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!

  • Recently, there has been an increased activity from spammers, which may result in you receiving unwanted private messages. We are working hard to limit this activity.

DF+ & CMOS IQ Backs

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I'm almost embarrassed to post this but I just spent the day shooting with my new IQ150 on DF+ fw 2.3.1 and ... It seems to have been transformed in terms of usability. Seamless integration between the body and back, and I just noticed that the back now has up to seven bracketing stops as an option (which I don't recall seeing before).

Live view is a real transformer. Totally integrated with the DF+ too in the right modes (well, it was before but now it's usable).

There, I said it, DF+ & IQx50 at least seems like a world of difference to my IQ260 already. Let's see how long the honeymoon lasts ;)
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
Congratulation , Graham .

You pointed it out yourself:
There, I said it, DF+ & IQx50 at least seems like a world of difference to my IQ260 already. Let's see how long the honeymoon lasts ;)
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Does the DF+ enter Live View mode the same way as the DF with the 150?

Move the shutter speed dial on the DF or DF+ to timer, (T) hit Live view from the back, the hit the shutter button on the DF or DF+.

Or does the DF+ have a more integrated flow like a dedicated button on the camera the is communicating to the back?

PS, Congratulations on the 150 and FPS, I keep seeing the CMOS back as my future, just can't justify the $$ loss I would take currently, hopefully Phase will bring some new program out to help other 260 customers who have seen the "light"

Paul
 
Last edited:

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Does the DF+ enter Live View mode the same way as the DF with the 150?

Move the shutter speed dial on the DF or DF+ to timer, (T) hit Live view from the back, the hit the shutter button on the DF or DF+.

Or does the DF+ have a more integrated flow like a dedicated button on the camera the is communicating to the back?

Paul
With the latest body and back firmware, all Credo, IQ, and IQ2 backs can automatically put the body mirror and shutter up when the user pushes the live view button on the digital back.

You can see this in the IQ250 Merry Go Round Live View video.

It also automatically closes the mirror and shutter when the user exists live view on the digital back.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
With the latest body and back firmware, all Credo, IQ, and IQ2 backs can automatically put the body mirror and shutter up when the user pushes the live view button on the digital back.

You can see this in the IQ250 Merry Go Round Live View video.

It also automatically closes the mirror and shutter when the user exists live view on the digital back.
By the latest back, you mean the DF+? Sadly I still have the DF and the cost to get to the DF+ is 5K, so that won't be happening anytime soon.

I assume for those of us still laboring with the DF, you still have to get there they way I describe?

Paul
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
With the DF+ you no longer need the rigmarole of messing with timer mode etc. You just hit the LV button on the back and it all works just like it would on a D800 etc, albeit in M/A modes.

Regarding $5k for a DF+, that's the new price if you buy it alone. I got mine when I upgraded my IQ160 -> IQ260 and it was less than half that price in a bundle.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
I was not given any email notification when Phase One offered a "trade in", for a DF to DF+, at the time I was more focused on tech solutions so I did not pursue it. However when I did look at the 260 first back in Mid 2013, I did ask about moving to a DF+ and was told 4995.00. No interest in trade in at that time.

Glad to see that Phase finally got it to work like normal on the DF+

When they announce the "new" body sometime later this year or next, then DF+ may start to show up on the used market.

Paul
 

Egor

New member
Yes that one single feature (LV without rigamorol) was worth the upgrade for us. I crowed about it a lot on the boards but the feature got lost in all the other new stuff at the time like the Credo etc. and many people seem to genuinely dislike the DF camera
I am glad its getting some press because the DF+ has some great improvements that make the whole experience better.
We were able to sell our old DF for over $2500 so it was almost a wash on the new Credo Kit
 

Egor

New member
Graham, the wifi- capture pilot feature + an iPad will blow your mind!
I think its only available on wifi enabled backs but should work on IQ260?
We use it on our IQ250 and I think the app is free (Capture Pilot)

We sometimes use it while tethered to IQ250 via Firewire and walk around the studio showing the composition to art director in a different room. If she likes it, we can change settings, shoot from the iPad, zoom in, check focus..review...all wirelessly anywhere in the building. Really impressive for MF!

For some odd reason, the camera closes down the lens in LV, and the best results are with the lens wide open, so its an extra step to remember (opening the lens for LV, then remembering to close it back down for the exposure). Also, white balance in LV would be nicer. But all in all, a really great feature and a long ways from the gymnastics just a few years ago with our Aptus/DF :)
 
Graham, the wifi- capture pilot feature + an iPad will blow your mind!
I think its only available on wifi enabled backs but should work on IQ260?
We use it on our IQ250 and I think the app is free (Capture Pilot)

We sometimes use it while tethered to IQ250 via Firewire and walk around the studio showing the composition to art director in a different room. If she likes it, we can change settings, shoot from the iPad, zoom in, check focus..review...all wirelessly anywhere in the building. Really impressive for MF!

For some odd reason, the camera closes down the lens in LV, and the best results are with the lens wide open, so its an extra step to remember (opening the lens for LV, then remembering to close it back down for the exposure). Also, white balance in LV would be nicer. But all in all, a really great feature and a long ways from the gymnastics just a few years ago with our Aptus/DF :)
No, the IQ260 is a CCD, and Capture Pilot for streaming of Live View on it is "broken".
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Graham, the wifi- capture pilot feature + an iPad will blow your mind!
I think its only available on wifi enabled backs but should work on IQ260?
We use it on our IQ250 and I think the app is free (Capture Pilot)

We sometimes use it while tethered to IQ250 via Firewire and walk around the studio showing the composition to art director in a different room. If she likes it, we can change settings, shoot from the iPad, zoom in, check focus..review...all wirelessly anywhere in the building. Really impressive for MF!

For some odd reason, the camera closes down the lens in LV, and the best results are with the lens wide open, so its an extra step to remember (opening the lens for LV, then remembering to close it back down for the exposure). Also, white balance in LV would be nicer. But all in all, a really great feature and a long ways from the gymnastics just a few years ago with our Aptus/DF :)
Glad to see that maybe Phase One has written some code to allow this to work better for the 250.

With the 260, Capture Pilot, will not stream live view, and of course live view on the CCD back requires a few more steps, see other posts on this in this forum.

However I was an early adopter to Capture Pilot, as soon as it came out for my 260. Results?

Not good, and I have tried with the latest 260 back firmware and still same results:

1. Slow to connect wifi and not consistent connection, it will often drop even in the field when there are no other wifi networks around.
2. Zoom to 100% is pretty much worthless as Capture Pilot STILL can't resolve the images from the 260 at 100%. They appear off register, and blurred just enough that you can't really get an idea of critical focus. This is with "respect retina" on in settings.
3. The speed of transfer is very slow to tedious at times and other times very fast, but it never stabilizes. Eventually all of my sessions will required either a reboot of the ipad, 260 or both, most times both.
4. If you are working in a area with multiple wifi networks, then the weak signal from the 260 can drop and you then pick up a stronger signal, then you have to reboot everything again.

Still with all of that, if Phase could have just made the view at 100% as good as the view from the back's own LCD, I would still mess with it, but I consistently have to zoom back to around a 70% view and in critical areas, you just can't tell focus.

These issues and more have led to most CCD back users tethering to a Surface Pro2 or 3 instead,, just overall much more reliable and the info being viewed is much better to gauge the image.

I can easily see the advantages you have pointed out, especially the ability to move around from the back and show images. But on the CCD backs, it seems a bit half baked, and from your reports is seems that the CMOS system of the 250 works much better.

Paul
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
I haven't tried this out as I have no need to run around the studio with a tablet---but this should work for USB3 enabled MFDBs when tethered to the Surface Pro.

The Microsoft Surface Pro 2 and 3 are Miracast capable devices. You should be above to wireless project or mirror the screen to compatible viewing devices, such as monitors, HD TV, and tablets. Live view may be iffy on CCD MFDBs, but it's hard to beat the 100% zoom in view on a RAW in C1Pro8.

ken
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I completely wrote off the wifi capabilities with my 260 for exactly the reasons cited by Paul. It was a waste of time and energy in the field - perhaps ok in a studio but worthless at 5am in the middle of a field when trying to connect, stay connected or checking accurate focus results.

It was so bad that I even bought some microsoft devices! :ROTFL:
 

Egor

New member
I don't own a CCD that also has wifi so can't comment on that. Sounds like a bummer. :(
For our CCD back like the Credo80 we just tether to large screen projection. Its OK, but CCD Live View is pretty lame in comparison to CMOS

On the IQ250, it is infinitely better and coupled with the DF+, a joy.
We haven't experienced too many problems with the WiFi LV Capture Pilot thing. So I guess its a "your mileage may vary..." kindle thing.
We even use the WiFi to iPad to AppleTV to Large Screen projection sometimes

Bummer it didn't work for you on the IQ260, Graham. If it had you may have gotten the IQ250 and checked it out.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Truly usable live view on the IQ260 would probably been enough reason to not upgrade. Once I'd tried live view with the CMOS sensor in the 645Z, Credo 50c & IQ250 that I'd had hands on with, my wallet was doomed ...

I've never really had any challenges with the image quality or DR with the IQ260 since I'm always shooting off a tripod anyway and could bracket if required. (Ok, that's not quite true - the rare centrefolding with stretched B&W tones was annoying).
 
Truly usable live view on the IQ260 would probably been enough reason to not upgrade. Once I'd tried live view with the CMOS sensor in the 645Z, Credo 50c & IQ250 that I'd had hands on with, my wallet was doomed ...

I've never really had any challenges with the image quality or DR with the IQ260 since I'm always shooting off a tripod anyway and could bracket if required. (Ok, that's not quite true - the rare centrefolding with stretched B&W tones was annoying).
If bracketing was a viable option for me I would have continued to use my IQ260. I'm yet to see anyone who claimed to have no issue with alignment in blending to succeed in my test shots: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5i9dgi756x4yije/AABKcpNvQov8SFzbZuupv3E1a?dl=0. Feel free to download these RAW files if you are up to a challenge :D

 

Paul2660

Well-known member
I bracket pretty much everything with the 260/rm3di and have never really had issues with alignment. If there is any slight alignment problem it is very easy to load the images into CC and auto align them.

Exposure brackets all manual as I using the Copal shutter.

Stitched images always work also.

28mm 35mm 40mm 60mm 90mm and now 120mm all work well.

Paul
 
I bracket pretty much everything with the 260/rm3di and have never really had issues with alignment. If there is any slight alignment problem it is very easy to load the images into CC and auto align them.

Exposure brackets all manual as I using the Copal shutter.

Stitched images always work also.

28mm 35mm 40mm 60mm 90mm and now 120mm all work well.

Paul
I'd be curious to see 100% crop of the edge between the buildings and the sky (both leftmost side and rightmost side) if you can really align my images provided above :D
 

Egor

New member
Hi Void,
Took a quick look at your raw files and not sure why they don't line up, but they clearly don't, as you have pointed out. If I didn't know better, I'd say they were shot at slightly different apertures?
In any case, a simple 100% overlay-difference map shows where they do not line up. I could do it using helicon or even warp tools if it were mine, but I'd be curious as to why they don't line up too. ;)
I have shot many multiple exposure-blended images with Credo80 and IQ250 (for masking reasons with fly-away hair on products and models) and have not experienced this problem. But Mine are in studio conditions using a DF+ standard primes, etc...
 
Hi Void,
Took a quick look at your raw files and not sure why they don't line up, but they clearly don't, as you have pointed out. If I didn't know better, I'd say they were shot at slightly different apertures?
In any case, a simple 100% overlay-difference map shows where they do not line up. I could do it using helicon or even warp tools if it were mine, but I'd be curious as to why they don't line up too. ;)
I have shot many multiple exposure-blended images with Credo80 and IQ250 (for masking reasons with fly-away hair on products and models) and have not experienced this problem. But Mine are in studio conditions using a DF+ standard primes, etc...
Hi, thanks for confirming this!

They were shot at the same aperture and same focus, but the foreground was shot with only the centerfilter, while the sky was shot with both the centerfilter, the ND filter and the ND grad filter. With 2 additional layers of filters the angle of view slightly changes. This distortion is perhaps non-linear and more complicated than the traditional breathing issue that Helicon Focus can deal with.

The reason why I can't shoot both frames with the same set of filters on:

a) I was shooting long exposure for a sunset;

b) For CCD sensors the darkframe NR is vital for long exposure, otherwise the image is completely unusable; (Sony CMOS sensors don't have this limitation)

c) To expose the foreground with ND and ND grad on, I would need triple or quadruple the time as for the sky (with changes of light over the sunset into consideration), which means it's going to be in the 10+ minutes territory;

d) If I expose the foreground before the sunset starts, the darkframe NR countdown of 10+ minutes would occupy the whole sunset phase;

e) If I expose the foreground after the sunset ends, then I would have to wait for the darkframe NR countdown for the sky to end first, after which I would then only be able to shoot a night scene for the foreground. This not only captures the wrong light for the foreground for blending, but also would easily force the exposure time into the 1 hour territory with the same ND and ND grad on (as the light gets dimmer and dimmer), and that would include another hour of darkframe NR countdown, which is totally not practical;

You may ask why I have to shoot so long exposures. Two reasons:

a) Sometimes the clouds are not moving that fast and it would be good to have the extra exposure time to further smooth out;

b) To justify the so called "Long Exposure Mode" of the IQ260 - otherwise why the hell shouldn't I buy an IQ280 instead?

Sadly even a Nikon D5300 can do this scene in just one single exposure and achieve better image quality than the IQ260.

I agree that you might be able to eventually align these bracketed exposures perfectly with dedicated efforts, but life is too short and I have no more time for that.

This is the most important reason why I dumped the IQ260 for an IQ250 instead. Bracketing isn't going to work for me. Sony CMOS sensor is of my taste (i.e. single frame of long exposure straight out of the camera, no darkframe NR, no bracketing, no harassment in post-processing).

 
Top