back does not need an LCC frame, due to the BSI sensor. the IQ3 and CFV backs do.
 
P

peterm1

Active member
OP here. I'm starting to think more about keeping the IQ4. @P. Chong the point about not needing an LCC frame is a good one - I never enjoyed making them and will not go back to that with the 907x/CFV back. I'm going to a Phase One Experience day tomorrow in NYC at Foto Care and will also chat with the team there as well and may get some further direction in my choice. Thanks all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top