If only you had 247 MP... What could you have done?

[JaapD]

I feel the same. I'm more interested at this point in using older sensors with way more advanced processing than what was around when they were released - give us a CCD back with excellent thermoelectric cooling, advanced ADCs, high res touch screen, EVF out, Wifi 7, etc.


Phase One has a patent for how they do the binning in the sensor plus backs - it's actually somewhat complex: https://www.fotoskoda.cz/images-old/multi/popisobr/MAMIYA/PhaseOne-Sensorplus.pdf

Thanks for providing the link, much appreciated! I've looked into it and I must say that I don't like their sensor+ approach very much as after downsampling it still results in a Bayer pattern. The downsampled image still needs to be 'de-Bayered' (demosaicing) afterwards which seems like a disadvantage if you'd ask me. In PhaseOne's approach I would first de-Bayer, then downsample.

Cheers,
JaapD

 

[MGrayson]

I haven't checked in with pro audio recording in a while, but a recent advance there points to a huge improvement for photography - floating-point recording. A $1,200 recorder can store 32-bit floats at 192 kHz. This gives a dynamic range of over a thousand dB, (that's 300 stops to us). Level setting is unnecessary - you CAN'T reach clipping without reducing your microphones to a quark-gluon plasma (and even that would fall far short - converingt all the matter in the observable universe to energy gets you about 650 dB). Now 192 thousand samples/second is glacial by photo sensor standards, and I don't know if the sensor sites allow for such a thing, but the question here is:

Instead of 300MP resolution, what would you do with (practically) infinite dynamic range? I'm not a fan of HDR imagery, that is, dynamic range compression for dramatic effect. But even something as simple as Soup lying in the sun becomes startlingly more lifelike when viewed in HDR mode on a suitable monitor. For printing, of course, not so much.

Matt

 

[f8orbust]

Hmm, if I had a $50k P1 IQ5-247MP back I'd probably sell it for $45k, buy a full(er) frame DB - probably the IQ260 - for something like $5k, and then spend the difference on taking a year off to dedicate 100% of my time to photography.

Jim

 

[Paul Spinnler]

So who is upgrading?

Its gonna be most likely 25-28k with your IQ4. For ex-P1 people who went for PDAF-Hassy it will be an expensive journey back.

It'll most likely have some cool features, like EVF compatibility with the new mirrorless body, etc.!

Clearly a better case than the compact 23 XT thingie.

 

[cunim]

Indeed, and I do that occasionally. But I almost never come back with something I want to keep! The problem is definitely me. I need my tripod, and I always miss movements when I don't have them.

Same here. I have never achieved sharpness in any hand held image from an 80MP or 150MP back (even with the 40HR). In fact, I have never taken a decent hand held image with any MF back, though I can't remember the ancient sub-50MP backs. Those might work, even for me. For most of us I suspect, hand holding a non-IBIS tiny pixel camera is just silly. Better off using a Sony at 60MP/IBIS and up-res if you want lots of pixels.

The smaller the pixels, the more demands are made on the technique of the photographer. Some of us, like Paul, have rock steady hands. I envy that skill but have to accept that hand holding will not work for me - not without IBIS. The GFX100 has shown me that IBIS works with small pixels.

Look, I am not saying there is anything bad about 250MP. We can buy it or not, depending on our needs. Some of us will buy it just because we can and that is who this upgrade is really targeted at. I think what is annoying many of us is that there are very real and pressing limitations that affect even our present MF backs (eg focus display, IBIS, fast wifi competence, compatibility with external devices, etc.). Use your R&D funds to address those issues before you make a fuss about tiny pixels. If you are going to do just one really innovative thing (more pixels from your chip maker is not innovation), give us a good way to focus.

 

[rdeloe]

Same here. I have never achieved sharpness in any hand held image from an 80MP or 150MP back (even with the 40HR). In fact, I have never taken a decent hand held image with any MF back, though I can't remember the ancient sub-50MP backs. Those might work, even for me. For most of us I suspect, hand holding a non-IBIS tiny pixel camera is just silly. Better off using a Sony at 60MP/IBIS and up-res if you want lots of pixels.

The smaller the pixels, the more demands are made on the technique of the photographer. Some of us, like Paul, have rock steady hands. I envy that skill but have to accept that hand holding will not work for me - not without IBIS. The GFX100 has shown me that IBIS works with small pixels.

Look, I am not saying there is anything bad about 250MP. We can buy it or not, depending on our needs. Some of us will buy it just because we can and that is who this upgrade is really targeted at. I think what is annoying many of us is that there are very real and pressing limitations that affect even our present MF backs (eg focus display, IBIS, fast wifi competence, compatibility with external devices, etc.). Use your R&D funds to address those issues before you make a fuss about tiny pixels.

I thought the GFX 100S, with IBIS, would allow me to work handheld. Still no. I can get more in-focus images with IBIS than I can without. But the number I consider worth keeping did not go up with IBIS.

When I shot film, I only felt settled with the equipment when I used 4x5. It's the same with digital. I use modern digital cameras almost exactly the way I used 4x5.

 

[MartinN]

What will a pro do with his 250 MP pixs when somebody is producing equal subject matter with his brand new 500 MP digital back ? In a perspective, where are those P25 and P40 pics now ?

The MP race is insane or at least a bit amusing.

 

[JeffK]

So who is upgrading?

Its gonna be most likely 25-28k with your IQ4. For ex-P1 people who went for PDAF-Hassy it will be an expensive journey back.

It'll most likely have some cool features, like EVF compatibility with the new mirrorless body, etc.!

Clearly a better case than the compact 23 XT thingie.

I can provide an imaginary yes to upgrading to a currently imaginary product.

 

[JeffK]

When I shot film, I only felt settled with the equipment when I used 4x5. It's the same with digital. I use modern digital cameras almost exactly the way I used 4x5.

with the exception of a few street/candid/portrait, most of my best images are tripod supported too.

 

[anyone]

some of my best images I shot either with film or the P45+. Most likely not because the means of capturing light were better, but because the technology forced a more focused working approach. Tripod-bound, obviously. But I still wouldn’t like to miss todays lightweight options.

 

[stngoldberg]

I can compose better with a cube on a tripod

 

[JeffK]

I can compose better with a cube on a tripod

loved using the cube. Just couldn't carry it anymore. Downgraded to a leveller 75.

 

[JeffK]

Thinking more about @Paul Spinnler perspective about walking around with a 40HR on a near 300mp sensor – like a point and shoot. Possibly a great idea for some, but ignores how different Focal lengths shorten or elongate the display of an image. Cropping in will never give you that "look" you may be wanting if perspective is of value.

 

[rdeloe]

loved using the cube. Just couldn't carry it anymore. Downgraded to a leveller 75.

I'm loving using your Cube! It's a heavy little brick of a head, but worth the weight.

 

[Shashin]

Instead of 300MP resolution, what would you do with (practically) infinite dynamic range?

That is an interesting thought. A sunset with detail in the shadows and surface of the sun. On one hand, that would be great--it could make having to set a shutter speed arbitrary or simply based on how you want to deal with motion.

The other part of me would say making a "natural" looking image could be a nightmare. Just controlling color could be horrific. Still, I would be really interested in seeing what the histogram looks like.

 

[MGrayson]

That is an interesting thought. A sunset with detail in the shadows and surface of the sun. On one hand, that would be great--it could make having to set a shutter speed arbitrary or simply based on how you want to deal with motion.

The other part of me would say making a "natural" looking image could be a nightmare. Just controlling color could be horrific. Still, I would be really interested in seeing what the histogram looks like.

God, I remember when Sony CMOS first came out and a certain evangelist was beating us all on the head because we were only using 10 stops of DR in our pictures and that flower silhouetted by the sunrise could NEVER be captured with a CCD etc. etc.

Aside: I read the title of this thread as "If you only had 247MP ... What could you do?" I bet we see that in 5 years.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Look, the new chips are coming and I am sure there are not only advancements in resolution, but also in DR, in body processing, I/O, battery life, EVF compatbility.

One can whine all day long about megapixels are enough etc.; I think that's self-appeasement because when the new goods arrive Dante's call will be like a siren's call.

I'd be very surprised if the new back is not the introduction of a whole new platform for P1, including new lenses with AF, EVF compatbility etc.

Maybe we get 0.5, 1, 1.5 mroe stops of DR, maybe ultra fast wireless background sync, and even video recording.

I bet it won't just be a replacement of the chip.

That's why everyone will be drooling and those for prematurely said goodbye to P1 will regret having sold their IQ4s which are the easiest way to get the new IQ5 stuff without going absolutely, completely broke, but only completely broke.

2025 is going to be a watershed year for MFD with the new batch of sensors and especially the introduction of the S4 which, in terms of optics, will set new standards for many years to come.

Leica bokeh and F2.0 APO - c'mon. And Phase? They probably will have also killer optics if they introduce the new XM system or however they call their mirrorless platform.

I bet engineers at SK are atm working on a new range - produced by Mamiya .... ie their Japan plant.

 

[JeffK]

Good advice video

 

[Shashin]

Good advice video

I guess the problem I have with the argument of the guest is he is using amateur photography workshop students as the example of why having equipment is wrong. If he can point to professionals, that would be different. Yes, simplification is good, but that is not defined by a certain level of equipment. You need the equipment to achieve your goals. BBC nature documentary crews are not going into the field with one camera and one lens.

I think a photographer that can use one camera and lens is most likely in a privileged position of doing personal work. And there are great examples of that, Avadon's American West. But there are examples of photographers using a variety of gear.

Yes, the idea of one lens and one camera is very attractive. I have certainly worked that way. But to say it is a universal ideal that works in every form of photography is a stretch.

 

[vieri]

I guess the problem I have with the argument of the guest is he is using amateur photography workshop students as the example of why having equipment is wrong. If he can point to professionals, that would be different. Yes, simplification is good, but that is not defined by a certain level of equipment. You need the equipment to achieve your goals. BBC nature documentary crews are not going into the field with one camera and one lens.

I think a photographer that can use one camera and lens is most likely in a privileged position of doing personal work. And there are great examples of that, Avadon's American West. But there are examples of photographers using a variety of gear.

Yes, the idea of one lens and one camera is very attractive. I have certainly worked that way. But to say it is a universal ideal that works in every form of photography is a stretch.

+1.

I'd add that working with one lens is great mental gymnastics, it helps focusing your vision and understand the way a focal lens "works". I also find it useful to recommend it, when I think it would help someone, and I pretty much do it myself, since I mostly use one lens for my work anyway. That said, the idea of having a zillion Mp sensor, using one lens only and crop to simulate longer lenses, or stitch to simulate wider lenses, is something with zero appeal to me, perhaps outside of casual photography outings (but when I am doing those, I'd go for the "one lens training" thing instead).

I am in the privileged position of doing personal work all the time, and in the even more privileged position of making a living selling that personal work. For me personally, for serious work the reason for using a long lens is not just having more reach, is mostly for the different level of compression it offers. Equally, the reason for using a wide or ultra-wide instead of stitching is not just to cover more field of view, but it is to have different relationship between close and far elements in the frame. Of course, I know lots of photographers that prefers to stitch rather than using a wide angle for that very reason - not many who prefers to use a wider lens and crop for reach, in terms of the look though. As always, when it comes to artistic expressions, YMMV, we are all searching for different things and all that - but as Shashin perfectly put, to say that using one lens only is a universal ideal that works in every form of photography and for everyone is definitely a stretch.

Best regards,

Vieri