vieri
Well-known member
Fair enough - care at least to give us a timeframe for the "soon" part?No not yet, but soon, very soon :toocool:
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!
Fair enough - care at least to give us a timeframe for the "soon" part?No not yet, but soon, very soon :toocool:
Hmmm...So, Tim, what are you going to ask for your place in line?:OT:
Victor
thank you!Tim, thank you for your answer - all your points make sense of course, and except nr. 3 and partially nr. 2 they are all very personal to you and what your imagine-creating process is, so let me just play the devil's advocate for nr. 2 and 3.
Nr. 2: first of all, CONGRATS! I am very happy for you, well deserved.
At the moment most of what I am selling is 21 x 14 inches but I go up to whatever I can fit on a 24" roll depending on aspect ratio.More into the point though, while is true that no customer really care about the gear you used, I am pretty sure that they all care about your images' IQ - so if you don't mind, I am very interested in a couple of more detailed points here, of course if you were willing to share this with us: first, what is the largest size you print your images at?
It's the usual constant struggle to find kit that does everything and weighs nothing! In the end it depends on whether I am going out with or without an aim in mind. For strolls with the dog, currently alternating between Fuji x100 (really nice in some ways, truly pisses me off in others...) Nikon D7000 (which like many people I have a below acceptable hit rate for focus on, and for which they don't make a good enough mid range zoom) and an Oly Pen (often but not always good enough IQ). often the M9 too, if there are no rain clouds or muggers in sight.Second, what kind of gear allows you to both feel free in your image-creating while at the same time providing you with the IQ you and your customers need? Or to put it differently, what gear are you instinctively reaching out to first when you go out?
I find that every shot needs it's own LCC because, and I can't prove this, I think that the colour temperature of the light affects things as well as the aperture and shift. I had one version upgrade to C1 in which most of my LCCs went astray and that REALLY annoyed me, though I am sure it was my fault for deleting the LCC shots after I had made a calibration file from them! I fear it happening again.Nr. 3: Agreed on the first part, I am pretty sure nobody loves LCC and we all would do without if at all possible - however, once you created your profiles for the different lenses that need them, it is a pretty straightforward process, just one more step in the digital workflow; as much as I don't like to hassle with them, to me personally LCC use wouldn't be enough of a reason to give up to the IQ that a tech cam with the P65+ and Rodenstock/Schneider lenses provides.
I use the DF and the Cambo. I know many people get on fine with the DF but I find that it stinks of legacy, and can't wait for it to be replaced. The Cambo is light but it really does need all the dangly bits, LCC sheet (which never quite fits the bull bars), tripod, cube, etc.Gear size and weight, of course that is a major concern; while the Phase kit is definitely too big and heavy, a tech camera with 3 lenses and a back is way smaller and comparable in size & weight to a DSLR, or even lighter. It is not comparable of course to a compact camera, or to a m4/3-based or M9-based system, so am I right in assuming that these are the solutions you are thinking about to replace MF?
I think that I am just not a good enough photographer here: by the time I have fought with all the setup and focus issues, all spontaneity and energy is gone from my work, which ends up being technically better than I have any right to expect but looking, well, dead.The last part of your Nr. 3 point is in fact the most interesting for me under a philosophical point of view, however IMO it is very difficult for me to define it as a "traditional MF landscape look": I'd rather describe it more generally as a "traditional landscape look", having seen it done by everyone with any kind of equipment. To me, what using a tech cam (or MF) does is forcing one to spend more time for each frame, more so for a tech cam of course; this is not related to achieving a particular look, 'cause obviously you can spend more time searching for all kinds of composition and looks: I'd see it more related to a spontaneous approach to shooting versus a more analytical one, if that makes sense, and of course here personal preferences and shooting styles are all that count.
Sorry those thoughts are so quirky, eccentric and inconsistent, as well as sounding whiney but that's really the way it has been for me more often than not. HOWEVER... I am so aware that the file quality I crave can't be met elsewhere and if the IQ series reduce the hassle, possibly even make me feel a tactile pleasure with the equipment, then I might finally make the leap to getting the results I want from this sort of gear. Jack's posts in this thread and the LuLa review are making me return to plan a, but I do think there's a fifty fifty chance that I'll get the 180, use it for a few weeks, realise that I'll never be an MF guy and sell the lot!Looking forward to hearing from you on the above, and thanks again for sharing your thoughts
Hello again Tim! Starting from the end, don't worry about it, I am in a very similar frame of mind at the moment and I understand you far too wellthank you!
At the moment most of what I am selling is 21 x 14 inches but I go up to whatever I can fit on a 24" roll depending on aspect ratio.
It's the usual constant struggle to find kit that does everything and weighs nothing! In the end it depends on whether I am going out with or without an aim in mind. For strolls with the dog, currently alternating between Fuji x100 (really nice in some ways, truly pisses me off in others...) Nikon D7000 (which like many people I have a below acceptable hit rate for focus on, and for which they don't make a good enough mid range zoom) and an Oly Pen (often but not always good enough IQ). often the M9 too, if there are no rain clouds or muggers in sight.
I find that every shot needs it's own LCC because, and I can't prove this, I think that the colour temperature of the light affects things as well as the aperture and shift. I had one version upgrade to C1 in which most of my LCCs went astray and that REALLY annoyed me, though I am sure it was my fault for deleting the LCC shots after I had made a calibration file from them! I fear it happening again.
I use the DF and the Cambo. I know many people get on fine with the DF but I find that it stinks of legacy, and can't wait for it to be replaced. The Cambo is light but it really does need all the dangly bits, LCC sheet (which never quite fits the bull bars), tripod, cube, etc.
I am not sure I know what to replace it with but my hunch is that the next generation of 1ds will, with a TS lens, finally cover all my bases other than the gorgeous DR and colour rendition of the Phase gear.
I think that I am just not a good enough photographer here: by the time I have fought with all the setup and focus issues, all spontaneity and energy is gone from my work, which ends up being technically better than I have any right to expect but looking, well, dead.
Sorry those thoughts are so quirky, eccentric and inconsistent, as well as sounding whiney but that's really the way it has been for me more often than not. HOWEVER... I am so aware that the file quality I crave can't be met elsewhere and if the IQ series reduce the hassle, possibly even make me feel a tactile pleasure with the equipment, then I might finally make the leap to getting the results I want from this sort of gear. Jack's posts in this thread and the LuLa review are making me return to plan a, but I do think there's a fifty fifty chance that I'll get the 180, use it for a few weeks, realise that I'll never be an MF guy and sell the lot!
Grrrr: it's ME I'm annoyed with, not Phase!
Owning too much gear is pain IMO and I'd love to own one system that did it all. IMO, digital photography is in a funny stage at the moment. Every one wants the 1Ds/D3X type of cameras but with the quality of the Phase/Blad gear but they not there yet.What would you and everyone else here do or suggest? Thanks again for sharing, it's great to hear from you and everyone
Leica S2 or Pentax 645D ?Every one wants the 1Ds/D3X type of cameras but with the quality of the Phase/Blad gear but they not there yet.
As in landed in the US?Also good news I heard the first customer deliveries are here.
Guy,Well have to say the IQ back is there in MF and just no question about it. ....Lots of images to download and get going on results but it's a IQ all the way. Just to damn nice not to have that's features and the LCD itself. ....No question the IQ 140 is what I want and the money is worth it and really not to bad even my wife blessed it.....
In theory anything will have an effect, and I would recommend a new LCC for each frame on a technical camera. This is probably overkill for most, but at least you get it right (what was the aperture and shift on that frame again?)I find that every shot needs it's own LCC because, and I can't prove this, I think that the colour temperature of the light affects things as well as the aperture and shift.
Yes, we had that once. If it occurs it will be fixed. We support LCCs all the way back to, and including, Capture One 3 (both generated from a PowerPC Mac or Intel). File a bug if it does not work for you.I had one version upgrade to C1 in which most of my LCCs went astray and that REALLY annoyed me, though I am sure it was my fault for deleting the LCC shots after I had made a calibration file from them! I fear it happening again.
As in one landed on dealers delivery doorAs in landed in the US?
No real word on what is or is not on the 160 and 140 we do know ISO 35 is not and that may extend to the higher ISO stuff.Guy,
Recently Phase announced added features/capabilities for the IQ180. But what wasn't made totally clear was if these features would/could be extended to the IQ140 and IQ160 backs. The sensors are from the P40+ and P65+ respectively, but hardware is all new. Any word on the new features being extended to the IQ140/IQ160---or is that still exclusively IQ180 territory?
I know that purchasing any MFDB is a big business decision for anyone, but there is also that subjective balance with personal enjoyment in photography itself to consider. I have absolutely no need for more resolution, but the new technology means much easier workflow and enjoyment.
The IQ160 has your name on it, Guy, just like we all knew the P40+ was perfect for you months before you pulled the trigger!
ken