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!

IQ4-150 - what features don't work on a tech cam?

peterm1

Active member
Hi All. I currently have an IQ3100 that I use on a Cambo tech cam with Rodenstock lenses. I was curious about the IQ4 and the advantages it provides over the IQ3 when used with a tech cam and manual focus lenses. Would frame averaging still work? I understand anything AF-based wouldn't work for obvious reasons, but are there other features that wouldn't work as well?

Thanks!

Peter
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
Hi All. I currently have an IQ3100 that I use on a Cambo tech cam with Rodenstock lenses. I was curious about the IQ4 and the advantages it provides over the IQ3 when used with a tech cam and manual focus lenses. Would frame averaging still work? I understand anything AF-based wouldn't work for obvious reasons, but are there other features that wouldn't work as well?

Thanks!

Peter
Yep frame averaging still works, and works great. I use it much more than I thought on my tech cam setup. Dual exposure also works.
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
What shouldn't work? The back works perfectly on tech cams and in fact I believe it is the only route if you want to use X shutter lenses (which could be key for flash based applications) ... :)
 

dchew

Well-known member
Whatever the autoexposure feature is on the 4150 doesn't work on a tech cam. Other than that, I think everything works. There are a few differences between how the 3100 works. For example, there is no equivalent of "zero latency." If you want to use a cable release, you need to either use the Alpa sync system or some other way of dual-firing a wake-up signal. But, I've used the electronic shutter exclusively for years now even though I still carry the Alpa sync cable just in case.

Dave
 

Greg Haag

Well-known member
Hi All. I currently have an IQ3100 that I use on a Cambo tech cam with Rodenstock lenses. I was curious about the IQ4 and the advantages it provides over the IQ3 when used with a tech cam and manual focus lenses. Would frame averaging still work? I understand anything AF-based wouldn't work for obvious reasons, but are there other features that wouldn't work as well?

Thanks!

Peter
Peter, I had the IQ3 100 before I got my IQ4 150, and I think the IQ3 100 was the most reliable back I have ever had. That being said there are a couple things about the IQ4 150 that I have really enjoyed, fewer LCC/dark frame issues and frame averaging. However, my memory is that the wireless control on the IQ3 100 was much better than the current situation with the IQ4 150. Also, I am using the Combo 1600 and Rodenstock lenses. Good luck!
 

DavidJA

Member
I recently upgraded from the IQ3 100 to the IQ4 150 and lenses with electronic shutters. I use a Cambo so I still have to connect the back to the lens.
This upgrade was a game changer for me. When doing personal work the cumbersomeness of the cables and LCC was annoying but ok. However, while working with clients I found it awkward and I grew tired of explaining what I was doing and why. The fluid shooting of the new system has reinvigorated my enthusiasm for the tech/P1 system. I had largely stopped working with the tech/P1 set up on client shoots and was using a Canon with TS lenses for the simplicity of it. My Canon now sits in the car until I need to run a second camera at the same time.

The cost of the upgrade had me terrified. I wondered if I should pay down my mortgage instead. In the end I have found the upgrade to be well worth it.

David

davidagnello.com
 

ThdeDude

Active member
I recently upgraded from the IQ3 100 to the IQ4 150 and lenses with electronic shutters. ...
This upgrade was a game changer for me. ... cumbersomeness of the cables and LCC was annoying ...The fluid shooting of the new system has reinvigorated my enthusiasm for the tech/P1 system....

The cost of the upgrade had me terrified....

The IQ4 was introduced on Aug 28, 2018. At that time the current iPhone was the iPhone X (however, new iPhones were introduced in September). As revolutionary the iPhone X was, as modern it still looks, but performance-wise it's now completely outclassed by the just introduced iPhone 14PRO. (My eleven-year old daughter says that she is embarrassed having only a iPhone X!) In particular, the jump in photographic capabilities is most remarkable.

This shows the problem now, September 2022, for upgrading from the IQ3 100 to the IQ4 is, - unless one is well-heeled enough not to care, has the income from photography needed for a full tax reduction, or gets a super upgrade deal - one doesn't know whether or not there will be a far more advanced IQ5 later this year.

A IQ5 could have a "global shutter", and other most substantial improvements (computational photography!) over the now four-year old IQ4.
 
Last edited:

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
The IQ4 was introduced on Aug 28, 2018. At that time the current iPhone was the iPhone X (however, new iPhones were introduced in September). As revolutionary the iPhone X was, as modern it still looks, but performance-wise it's now completely outclassed by the just introduced iPhone 14PRO. (My eleven-year old daughter says that she is embarrassed having only a iPhone X!) In particular, the jump in photographic capabilities is most remarkable.

The problem now, September 2022, for upgrading from the IQ3 100 to the IQ4 is, - unless one is well-heeled enough not to care, has the income from photography needed for a full tax reduction, or gets a super upgrade deal - one doesn't know whether or not there will be a far more advanced IQ5 later this year.

A IQ5 could have a "global shutter", and other most substantial improvements (computational photography!) over the now four-year old IQ4.
I have stated this already - all global shutter sensors to date are smaller in size, made for industrial applications and have lower dynamic range not suitable for photo. You need a 54x40 200 megapixel sensor with high DR to warrant an IQ5. Outside of photo neither security, drones, nor quality control need such a huge sensor. It is sufficient to have a smaller sensor with high rez for most sensor applications. The medium format size thing is primarily useful for photography where the area also impacts the look of the photo.

From announcement to production it will take a year at least. If you get an IQ4 now your investment is safe more or less for the short- to mid-term. There might be a SoC upgrade, but before there's no new sensor - and for R&D there needs to be a visible market - there won't be a huge jump. We have reached a high quality level and jumps just take more time.

If an upgrade comes if you own an IQ4 150 you will have to pay c.25k-30k which will be the lowest entry point as the new back will be typically priced at 45-50k. So you won't lose that much TBH given used IQ4 150s are somewhere between 20-30k with a few recent exceptions below 20k.

IMHO nothing speaks against getting a used IQ4 now. IQ5 will be expensive no matter how you spin it.
 

DavidJA

Member
No, currently neither automated bracketing nor time lapse are available on the IQ4 unless connected to a XT or XF.
I a
Does bracketing work with the IQ4 and a non-XT tech cam? On the IQ3-100 we loose that feature with the tech cams.
yes brack
Does bracketing work with the IQ4 and a non-XT tech cam? On the IQ3-100 we loose that feature with the tech cams.
Yes, bracketing is one of my favorite feature upgrades in going to IQ4 and electronic shutters. I use a Cambo, the XT is not required for bracketing. The electronic shutter is required of course. This is a key feature for me as I bracket every shot, sometimes completely unnecessarily, but I can delete later. It’s a pleasure to swipe from right to left, open the bracket menu and push a button letting the camera do the work. I’m often composting images for windows or reflections or art work so having the camera be perfectly still between bracketed shots is great. It was rarely an issue before but resetting the shutter, if I wasn’t careful enough could result in a bit of movement.
 

ThdeDude

Active member
all global shutter sensors to date are smaller in size, made for industrial applications and have lower dynamic range not suitable for photo. You need a 54x40 200 megapixel sensor with high DR to warrant an IQ5.
This is also my understanding. Early '21 Sony released a 44x33 sensor with global shutter, IMX661, allegedly only suitable for industrial use. But soon we will have early '23.
 

ThdeDude

Active member
IMHO nothing speaks against getting a used IQ4 now. IQ5 will be expensive no matter how you spin it.
Last week Hasselblad announced the X2D 100C. A person in the know told me that we can expect a corresponding Hasselblad CFV-100C digital back.

If reasonably priced, and with up-to-date computational features, this may be an attractive alternative to the IQ4 for some technical camera users.
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
The point about the IQ4 150 is not only the resolution but also the size of the sensor which is again bigger than any Hassy or S3, Fuji type of "small MFD" sensor.

Producing a sensor this size is very expensive and the problem from a photographic perspective is that outside of ultra high end photography a 54mm x 40mm sensor is not really needed. I am not talking about NASA, etc. ... but the point is that such a sensor needs to be sold at a certain price to make sense and then everyone chips in with their cut in terms of margin and before you know it you are at a dealer MSRP of 50k so everyone is happy. Also worth remembering that costs rise non-linearly the bigger the sensor.

So at one point clearly there will be a successor, but for now nothing in sight. I am sure someone will spot the announcement by Sony when the time comes.

More likely to me for the near term at this stage seems a trichromatic kind of upgrade, ie just minor with either some processing or other color feature etc.

A true 200 megapixel IQ5 is of course the dream, but for now not clear when it will come ... could be 18 months, 24 or 36 months, but in any case there will be some preceding news around a new sensor which will then lead to the IQ5 some months after (would assume 9-12 months at least).
 

ThdeDude

Active member
The point about the IQ4 150 is not only the resolution but also the size of the sensor which is again bigger than any Hassy or S3, Fuji type of "small MFD" sensor.
Yes, you are correct, but depending on the lenses in the camera kit a slightly smaller sensor may not necessarily be a negative. Technical camera users, especially who use Digaron-S lenses, gain (more) shift/tilt and stitching capabilities which may compensate somewhat not having a larger sensor. Having to rethink and rememorize the angle of view (or what is the 35mm equivalent) would for me be the biggest hassle.
 
Last edited:

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
In any case technology will march on and always has and my wishlist for IQ5 would be:

1) DR like the Arri Alexa 35 - ie full 17 stops, exceeding color neg film
2) 200 megapixels, BSI
3) Faster read-out for video purposes
4) New faster SoC for snappy operation - ie lighting fast bracketing, etc.
5) Next gen I/O, incl. robust and very fast WiFi
6) New SoC should provide better battery life - new batteries with higher capacity welcome
7) Step up in infinity platform - in body HDR, in body ICC / LUT preview, auto LCC in sync with XT, new workflow improvements (e.g. faster LCC switch, exposure heatmap for grad filter application, etc.)

So IMHO there is still a lot to do in an IQ5 with points 1-2 being the most tricky ones as they depend on multi million dollar sensor R&D.

They should also release XT XL based on Cambo 5000 or 1600 and add tilt to all XT lenses plus release the 55 MK II.
 
  • Like
Reactions: med

ThdeDude

Active member
Would add USB-C

Addendum
Yes, IQ4 has USB-C. Sorry for the oversight, was thinking in terms of my IQ3 which doesn't.
 
Last edited:

Paul2660

Well-known member
The Red Komodo has a 19.9 global shutter, and it's extremely well thought of in the video market. No rolling shutter and very impressive video. This is only a body with no lens, but at 6K very reasonable. So global shutters are slowly making it into the market, but 200MP I agree is not only years away, but also it will be a shoot to the moon price.

Yes the IQ4 has USB-C, which is used for tethering to C1 on a laptop or can be used to run the back from an external battery pack.

Paul
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
The Red Komodo has a 19.9 global shutter, and it's extremely well thought of in the video market. No rolling shutter and very impressive video. This is only a body with no lens, but at 6K very reasonable. So global shutters are slowly making it into the market, but 200MP I agree is not only years away, but also it will be a shoot to the moon price.

Yes the IQ4 has USB-C, which is used for tethering to C1 on a laptop or can be used to run the back from an external battery pack.

Paul
Well the point about the cinema world is that both Red and Arri have the ability to custom design sensor platforms (they may reuse designs via stitching, etc.) due to the different economics in the cinema world. Also the space and heat dissipation aspects of a cinema body are completely different than what is possible to cram into a small digital back.

For example, the Alev CMOS sensor previously lasted a decade and now the newest gen will probably also last a decade. They have a lot more space around the sensor with the cinema body to implement a dual gain structure and have better ability to dissipate the heat due to the size of the body.

Have you ever looked at the sensor board of an Alexa? It is huge and spacious. So if you are in a duopoly like they both are with a highly lucrative rental and camera sales business with cinema cameras which arguably can get a lot more expensive with accessories, etc. you can of course plan differently and then also approach Towerjazz and say: hey we have USD10m and want to build the next gen CMOS with you based on dual gain structure, etc. and they can then devide the cost by the lifetime expected unit production.

So the last Alev generation served Arri very well - ie a decade - and I would assume they built a few thousand if not 10k+ sensors for cinema cameras during this period. Then all of a sudden, if you are the quasi market leader and revenues are more or less plannable, then you can go and design custom chips that you make profitable over a long time.

P1 probably faces the question where to best invest capital for highest RoE and I am afraid it is not fronting 10m USD for a new sensor order but maybe more hiring sales reps in B2B and driving forward the drone product line based off of existing tech stacks ...

I mean they are cranking out some insane aerial produts, like a dual sensor 200 megapixel + array with two 90mm Rodenstock lenses ... we can all guess that this probably costs 200k + to order ... and there are enough industrial / governmental clients willing to do this ...
 
Top