Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 65 of 65

Thread: MF realities and limitations

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Thanks Lance and Jack.
    My main personal trend is urban, seascapes and landscape photography. Recently, I've been after long exposures.24X30" is fairly standard for me. I've managed to print (lots of PP, but it works) nicely at this size with my 5D. So, I drool at the mere thought of shooting with a double frame PhaseOne or other DMF back. My gear are (is?)a 500CM and 4 CF objectives.
    After reading your posts (Guy's and others too), I'm pin-pointing now between the P25+ and P45. In your opinion, would the P25+ look as good as a P45 printed 24X30"?
    What is the longest clean exposure with P45 non-plus?
    Thanks in advance
    Eduardo
    (b
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    The 45 will print a 33x44 with the same detail as the 25 prints say a 24x32. At ISO 100 and 200 I doubt you will see any difference between a plus and non-plus; you *might* notice a bit of a difference in larger prints on noise at 400.

  2. #52
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Justin:

    There is no easy answer here, and you are essentially down to 'splitting pixels' () in an effort to determine which best suits your needs.

    A few added comments:

    1) The P30+ has the same size pixel as the P45+. As such, if one uses pixel size as CoC for their DoF calc, then both the sensors deliver the same effective DoF. Yes, the P30+ has a theoretical added enlargement factor using a slightly shorter lens to get to the same size print as the P45+, but the fact that we do not have infinite focal length choice essentially negates this consideration.

    2) Micro lenses do affect native image quality at the pixel level; they slightly soften the image and slightly lower inter-pixel contrast in the mid to upper tones. Added sharpening and a bump in contrast during raw processing bring these back in line, but when Guy and I did the direct comparison tests, we both agreed that the final file detail ended up somewhere between the P45+ and 25+. So, by the time you backed up the few steps with the P30+ required to get the same framing as the P25, the final files were essentially equal for detail. The difference in mid-upper contrast requires a bump to correct which has a negative effect on the total dynamic range, and the P30+ netted visibly less detail in the lower shadows than either the P25+ or 45+. While it was difficult to measure this loss empirically, we 'guesstimated' 2/3 stop less DR.

    3) No real difference in noise between the P25+ and P45+, however the P25+ tends to show moire more frequently.

    4) If money were no object, I would own the P45+ for maximum detail and print output size and a P30+ for capture speed and higher ISO.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  3. #53
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Quote Originally Posted by Uaiomex View Post
    In your opinion, would the P25+ look as good as a P45 printed 24X30"?
    Print detail will be very hard to differentiate at 24x32, and either will be an order of magnitude more detailed than your 5D at that size.

    I cannot speak to long exposure noise on the non-plus backs because I've never tested that.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  4. #54
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32į 31' 37.06" N, 111į 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Justin

    Iíve been shooting with a P30+ for about 18 months and love it. The largest size print Iíve made so far has been a tad over 34x64 on canvas which was a result of a 2 shot merged panorama. Iíve been shooting and loving the 28mm since late last year and have constantly gotten great results.

    That said, I might be upgrading to the P45+ only because I might also start shooting a TC (Iíll be testing next week).

    If youíre sure you wonít be shooting a TC go with the P30+ you wonít be sorry. Listen to Chris and you wonít go wrong either.


    don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  5. #55
    jmvdigital
    Guest

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Don, excellent! I'm glad you're having a good experience with the 30+. I'm in limbo right now, mostly dictated by cost at this point. If I can swing the 45+, I'm there. If not, back to the 30+ I think. What is your impression of the low-light capability of the 30+? Any 1600 ISO images (with crops) that you'd be willing to share?

  6. #56
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Here Justin some P30 plus stuff. Happy reading. LOL

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1896
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  7. #57
    jmvdigital
    Guest

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Guy, right on cue with great reading material... again. Thanks.

    Sheesh, still stuck. The 30+ is fabulous at high ISO. The one or two 800ISO shots I've seen from the 45+ have been significantly less inspiring (one in that thread).

  8. #58
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32į 31' 37.06" N, 111į 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Quote Originally Posted by jmvdigital View Post
    Don, excellent! I'm glad you're having a good experience with the 30+. I'm in limbo right now, mostly dictated by cost at this point. If I can swing the 45+, I'm there. If not, back to the 30+ I think. What is your impression of the low-light capability of the 30+? Any 1600 ISO images (with crops) that you'd be willing to share?
    Justin

    Sorry but I can't help you out on low-light with the P30 as I normally don't shoot above 100. The only time I shoot low-light is when I'm doing lightening and I've been using my Canon for that as it's just faster.

    The reason I decided on the P30+ above the P45+ (at the time) was I felt that the P30 was just a better buy; more bang for the buck so to speak; the reason I'm making the switch to the P45+ is if I decide to make the move to the Cambo WDS and I'll know the outcome of that little drama by the end of next week.

    My suggestion is that unless you are convinced you'll never move to a TC then wisest move might be to pick up a P30+; you'll always have the upgrade path to either the P45, P65 or whatever Phase has by then.

    The major thing that's holding me back from just ordering the upgrade is that I want to see how well my Mamiya 28 is going to play with the P45; of course I might also find I no longer need that lens if I'm shooting wide with the WDS. Again, I'll know for sure by the end of next week..

    Bottom line? You won't go wrong with either ...

    don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  9. #59
    jmvdigital
    Guest

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Jack, I see you had posted some 800 ISO comparisons from your 45+ (and then you and Thierry had it out, haha) on an older thread when you first got your 45. But those images don't show up in the thread any more. Any chance you could hook up some fresh 800 images w/crops? Nothing special needed. Greatly appreciated.

  10. #60
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Here is the P45+ at 1600 -- or more precisely captured underexposed 1 at ISO 800, then pushed 1 during raw conversion. It is a screen capture at actual pixels resolution:
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  11. #61
    jmvdigital
    Guest

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Hmm, I don't really see a huge problem here. Obviously there is some NR taking place. Now that you've had the 45+ a while, what's your opinion of using it 800? Can you reliably get clean images like this one? Does it compare (visibly) to the shots the bathroom shots that Guy has posted with his 25+? I found those images to be acceptable for sure.

    Thanks again.

  12. #62
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Justin, I honestly have not used it enough above 200 to generate a strong opinion. The fact is I use it mostly at 50 or 100 on a tripod for landscape or 100 or 200 when shooting handheld. Occasionally I've go to 400 in lower light handheld, but any darker and I usually move to my smaller cameras anyway. Sorry I cannot be of more help.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  13. #63
    jmvdigital
    Guest

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Well folks, I finally took the plunge, and decided on a 30+. I'm very much looking forward to getting out and shooting. Lots to learn still about MF. Thanks Guy, Jack, Don, Brad and others. You'll be seeing me around here much more often soon.

    I would like to thank Chris Lawery at Capture Integrations for his continued patience. I ultimately went with CI because of their reputation on this board and because I started my negotiations with them first.

    Even though I didn't buy it from him, I would like to especially thank Chris Snipes at Image Production. He was openly candid with me, took a look at my work and offered equipment opinions, and was very open and honest with pricing and options.

    I highly recommend the Chris' at either CI or Image Production if you're in the market for Phase1.

  14. #64
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    I think you will be very happy overall Justin. Good luck and we want to see images. The P30 plus is a excellent back
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  15. #65
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: MF realities and limitations

    Looks like that file would sharpen up nicely, it's got a kinda 'AA filter' look to it.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •