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!

Tech cameras and IQ.

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I'll patiently wait for Guy to trade up from his IQ160 to the IQ180 then I'll look at picking up his used back. What's your guess on that move - September, October? :D
My honest guess is that Guy will make that move BEFORE he even takes delivery of the IQ160! SERIOUSLY!

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
LOL

I'm having lot of fun with the 180 the next couple days. This is just so sweet to work with.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Guy, how are you finding the 180's "speed" for your needs? I know that was your numero uno concern for your uses.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Actually was going to address this. Last time I had the 180 to shoot it felt a little slow in response to focus mask and actually shooting speed. Now this week with a Extreme Pro card it seems faster even though this card needs the firmware update coming. Oddly it seems faster but can't prove it since I am going by memory. Focus mask has consistently been 5 seconds to render and shooting speed is pretty dang good shooting on continuous. So my earlier concerns seem a little unwarranted as i was really worried about this. I feel much better about it now and obviously this new firmware coming that will support these Extreme Pro's cards and speaking to a few folks at Phase we are assuming things will get a little faster still so this is something we have to look at in the next firmware and also Phase will keep optimizing these backs as time goes forward as well.

So honestly feeling much better here about this. Lets face it these are HUGE files pushing through these backs and if this was 10 years ago we would be drinking coffee between shots. LOL

Also I helped Doug shoot his tests on a lot of lenses on the Cambo WRS 1000 and the focus mask is just killer. We take a shot and notice maybe front focusing than make small focus adjustment and bam right dead on the money. I was so into the focus mask I forgot about the 100 percent zoom
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I was so into the focus mask I forgot about the 100 percent zoom
That's where I got in my testing with the 43 after about frame 3. FM is accurate enough that 100% view becomes almost redundant. (I am now using a setting of 45 for FM.) However, I do use use 100% view to confirm criticality on important details in images, so I am *really* glad it's there too.
 

cmb_

Subscriber & Workshop Member
What settings do you use for Focus Mask in Capture One and does this then correlate to what you are seeing on the back?
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Me personally, I rarely shoot tethered and so typically don't bother with FM inside C1 -- I have my dual monitor set up with 5 individual 100% focus screens on the RH side for actual pixel confirmations on critical image areas.
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I shoot tethered more than half the time and use a focus mask of 250 which is the default.
And since I also am usually at f/11 it works really well for me.
Note that tethered, the 100% zoom does not work but the on-back focus mask does.
-bob
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Today I confirmed that whatever your focus mask is on the back directly goes into C1 exactly the same as what you see on your LCD. Very nice
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Today I confirmed that whatever your focus mask is on the back directly goes into C1 exactly the same as what you see on your LCD. Very nice
Let me explain this at default in C1 which is 250 whatever showed exact coverage of focus area on the LCD regardless of focus mask setting on back matched exactly on computer in C1 at C1s default setting of 250.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
What Guy is trying to say is that the Focus Mask setting on the back has no bearing on the Focus Mask setting in C1, and I think for the most part we all understood that.

I think Charlie's question was more what FM settings on the back correlate to what C1 FM settings? My answer is I have no idea -- the setting values are very different in range and scope, probably specifically so they are not confused to correlate somehow; I suspect they are generated using different methods...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks Jack sorry if I confused folks. 5 things at once and on the road. But it would be nice if they used the same numbering setup between the software and back. This way knowing let's say on location with back that 43 felt like a good number for example to use with a certain lens or scene when back at computer you could see by going up or down from that number how critical you where. Phase you listening hear. Also would be easier on user. My request was mentioned to Doug and maybe send this up the food chain.

I think myself the lower the number for folks would be easier to remember so let's change C1.

Unless there is a specific reason for the certain numbers and what it correlates to. I have no idea in C1

Just a thought
 

KeithL

Well-known member
I'd be the first to admit there are very real advantages to using tech cameras, both in terms of image quality and options.

My problem when using them is that they suck the joy from the process and consequently my images suffer. I should add that I know many for whom the opposite is true.

Each to their own.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I keep going back and forth on those exact thoughts. Just not my way or style of shooting. Honestly a TC and a 35 Schneider makes more sense as to speed of operation but I miss out on the other benefits. At some point I will figure it out but no hurry either.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I'd be the first to admit there are very real advantages to using tech cameras, both in terms of image quality and options.

My problem when using them is that they suck the joy from the process and consequently my images suffer. I should add that I know many for whom the opposite is true.

Each to their own.
Keith,

You are quite correct that there are two sides this one. I'm definitely in the camp where the deliberate shooting style required by a tech camera is a big element of my joy in using it and by extension contributes to the quality of images I capture (well, I like to think so anyway). The same was true with large format film.

I don't think that anyone would disagree that shooting with a MF DSLR is a lot easier, faster, more versatile, or more efficient for a wider range of shooting situations.

Since I shoot for pleasure, the journey is sometimes more important than the destination, so to speak.
 
Top