P65+ and 645DF arrive

[tashley]

My long awaited trade in has finally happened and so in one fell swoop I have a whole new setup. First impressions are great - love the files, especially the Sensor Plus ones though I am slightly surprised by dark mid-tone and light shadow noise levels at ISO 100 (C1 current version, naturally).

The larger sensor shows up the weakness of my glass immediately - even the amazing 80D has slightly soggy corners wide open, the Mammy 28 needs to be stopped to F16 before it behaves anything like acceptably and the Hartblei, well, it continues to amaze but it has now met its match!

I'm really keen to hear any tips'n'tricks people might have. I have the latest FW so can set Custom Functions from the body, which is neat, but am sure there are a host of other useful things I could know...

Thanks in advance for any ideas!

Tim

 

[Jack]

Congrats Tim!

What do you have your default NR settings at? If you're seeing anything resembling objectionable noise in a properly exposed ISO 100 shot, something is amiss... I am looking into some very deep shadows at smooth painted surfaces in an ISO 100 shot right now and see NOTHING even resembling noise in the file.

Re set-up tips:

1) Fast AF is about 2x as fast as the accurate setting, but IMO not consistently accurate enough to relay on it at the more open apertures, so I use accurate and have been gleefully happy with focus accuracy --- like it's dead spot on 99% of the time, even in crappy light.

2) I use the 3-spot focus pattern too as I find it more accurate than center.

3) I leave the focus lock on the front button, but set it to lock and hold until released -- this works well for me in my landscapes where I want to focus on some specific point in the image and hold it there until I'm done shooting. However, be advised this will stay locked even if you power the camera off, until you press a second time to unlock it. You'll know it's locked because the green focus confirm dot in the VF stays lit.

4) Rear button is AF lock, lock and hold until shutter is released, so it's off for at the next frame. You know this is locked because the brackets in the VF around the exposure setting stay lit.

 

[tashley]

Thanks Jack, much appreciated!

I have all settings on defaults (so that's 140, 1, 1 for sharpening and 25, 38, 0 for NR) but I have noticed that this noise is only visible without extreme squinting in shots where I used the Cambo, did an LCC and applied it. It is particularly visible with Light Falloff at 60% or more correction levels since these shadow areas 6/10ths of the way towards the edge from the centre and are thus getting a bit of a boost there.

Get a few weird metering results too, but I'll get to grips with that: it seems that exposing a scene at F2.8 on AV and then stopping down a stop at a time can lead to the scene needing progressive negative compensation even when the camera is metering wide open with a full auto lens. Odd, might just have been an aberration or mildly shifting light levels... I'll have another go tomorrow.

But I am sorry to say that for now at least that means no Hartblei for Jack :-(

 

[Jack]

Ah, tech camera -- let me guess, you left shutter latency at zero? It is a known issue that if you use zero latency on a tech cam with the P40+/65+, noise increases. And the longer the back is left in that state, the worse the noise (heat) gets -- I suspect that's probably your issue. Set long latency and use the trigger cable you had for the P45+.

If that's not it, then something is definitely wrong. I run NR for ISO's 50 and 100 at 15/30/0 and get no noise at all. Try shooting a file using your DF body and the zoom or 80 at f11, both ISO 50 and 100, process using my NR settings above and report back.

Re 80 metering: There was a firmware update for the 80 a while back that addressed wide-open metering.

PS: I do want to test that Hartblei of yours since seeing is believing!

 

[tashley]

Ah, tech camera -- let me guess, you left shutter latency at zero? It is a known issue that if you use zero latency on a tech cam with the P40+/65+, noise increases. And the longer the back is left in that state, the worse the noise (heat) gets -- I suspect that's probably your issue. Set long latency and use the trigger cable you had for the P45+.

If that's not it, then something is definitely wrong. I run NR for ISO's 50 and 100 at 15/30/0 and get no noise at all. Try shooting a file using your DF body and the zoom or 80 at f11, both ISO 50 and 100, process using my NR settings above and report back.

Re 80 metering: There was a firmware update for the 80 a while back that addressed wide-open metering.

PS: I do want to test that Hartblei of yours since seeing is believing!

I just checked the latency Jack, it was set at 'normal' so I'd better run some more tests and maybe post something tomorrow though I do think it's the falloff corrections that are responsible and that's with the Schneider/Cambo. I'll follow your suggested parameters and see what happens.

Thanks for the firmware tip: I will check that out asap.

The Hartblei is not a miracle lens by absolute standards but relative to its price and ambition it's pretty cool. I'd use it for a big print, carefully and with a bit of work: it's not as 'cogent' as the Schneider/Cambo but its almost in that ballpark if used carefully... and I must say that a fully armed Hartblei, with movements set, on a DF with a cube under it is not a sight I would have understood two years back... scary but very cool!
:bugeyes:

 

[rhsu]

Tim,

Foremost, congrats as well.

Can you kindly test further on a tech-camera in the light of what Jack has highlighted regarding noise and latency. I believe you have a WRS - (a few cracking jokes about "holes" from the artec posting...)

I am looking at upgrading to P45+ or P65+. The former for longer exposure. The latter merely due to better trade-in and cash balance ($4K difference).

Jack has said something very interesting. (Or perhaps Jack can kindly wisen me with the delight of P65+ on tech-camera.) I like to see long exposure and at fast ISOs.

On the lighter side, from where you are at, perhaps the cold weather should help subdue the heat on the P65+ let alone testing up in the Arctic. :salute:

cheers

 

[Jack]

Tim, stupid question, but are you by any chance cranking up exposure, brightness or curves to see better into the darkest corners? Or perhaps trying to view the file in LR instead of C1??

 

[tashley]

Tim, stupid question, but are you by any chance cranking up exposure, brightness or curves to see better into the darkest corners? Or perhaps trying to view the file in LR instead of C1??

Nope, everything was C1 5.1 and everything defaults other than the application of LCC from a separate file. As I say I think it's the LCC feature that is responsible, when using the default (100%) light falloff correction on top of the colour cast correction.

This file shows it quite well: first is a small JPEG of the whole scene with ALL settings at C1 defaults except for the addition of the LCC corrections.

Here's a 100% crop at 100% JPEG quality in Adobe RGB

This is an ISO 100 shot on the Cambo with Schneider 35XL and though the sky is blown, the church and grass are about right I think. It was a test shot only, not intended to be of any merit!

 

[dougpeterson]

Note that applying an LCC which is boosting the shadows in the corner one stop is equivalent to raising the ISO in that area by one stop. Likewise a corner correction of 2 stops is equivalent to raising the ISO in that area by two stops.

So an ISO100 shot with an LCC with two stops of corner light fall off correction is an effective ISO400 shot.

Do you have the center filter for the 35XL?

 

[dougpeterson]

Also note that an area of flare (such as that in the upper left corner) can cause overall issues with any sensor/film especially regarding color and tonal smoothness in the shadows. I don't think that's the problem in this case, but anytime I see flare I start worrying (unless its a shot where the flare is a major aesthetic in which case the absolute image quality is probably not a huge concern).

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Does a P65 not need a LCC correction pretty much over the P45. Maybe said wrong needs one less than a P45+.

 

[dougpeterson]

Does a P65 not need a LCC correction pretty much over the P45. Maybe said wrong needs one less than a P45+.

A 65/40 shows less color cast than a 45+.

A Schneider 35mm is one of the worst lenses when it comes to producing color cast, so even a 65/40 will show enough cast to require it.

And you can also use the LCC to correct for fall-off (lens vignette). That's a fantastic tool, but like any tool it has it's advantages and disadvantages and one disadvantage is that correcting for fall off is effectively "pushing" the image. If you're at base ISO (50) and correcting 1 stop of fall off this way you're unlikely to see any noise at all - at the other end of the spectrum if you're at ISO200 and correcting for 3 stops of fall off you're likely to run into major shadow noise.

It's just not intuitive to everyone that correcting X stops of fall off is the exact same as pushing that area of the image by X stops.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Very interesting Doug, learned something new on the tech cams.

I think I had that lens on my Horseman and maybe the reason I sold it was it was weird when shifting

 

[Jack]

Yes, it appears that for the 35, you should be using the CF. This will require you add about 1-1/2 stops to your initial exposure, but then offsets that correction in the LCC to minimal and thus no noise boost.

 

[tashley]

Thanks everyone, I guess this confirms my suspicions - and is nether very surprising nor very problematic. I think it hit me as something 'new' from the P45+ partly because the particular file I posted here had dark shadow on that one side in a way that I haven't often shot purely by coincidence, with the 45+ on the Cambo, and partly because obviously the larger sensor means more falloff to correct. I have never been a big fan of either vignetting or sharpness corrections because they both boost noise.

So I guess I'll get the CF though I'd be grateful if Doug or Jack have a view on how other lenses in the same ballpark will behave in terms of colour shift and vigging (especially the Tilt/Shift 28 and 45). I am also looking into the Sinar and should be able to test one within a few weeks.

Best

Tim

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Tim you may want to read this from Jack on the 40mm lens

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13238

 

[tashley]

Tim you may want to read this from Jack on the 40mm lens

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13238

Thanks Guy - actually it was that thread that first got me interested but Jack has mainly focussed (excuse the pun!) on the T/S side of things and not gone into how much LCC corrections were needed....

 

[Jack]

Thanks Guy - actually it was that thread that first got me interested but Jack has mainly focussed (excuse the pun!) on the T/S side of things and not gone into how much LCC corrections were needed....

I thought I mentioned in there that I did the LCC and it only altered the corner pixels by a 2 points of tint, nothing at the center, so I basically didn't bother using them for the image set...

 

[dougpeterson]

So I guess I'll get the CF though I'd be grateful if Doug or Jack have a view on how other lenses in the same ballpark will behave in terms of colour shift and vigging (especially the Tilt/Shift 28 and 40). I am also looking into the Sinar and should be able to test one within a few weeks.

I have no experience with the 28. However the Schneider 47 and Rodenstock 40 require very little correction in my experience until relatively strong movements are placed on it. YMMV

 

[tashley]

I thought I mentioned in there that I did the LCC and it only altered the corner pixels by a 2 points of tint, nothing at the center, so I basically didn't bother using them for the image set...

That's good to hear since I find LCCs rather a pain... I might have a Schneider 35XL on a Cambo board for sale soon!