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 recording at wrong image format, 14 bit instead of 16 bit EX

Paul2660

Well-known member
Thanks to another forum member I just realized this issue, only after 2 full days of shooting however.

The IQ4 with the latest firmware is not recording at the 16 EX extended quality or normal 16 bit when selected, instead it's writing at 14 LOW quality, amazing. You can select the 16 Bit EX and the camera shows it's selected, but LOOK AT YOUR COUNTER, it will show the incorrect number of frames remaining instead it's based on the 14 setting.

To get my IQ4 to finally record 16 bit agin, I had to do the following:

1. Formally select the 14 setting
2. Reformat the Card in the IQ on the XF (not sure what would happen if back on tech camera)
3. After first format camera still showed the incorrect frame count after selected 16 bit EX(note it's almost 2x if you have 14 bit selected)
4. I selected 14 bit again and reformatted the camera a 2nd time.

Now the camera will record correctly, but only after 2 formats.

NOTE I tested this on a brand new card out of the box XQD. But also had the exact same issue with a 64 bit card.

I normally do not format my cards each time, instead I just copy the images off and reuse the card. But it's apparent to me it doesn't matter as a brand new card, formatted for the first time in camera did the exact same thing.

Just want to point this out as you may end up with hundreds of images all in 14 bit, like I did.

Sorry, tone of post is harsh just a bit pissed off at this time. There is NO excuse for this.

Edit:

Problem is worse than I thought. It happens everytime you turn off the camera. So if you have formatted a card, and it's showing the correct frame count for 16 Bit EX (on a 64GB card around 266 frames), when you power on again you will have 16 Bit EX selected and the counter will show 556 So the IQ4 is dropping to the lowest quality setting of S14. You have to go back and re-select 16 Bit EX again and then as long as back is powered on it will stay there. Turn it off/on you must reset. Trust me even though the quality setting shows EX16 bit your remaining frame count is the give away, 556. Take a shot and it's in 14 Bit lowest possible quality.

Also there is not real way to tell if you have recorded in 16 Bit EX or 16 bit until you look at the image in C1 as on the back, the files have the same description. No EX shows.

Paul C
 
Last edited:

dchew

Well-known member
Paul,
Did you keep track of turning the back on and off during your card formatting test? I've noticed the problem can be fixed by cycling between 14 and 16 bit, but if you turn the back off and back on the problem comes back. I will try your formatting process to see if it sticks.

The other thing I did was tether to C1 and see what it says about the back settings. When tethered, C1 reports the back is set to:
File Format: IIQ16 Extended
Compression: IIQ L 16bit

But if you take a photo, that image comes in as IIQ S Ex. If I cycle back and forth on the back to 14 bit then back to 16 bit and take another photo, it comes in as IIQ L 16bit Ex like it should.

BTW, I created a case this morning because my dealer hadn't heard of this before. More to come.

Dave
aka "the other forum member!"
:cool:
 

dchew

Well-known member
Paul,
I just checked. Mine does not work as you described. Doesn't matter whether I reformat the card or not. Turning off the back is what does it (note I'm on a technical camera - no XF). Whenever I turn the back on, it says it is set for "L16IIQEX", but as you point out the count is ~2x what it should be, and if you take a photo it records as 14bit. In C1 the format says "IIQ S Ex" and the file size is 95.8mb. Without turning the back off, if I cycle between "S14IIQ" and "L16IIQEX" the image capacity gets cut in half and it will record a 16 bit Ex file like it should ("IIQ L 16bit Ex" in C1) that is 172.7mb. It will continue to do that correctly until I turn the back off and back on, at which point its brain gets scrambled again and shows ~2x card image capacity and records the smaller files.

Dave
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Just modified my original post, you are correct it's turning off the back that does it.

The Quality setting stays at 16 Bit EX, the actual image taken is 14 bit low quality.

With a IQ4 I am always turning the back on and off, tech or XF, this is bite you in the butt problem. As stated before 2 days worth of shooting all in 14 bit quality. I saw the 16 bit setting on the camera screen, did not think about the math involved around total number of images. TO BE HONEST I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO EITHER.

First screen shot shows power on, with 16 BitEX selected, but image count at 556. next shows switching back to 14 low quality, last shows moving back to 16 bit EX and count is correct. Note count is the same between 16 EX and 16 Bit

Paul C
 

Attachments

Last edited:

dchew

Well-known member
The other "funny" thing is C1 shows those files as "IIQ S Ex." I don't think an Extended S format even exists. In fact, if I pick "S14IIQ" as the format on purpose, C1 shows the format as "IIQ S"

It is recording a format that doesn't exist! Not so funny...

Dave
 
Last edited:

Paul2660

Well-known member
Yes, I saw that also on C1, checked file sizes, the 14 bit ones are all 107MB, and the 16Bit ones in the 140 to 198MB range, so all of the images I took over the last week unfortunately are all 14 bit. Never thought to do the math on frame count as I was switching between 32GB, 64GB and 120GB cards. But camera was always on 16 Bit ex that's what I always shoot in when at ISO50 to 100.

Paul C
 

Christopher

Active member
It should take Phase One a week to hot fix, it probably will take them 3 months, hopefully we will get adhoc WIFI with the next update...
 

algrove

Well-known member
So should we go back to the old FW, if possible? Sure no frame averaging, but at least 16bit file sizes.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
So should we go back to the old FW, if possible? Sure no frame averaging, but at least 16bit file sizes.

Stay current just switch back every time you turn on the camera. For me in a average shoot that’s between 30 and 45 times.

Just amazes me with all the folks at P1 and dealerships no one caught this in all the beta testing so not sure if came out with final release or not. I have traced it back to the last firmware update. All images before it are 16bit as that’s where I leave the quality. After update it’s all 14 bit low quality.

Paul C
 

earburner

Member
Reading this has not been good, been on a bit of a ride to get my back up to the latest FW, nearly bricked my back only for the pokey blighter to come back to life after trying to factory default firmware. My back would not take the latest and greatest firmware and would just reboot if I tried to install it..
Had to get an intrum version between XFSystem1.03.26.fwp and XFSystem5.00.20.fwp from phase one (2.00.20) to get mine to take 5.00.20.
I get the feeling the instal doesn't always work. Thankfully Mine is saving full 16bit ex files
 

Steve Hendrix

Active member
Stay current just switch back every time you turn on the camera. For me in a average shoot that’s between 30 and 45 times.

Just amazes me with all the folks at P1 and dealerships no one caught this in all the beta testing so not sure if came out with final release or not. I have traced it back to the last firmware update. All images before it are 16bit as that’s where I leave the quality. After update it’s all 14 bit low quality.

Paul C

Paul, you're right. Everyone missed this. Phase One, dealers, end users (until now).

Thank you for bringing it to attention, it is something that others need to know.

What is important to keep in mind, and what I feel that dealers, including us, should be doing a better job of, is emphasizing to any that are using this firmware, that it is a public beta. It is not a final firmware. That is the whole point of the "Beta Labs" program, that you, the end user, can participate in using beta firmware and help shape the use cases, and ultimately the final version of the features. While this sounds like a great thing on the one hand, it is beta, not final firmware. Bugs can be present.

This is the case whether you're beta testing Capture One software as well. There is an important difference though, that Paul's post brings to light. Beta testing software means that if you shoot to a card and you ingest files and something goes really wrong, you could still have your raw files backed up elsewhere before jumping them into the beta software.

With beta firmware for hardware, what you actually captured in general won't be reversible. So extra care needs to be taken that before jumping into shooting for real. That your practice files have been scoured and looked over in every detail to make sure that when it is for real -- so far as you can tell - everything seems hunky dory.

And this is what we failed to account for. It's different than beta software. And all dealers should have considered this and emphasized the caution. So on our part, I would like to apologize for not making that clearer to end users adopting the beta firmware. I think in this case, all were so excited and focused on exploring what the firmware could do, the fact it is beta and needs to be tested completely just for any odd behavior was not pushed forward. Due diligence still needs to occur, in fact, more than usual.

Going forward - I can see that this could question the idea of the "Beta Labs" program. I hope that's not the case, though I understand the right of those to feel that way and exercise caution. I consider the idea of end users shaping a tool for an industry leading camera to be pretty exciting and innovative. So going forward, we understand if anyone feels like sitting out, but we're still going to present these releases to our end users that may choose to participate if they wish to do so.


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Christopher

Active member
The problem aren't the bugs, it's how long it takes to roll out fixed and new versions. You'r right it's not as easy as a C1 beta, which can coexist fine with another version, however, it should't take as long as it currently takes to get stuff along. We have been waiting for 8 months now and things still are super slow.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Hi Steve,

You are my dealer, I appreciate your companies support over this years, this is all on Phase One, there is no way this should have been missed and allow this blatant an error to go out. They have not release a firmware update yet for this back, official or public beta that is free of bugs and screws up something else that was working before.

I guess I disagree. I never saw anything about this firmware being a Public Beta, I know that it was in dealer beta for amount a month. The actual release notes do not mention it being a public beta, at least I can't find anything. Per the release notes, I guess there should have been a big line of text Public Beta, use at your own risk.

https://downloads.phaseone.com/8707...6f15b3dd/English/Creative Control Package.pdf

I tend to read these and did read these.

Per the Phase One site, this update is listed pretty much just like all the previous ones.
I guess I missed any posted flags on this also being a public beta. The only public betas I have ever seen or used are the new versions of C1 as I was on that list, appear to be off it now.

Whatever, this issue would have kept on biting me over and over, 14 bit low quality, and in a format that C1 gives a totally different name to, I someone else on this site had pointed it out to me. I have used the back extensively since the 3rd, when I did the update, over 3 shoots and all of the files are the same 14 bit low res, low quality.

Damage is done for me close to 500-600 images all in the lowest possible format possible.

Please be aware that currently, even after the fix is done to allow the back to actually record correctly, on playback, Phase doesn't show a difference in the 16 bit and 16 bit EX capture, only C1 shows this. So unless tethered, you just have to hope the back is doing it correctly.

Files sizes are also same so there is really no way to know.

Paul C
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
This was not marked as beta*, and should not have contained this kind of bug. The previous firmware release (also not a beta) contained a pretty annoying bug that addressed review of vertical images.

The honeymoon period (a grace period for quirks and bugs that are often present for any new platform in the first few months) for the IQ4 is over. This sort of thing is unacceptable. Phase One is doing a ton right in the last few years, but that is really sullied by slip ups like this.

Thank you for finding and sharing this bug.

Can I ask you to confirm that the file size of the captured-during-the-but raw files indicate that the bug is the actual bit depth rather than the bug being the mislabeling the metadata field?

*it was labeled beta during the dealer testing period, but not for the public launch. I’m ashamed to say we missed that during our testing

Note: I don’t have an IQ4 with me, so I’m just assuming the report is accurate as I know both Paul and Dave are experienced P1 users
 

Christopher

Active member
Just did 4 captures. Two with 16bit EX and two with 16bit. One of each before power down after setting the raw format and one after on/off cycle.

I can confirm that both second captures ARE IIQ S! The first one is IIQ16Ex and IIQ16 as aspected. The file size is also different. (120MB vs 70MB)


This was not marked as beta*, and should not have contained this kind of bug. The previous firmware release (also not a beta) contained a pretty annoying bug that addressed review of vertical images.

The honeymoon period (a grace period for quirks and bugs that are often present for any new platform in the first few months) for the IQ4 is over. This sort of thing is unacceptable.

I will express my displeasure directly to P1 on Monday.

Thank you for finding and sharing this bug.

Can I ask you to confirm that the file size of the captured-during-the-but raw files indicate that the bug is the actual bit depth rather than the bug being the mislabeling the metadata field?

*it was labeled beta during the dealer testing period, but not for the public launch. I’m ashamed to say we missed that during our testing

Note: I don’t have an IQ4 with me, so I’m just assuming the report is accurate as I know both Paul and Dave are experienced P1 users
 

Steve Hendrix

Active member
Hi Steve,

You are my dealer, I appreciate your companies support over this years, this is all on Phase One, there is no way this should have been missed and allow this blatant an error to go out. They have not release a firmware update yet for this back, official or public beta that is free of bugs and screws up something else that was working before.

I guess I disagree. I never saw anything about this firmware being a Public Beta, I know that it was in dealer beta for amount a month. The actual release notes do not mention it being a public beta, at least I can't find anything. Per the release notes, I guess there should have been a big line of text Public Beta, use at your own risk.

https://downloads.phaseone.com/8707...6f15b3dd/English/Creative Control Package.pdf

I tend to read these and did read these.

Per the Phase One site, this update is listed pretty much just like all the previous ones.
I guess I missed any posted flags on this also being a public beta. The only public betas I have ever seen or used are the new versions of C1 as I was on that list, appear to be off it now.

Whatever, this issue would have kept on biting me over and over, 14 bit low quality, and in a format that C1 gives a totally different name to, I someone else on this site had pointed it out to me. I have used the back extensively since the 3rd, when I did the update, over 3 shoots and all of the files are the same 14 bit low res, low quality.

Damage is done for me close to 500-600 images all in the lowest possible format possible.

Please be aware that currently, even after the fix is done to allow the back to actually record correctly, on playback, Phase doesn't show a difference in the 16 bit and 16 bit EX capture, only C1 shows this. So unless tethered, you just have to hope the back is doing it correctly.

Files sizes are also same so there is really no way to know.

Paul C

Paul, now that I am looking back, I have to agree with you - if it is beta firmware, it has never been stated so anywhere. There was a beta firmware period to dealers, but when the public version came out, Phase One just released it. So hard to say whether this was a continuing part of the Beta Labs program (as I assumed) or not. At any rate, beta or not, I agree this should not have come out without some more testing on Phase One's part.


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Sure, raw files size is 109MB, for all the images that I took, they show up as IIQS in C1, and on the camera playback screen. even as the main camera screen as shown in my screen captures shows 16 BitEX.

The true 16 bitEX files I have are all 186 to 200MB, close to 2x the file size.

Going through all of these settings, I remembered that the camera had the sensor plus mode. It shows only 14 bit, I only looked at it once way back, but I though it was available in 16 bit (sensor plus), but I may easily have that wrong.

Until you go back and forth in the image quality settings, all images are taken in the IIQS size.

Paul C
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
I've just checked my XF/IQ4-150 and get exactly the same problem. Fortunately for me the only shooting I have done since the "upgrade" was to play with Frame Averaging and so I have no sub-par files that matter.

I'll bring this to my dealer's attention too so that Denmark gets a landslide of complaints!

PS Anybody else using the Haehnel remote release? It will not work with frame averaging - just gives a single exposure. But the Vibration Delay does work so it's not a major issue for me.
 
Top