Has P1 defocused back upgrades to fund C1 R&D? And what does one pay for in C21 anyway?

[alistairsimmons]

I'm expecting remote solution for IQ4 by the end of this year, or early next.

 

[Mexecutioner]

I'm expecting remote solution for IQ4 by the end of this year, or early next.

I don't believe you.

 

[Boinger]

I don't believe you.

Seconded!

 

[Pemihan]

As a second thought, having owned P45+, IQ160, IQ260, IQ250, IQ3100 over the past years, and always upgraded, the IQ4 has amazing image quality. The two most powerful features for me bring Dual Exposure (really a huge advantage for my workflow) and frame averaging, (which has more limited use in the field due to the issues with subject movement).

I was stunned when I first received my back and used the Live View (coming from the IQ250 and 3100) to find that the Live View was just nothing like the previous backs. The fact it took almost 1.5 years to resolve it was interesting as I was quick to point it out to my dealer and Phase One directly. With the last formal firmware that brought Dual exposure out, it was fixed.

The issue with cropped frames when using a tech camera (issue occurs randomly) has been corrected with a beta firmware that I am using now. So far no issues and cropped frames problem is gone. (only occurred on tech cameras and ES shutter, not on the XF).

The ability to use older Schneider lenses, like the 35XL, albeit with little to no shift, but with almost no color cast is impressive. Using the more modern wides like the 32mm Rodenstock or 40mm Rodenstock allows for no color cast in the sky and the need for only 1 series of LCC frames to account for the light loss on shifts.

Hopefully P1 will bring out something in the future for a Capture Pilot solution replacement.

The images I have taken with Dual exposure outdoors continue to impress me.

Paul C

Me too, Paul. Image quality is simple second to none and Dual Exposure is icing on the cake.

Paul, Bill, I know this has probably been discussed a million times, but never the less not taking Dual Exposure into the equation do you see a huge jump in quality in relation to IQ3100?

 

[Paul2660]

Hi Peter,

I do see a significant jump over the 3100. Some things I have seen.

The 3100 and tech camera lenses, were for me just incompatible do to the color cast issues. The IQ260/160 I had used before was easier to correct. The 3100 files especially when a blue sky was involved were very hard to work to get a even color when using a tech camera. Shifts were the worst and both light fall off corrections (which had considerable noise) and color cast corrections were hard to get correct. I used the 3100 probably more than any other IQ back I have owned in the 2.5 years I owned it. But I only used it on a tech camera 1 time, and quickly moved back to the XF. I was in the process of selling my Tech gear ( a huge investment for me) when the IQ4 as announced and when I saw the early results on tech lenses I held off selling.

Ability to capture correct color of outdoor subject matter to me is very subjective, however for me the 3100 and IQ4 seem pretty equal there.

Dynamic range out of the gate I found much better on the IQ4, for me this is shadow pull. I had several rounds of conversation with my dealer and Phase One due to what I found to be excessive noise in the shadows with the 3100 even at base ISO, unlike the files I had seen from the IQ250 and IQ150. The 50MP back showed so much shadow recovery when it was first released, I expected similar results from the 3100. For most work the 3100 needed bracketing which just added for work. The IQ4 has impressed me from day one with the amount of shadow recovery it has just in standard exposures, (add Dual exposure and the results are really impressive).

If you use a tech camera at all, the difference just has to been seen to believe. The fact you can now use the SK35 without a CF and still get a useable file is pretty impressive. You can't shift it hardly at all as the lens stand up to the resolution of the back and you will see traditional smearing etc. The SK35 on a CMOS back generated one of the most difficult files to correct in post do to the huge amount of color cast and the SK35 being symmetrical is still an amazing optic, unlike the Rodenstock 32mm HR-W which easily shows the issues of retrofocus distortion towards the edge of the frame and if shifted the issues become much worse.

Downsides would be trying to work the IQ4 files in 16 bit with multiple layers, as you quickly run into huge file sizes and need to save as a PSB. Also I find that the same raw files will tax Capture One much faster than the 3100 files. I use a lot of masks and layers in C1 (one of it's huge strengths over the Adobe software working with raw files) and you will quickly start to the the spinning color wheel once you have 4 or more layers. Youl also start to see much slower performance in drawing a mask. I am using a 2017 Mac Pro 6 way with 64GB of ram, and have no plans to upgrade to the 14K Mac Pro and Big Sur.

Some things that IMO missed the boat on the IQ4 which will never make it are: These are beyond image quality concerns.

No fix to the slow boot time, if anything it's longer. For me the 10 to 12 seconds it takes the back to power on is just too long when compared to any other camera I use, Fuji GFX, Nikon etc. Phase has always had a slow boot time and the IQ4 (at least mine) is still a bit unstable and can and will lock up or freeze during extended use, requiring a power off. Also the back IMO seems to drain the current Phase One batteries faster thus you need to turn it off more often.

No true power share like the 3100 had with the XF. This is still a huge issue for as there IMO is no reason that it can work like it did. With the 3100 and XF you can make it 1/3 of day, to maybe 1/2 a day as the back would quickly start to use the power from the XF battery to run as the XF needs so little power. With the IQ4, this no longer works and all the power share feature does is allow you to pull the battery out of the back and replace it as long as the XF is powered on. But there is no power sharing going on so plan on bringing a bunch of batteries.

Paul C

 

[Pemihan]

Wow thank you for the write up Paul really appreciate it. Right now I only have the IQ3100 Achromatic but at some point I may want a color back again. I only shoot on tech camera but with an Achro back there's obviously no issues with color cast

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I echo Paul's (excellent!) remarks. I never used my 3100 with a tech cam (only just got the XT) so I can't comment on color cast issues. But I can say that shadow recovery and dynamic range generally are much better on the IQ4. It's almost eerie how much detail can be pulled out of dense black. Also, high ISO is much cleaner - ISO 800 is entirely usable and 1600 is way better than the 3100, tho' to be honest I never did a direct comparison because I traded in the 3100 so never owned both backs at the same time. And of course Dual Exposure+ is a huge addition.

On the other hand boot up time is annoying - especially when you see light changing and are desperate to shoot NOW - not in a 1/4 minute. And I loved Capture Pilot which I'm still hoping for in the IQ4.

Finally, I'd say I wouldn't upgrade for the resolution. Of course it is higher but not a dramatic difference for the 3100. See my first paragraph for the reasons p upgrade!

 

[Geoff]

Pretty sure the "problem" with live view on the iq1/2 series is that every one of them is a CCD sensor except for the 50mp backs. I had a Leaf Credo 60, similar to an IQ160, a CCD sensor, spectacular image quality but its live view was functionally unusable. The problem is that CCD can never come close to live view on a CMOS back, I don't think it is a difference engineering can solve

Much appreciate the 3100 and 4150 writeup above. I live in the past a bit here, with a Credo 60. And while the live view is difficult, I do find it usable for focus confirmation. Its a bit of a hassle, and in sunlight need either an ND filter, or say f11, but it allows for quick focus definition. Lovely? no. Usable? yes. YMMV.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Hmmm, well I just finished a webinar with Phase One which was very interesting. Some new goodies are on the way soon, including yes, Ad Hoc Wifi. More details to come. The summary of my webinar time today is that I recognized that Phase One will sometimes move slowly, they also will sometimes package multiple things in a single firmware, which extends the time frame for resolution of individual issues, and that I had to remember that there has been a global pandemic going on, and this certainly had a slowing down effect on some of what they were working on. No excuse, some of what is coming is long overdue, pandemic or not. But what they shared and hinted at is quite positive.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Ray Harrison]

Hmmm, well I just finished a webinar with Phase One which was very interesting. Some new goodies are on the way soon, including yes, Ad Hoc Wifi. More details to come. The summary of my webinar time today is that I recognized that Phase One will sometimes move slowly, they also will sometimes package multiple things in a single firmware, which extends the time frame for resolution of individual issues, and that I had to remember that there has been a global pandemic going on, and this certainly had a slowing down effect on some of what they were working on. No excuse, some of what is coming is long overdue, pandemic or not. But what they shared and hinted at is quite positive.


Steve Hendrix/CI

Great and thanks! Was the webinar for public consumption or just for dealers? I don't see it on their site, so assuming the latter.

 

[Greg Haag]

Hmmm, well I just finished a webinar with Phase One which was very interesting. Some new goodies are on the way soon, including yes, Ad Hoc Wifi. More details to come. The summary of my webinar time today is that I recognized that Phase One will sometimes move slowly, they also will sometimes package multiple things in a single firmware, which extends the time frame for resolution of individual issues, and that I had to remember that there has been a global pandemic going on, and this certainly had a slowing down effect on some of what they were working on. No excuse, some of what is coming is long overdue, pandemic or not. But what they shared and hinted at is quite positive.


Steve Hendrix/CI

Steve, thanks for the update, did the give any idea on the approximate release date?

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Steve, thanks for the update, did the give any idea on the approximate release date?

I don't have an exact date, but it will be sooner than later. Does that even make sense ... I don't know. But it won't be too much longer.

Ray - this was just dealers. It covered a wide range of topics, not just Phase One IQ4, but also some of the internal re-org and market clarification/expansion that has ocurred as the INDU division has grown.

Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Gerd]

Personally, I find that the visual resolution difference between the IQ3100 Tr. and IQ3100 Achromatic was greater - than the difference between the IQ4150 and IQ4150 Achromatic.

And apart from that I hope that Phase One will soon release a new firmware that will fix many of the things discussed above.

Greeting Gerd

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Separate but the revenue still goes to one place. I don’t believe Capture One has totally spun away from Phase One. It all rolls up to the same corporate bank eventually. If they were totally separate it would make no sense for C1 to no longer support Lecia S7 or Hasselblad raw.

As for Phase One and the IQ4, it been two years now and it’s pretty clear that no adhoc solution is coming so no Capture Pilot As for a stronger software for WiFi tethering I would no except anything soon if ever.

IQ4 still has many bugs that go back to day one that have no been fixed.

Paul C

Hi,

As far as I understand Phase One and Capture One are now two separate companies, both owned by the same investors.

Best regards
Erik

 

[f8orbust]

P1 never really had a policy of revisiting older backs to add functionality, which was a shame given the high cost of the gear. But that doesn't explain the interminable wait to get everything working on the IQ150. I suspect that has more to do with P1 being sold twice in the past 5 years, with every new buyer having a vision of where they want to take the company (the latest buyer is Axcel, a Danish investment company). At the time of Axcel's purchase the press release stated:

...Today, the majority of growth and profitability comes from sales of software solutions, where the company has managed to grow by ~40% p.a. in revenue in the last four years and also expects significant growth in 2019...

Christian Bamberger Bro, who is responsible for the investment at Axcel, stated:

...Phase One has built its position on deep technical expertise and an innovative product portfolio, and we’re impressed by what the management team has achieved over the last few years. We look forward to applying our experience of growing software businesses and to partnering with the management in their pursuit of further growth...

So I think it's fairly clear where Axcel's interests lie and in which direction they want to take P1, which may help (in part at least) to explain why its taking so long to get the IQ150 working to its full potential.