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!

IQ180 frustrations.

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
If either the 5d2 user or the 180 owner notice it in normal photographic work I would think they would be unhappy, and in either case their issue would be addresse by the manufacturer.

I used the 5d2 because of its ubiquity and because it's well documented that I like canon and therefore I'm not just dumping on a brand. My point was that EVERY modern high res photographic device (Phase, Mamiya, Leaf, Hassy, Sinar, Canon, Nikon, Sony) can show this issue if pushed far enough. If an IQ180 owner is seeing it in normal photographic use then it's not in spec and requires attention. It's hard to tell without raw files (hard to tell what settings were used and how much the file has been adjusted).

In fact, while we are on it, every film also showed tangentially related issues if you manipulated the end result hard enough. For example extremely minor uneven development would lead to slight variations of exposure which would manifest in a streaky manner - but only if you were scanning and pushing the curves around heavily.

@cunim: Every time a customer starts a support case the raw files for the case are place on a server for Phase One to access. Especially interesting cases (e.g. Out of norm performance) one of the engineers from the relevant departments is consulted; often the head of that division. In this way field results are constantly fed back to the designers/engineers. There has been great improvement in the software and firmware in areas that stretch the abilities of the sensor because of just Hthat process. Take for instance the 35xl; at launch the lens was utterly unusable, but with the new LCC routine and improved firmware it is being comfortably used by many customers (with the understanding it simply will never work with large movements).

So bottom line again: if you're seeing it in images in your normal workflow from supported lenses then your back is likely out of spec. If you're only seeing it when you adjust the file solely for the purpose of looking for it then you'd find issues with any camera. If you're at all unsure you can consult with your dealer: that's what they are there for!
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Slightly OT but I totally have seen the 35xl on the 180 go from totally unusable to workable with the new tech analyze tool. Honestly even my new SK 28 Xl on my 160 would not be usable either without the new tech analyze tool. So in response to Wayne's issue if this is in normal mode of shooting than I think it needs a new calibration . I have not seen this myself.
 

cunim

Well-known member
If either the 5d2 user or the 180 owner notice it in normal photographic work I would think they would be unhappy, and in either case their issue would be addresse by the manufacturer.

@cunim: Every time a customer starts a support case the raw files for the case are place on a server for Phase One to access. Especially interesting cases (e.g. Out of norm performance) one of the engineers from the relevant departments is consulted; often the head of that division. In this way field results are constantly fed back to the designers/engineers. There has been great improvement in the software and firmware in areas that stretch the abilities of the sensor because of just Hthat process. Take for instance the 35xl; at launch the lens was utterly unusable, but with the new LCC routine and improved firmware it is being comfortably used by many customers (with the understanding it simply will never work with large movements).

So bottom line again: if you're seeing it in images in your normal workflow from supported lenses then your back is likely out of spec. If you're only seeing it when you adjust the file solely for the purpose of looking for it then you'd find issues with any camera. If you're at all unsure you can consult with your dealer: that's what they are there for!
OK Doug. I think we have an engineer and a photographer agreeing on a final outcome, even if they disagree on why.

If I worry about seams, I would love to just ask my dealer for a definition of them. He doesn't have one. So, I capture a ganzfeld, correct it to even with LCC, and then plot the deviations. I get a clean cyclical variation of +-0.06% of a 64 bit theoretical dynamic range as we cross the edges of the seams. I get the same result with two IQ180 backs. Of course I would not see that and I doubt anyone else would either. However, if we window down to looking at a 12 bit slice of those 16 bits during processing the raw - not at all unlikely - the seams become something around 0.25% of the total intensity range seen in the image. In areas of even sky or in a corrected LCC blank, a skilled eye might well notice. I do. At least now I know why and I feel comfortable that the cameras I am working with are functioning about as well as they should.

What, me worry?
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Just to update this, PhaseOne contacted me and after reviewing one of my raw files told me the back could definitely be improved by being re-calibrated, which is being arranged as we speak.

I assume the problems were always there, just didn't exhibit themselves very often.
 
P

petercoxphoto

Guest
Hi guys -
Just to let you know that I'm working through the same problem (tiling in images) with Phase One on the IQ180 at the moment. I'm using mine on an Arca-Swiss Rm3d with a 23mm Rodenstock, and 35 and 47mm Schneiders.

It's been in for recalibration once already and that didn't solve the problem. The current theory is that the problem may be lens related.

As I don't make notes of what lens I use in a given shot, it can be tricky after the fact to see what lenses it occurs with, but I believe it may be limited to my 35mm Schneider. Anyone have any data on what lenses of theirs the problem appears with?

Cheers,
Peter
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
@Peter, your dealer should have helped guide you on lens selection for the IQ180. The 35XL will show this issue on any IQ180. As noted earlier in this thread it is not a recommended lens for use with an IQ180 (though that doesn't mean you can't use it to produce great images, just that you have to be aware of it's limitations).

An optical center filter, and using less movement will reduce instances of issues with a 35XL (an optical center filter for your 23 and 47 are also good ideas depending on your usage of those lenses).

TAshley (and others) might be able to chime in additional real world advice based on his experience with the same combination.

See Also: http://www.phaseone.com/en/Search/Article.aspx?articleid=1221&languageid=1
(not updated for the IQ180, but relevant relative to a P65+).
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
*chime*

The 35XL on IQ180 is certainly not for the faint hearted and I would never buy one, unless it was a real bargain because everyone else was dumping them... However, given that I know the lens inside out, love its freedom from distortion and its great sharpness, and given that I already owned one and didn't want to pony up (an english phrase meaning 'to pay') for the best alternative, the Rodie 32, I delved.

My delving into SK35XL/IQ180 sort of delivered:

You have to use a centre filter. You have to give up hope of stitching without tears. You have to turn off Light Falloff in Analyse Technical Wide Angle LCC. You have to get the exposure really really right AND your LCC file has to be specific for every shot and has to be perfectly exposed.

And you can't shift left or right more than a tiny amount. You can do 5 rise, maybe 10 if you're lucky.

If you ignore any combination of the above and find yourself in Radical PP land to correct your errors, you will sometimes see tiles emerge, and then you are screwed unless you are Jeff Schewe.

It's like Dr Johnson said in this famous (mis)quote:

"Sir, a 35XL on an IQ180 is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."

Actually it's not too bad. You can often make the dog sprint.


@Peter, your dealer should have helped guide you on lens selection for the IQ180. The 35XL will show this issue on any IQ180. As noted earlier in this thread it is not a recommended lens for use with an IQ180 (though that doesn't mean you can't use it to produce great images, just that you have to be aware of it's limitations).

An optical center filter, and using less movement will reduce instances of issues with a 35XL (an optical center filter for your 23 and 47 are also good ideas depending on your usage of those lenses).

TAshley (and others) might be able to chime in additional real world advice based on his experience with the same combination.

See Also: Camera systems and image software
(not updated for the IQ180, but relevant relative to a P65+).
 

markymarkrb

New member
I just sent my IQ180 back to Phase today because of tiling issues. So, just to let you know, you aren't the only one. This is my first digital MF back so I didn't really know what to expect but on some of my latest shots, the tiling was definetly noticeable on 100% in Capture One. Thank goodness for warranties!
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Mine should be in Denmark by now ... I'm hoping it returns soon, gonna miss the tulips in downtown SLC ...
 
Top