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!
Phase One IQ250 - 11 things you need to know, and Q&A
- Thread starter dougpeterson
- Start date
I am not sure who you are referring to, but I don't think I fit the boogeyman profile you describe. First, I have an IQ180 and fully understand why I bought it and continue to use it. Second, I would never describe those that buy an .iQ250 or any other piece of camera equipment as "insane". I think its a very disappointing offering in absolute terms. I have no issue at all with charging premium or even obscenely high prices for a CMOS back, but it should offer a commensurate level of performance . After all, if I bought a Ferrari, I would not be happy to be told that it's slower than a Prius, but be pleased, it's still faster than earlier Ferraris.
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
Actually Howard I wasn't necessarily referring to you re D800/A7r but there are a few here that can't see beyond the other systems.
And on the Ferrari analogy, it wouldn't bother me that the Ferrari was slower than a current Prius because ultimately it's STILL a Ferrari. Compare a Ferrari 308 to any mainstream vehicle and it'll seem like a boat anchor with no brakes. However, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one for all of the other intangible reasons. Ditto these cameras/backs.
And on the Ferrari analogy, it wouldn't bother me that the Ferrari was slower than a current Prius because ultimately it's STILL a Ferrari. Compare a Ferrari 308 to any mainstream vehicle and it'll seem like a boat anchor with no brakes. However, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one for all of the other intangible reasons. Ditto these cameras/backs.
It shall be interesting to see where this back find its home. To me it seems like it would fit best in a studio which has many MF cameras, and this back could be added to the bunch to be used in special assignments where you might stumble on difficult light.
I find it harder to see that you'd want this back if you're going to have only one back. You're not using MF to shoot high ISO. As it costs almost as much as a full-frame CCD back I think most would rather spend the amount on a CCD back, and stick with the DSLR you already own for the high ISO work.
If high ISO quality turns out to be better than the initial samples we've seen (I think the MF world is not really used to high ISO processing so it will take some time before we see good results) it could be a fine event/wedding camera.
Haven't seen the tech camera testing yet. Although I think angular response will be a real problem, maybe it still works quite fine with the Digaron-S line (recently heard nice stuff about Sony A7r and Digaron-S, that it would take even the 23mm, if that's true this sensor will likely handle it too), and that together with it's live view could be a killer. Digaron-S + 44x33 is not how I like my own tech cam system to be, but there are other views than mine.
I find it harder to see that you'd want this back if you're going to have only one back. You're not using MF to shoot high ISO. As it costs almost as much as a full-frame CCD back I think most would rather spend the amount on a CCD back, and stick with the DSLR you already own for the high ISO work.
If high ISO quality turns out to be better than the initial samples we've seen (I think the MF world is not really used to high ISO processing so it will take some time before we see good results) it could be a fine event/wedding camera.
Haven't seen the tech camera testing yet. Although I think angular response will be a real problem, maybe it still works quite fine with the Digaron-S line (recently heard nice stuff about Sony A7r and Digaron-S, that it would take even the 23mm, if that's true this sensor will likely handle it too), and that together with it's live view could be a killer. Digaron-S + 44x33 is not how I like my own tech cam system to be, but there are other views than mine.
malmac
Member
I think as owners or prospective owners of digital medium format most of us are interested in the development of the MF platform.
I would like to contribute some points to the conversation ( I currently use an IQ180 and a Canon 1D (4).
1. The High ISO images posted on Phase One Unveils First Medium-Format Camera With CMOS Sensor: Hands-On Test, in my opinion were unfortunate in the fact that the figures which represented the focal point/subject of the photos, actually represented a fairly small % of the area of the image - therefore, when you zoomed in on the figures they lacked sharpness/detail and this detracted from the iso performance which was the subject of the test.
2. Because the subject in each case was well lit by a strobe, the noise was less obvious than it might have been in a poorly lit scene, (as it is with the IQ180 when one shoots in bright light with a higher iso) - I'm not saying the IQ180 is as good, not even suggesting, nearly as good - but just making the point that high iso in really bright light reduces the ugly noise - from my limited experience.
3. I think it was a shame that they didn't bother to shoot some really traditional 100iso portraits to render the colour of the CMOS sensor in a positive light.
All in all I think the high iso examples showcased so far have been less than inspiring and it might have been better if a more balanced selection of images had been posted to showcase the full potential of the new back.
If I was buying again now?
Well for one I would not believe that Phase One will bring out a new DSLR camera body soon, which I did when I bought into the IQ180 and secondly I would not part with my money on the basis of a handful of early release photos (which I am sure are really a poor examples of what this back can produce).
I guess we all look forward to seeing more examples in due course.
Mal
I would like to contribute some points to the conversation ( I currently use an IQ180 and a Canon 1D (4).
1. The High ISO images posted on Phase One Unveils First Medium-Format Camera With CMOS Sensor: Hands-On Test, in my opinion were unfortunate in the fact that the figures which represented the focal point/subject of the photos, actually represented a fairly small % of the area of the image - therefore, when you zoomed in on the figures they lacked sharpness/detail and this detracted from the iso performance which was the subject of the test.
2. Because the subject in each case was well lit by a strobe, the noise was less obvious than it might have been in a poorly lit scene, (as it is with the IQ180 when one shoots in bright light with a higher iso) - I'm not saying the IQ180 is as good, not even suggesting, nearly as good - but just making the point that high iso in really bright light reduces the ugly noise - from my limited experience.
3. I think it was a shame that they didn't bother to shoot some really traditional 100iso portraits to render the colour of the CMOS sensor in a positive light.
All in all I think the high iso examples showcased so far have been less than inspiring and it might have been better if a more balanced selection of images had been posted to showcase the full potential of the new back.
If I was buying again now?
Well for one I would not believe that Phase One will bring out a new DSLR camera body soon, which I did when I bought into the IQ180 and secondly I would not part with my money on the basis of a handful of early release photos (which I am sure are really a poor examples of what this back can produce).
I guess we all look forward to seeing more examples in due course.
Mal
johnnygoesdigital
New member
Seems to me that it's started to spiral down to certain folks taking the viewpoint that you've got to be insane to want a flexible medium format camera system that can be used anywhere when you could buy a D800 or A7/A7r.
They're never going to buy one and don't see how anyone else would want to shoot and use a medium format system when so many other smaller, cheaper, arguably technically superior solutions exist. GrahamWelland-
There's shades of an oxymoron in there..."flexible medium format"
The Leica S/S2, and lens lineup has lot's of appeal to me now!
It's only a community when other ideas and viewpoints can be shared in an objective manner... and you don't diss Shashin's Pentax 645D
They're never going to buy one and don't see how anyone else would want to shoot and use a medium format system when so many other smaller, cheaper, arguably technically superior solutions exist. GrahamWelland-
There's shades of an oxymoron in there..."flexible medium format"
The Leica S/S2, and lens lineup has lot's of appeal to me now!
It's only a community when other ideas and viewpoints can be shared in an objective manner... and you don't diss Shashin's Pentax 645D
Last edited:
dougpeterson
Workshop Member
Phase One did - a huge volume of them actually as part of the profiling process. More on this when my feature length article is released (now looks like Monday since the publishers are traveling).
Typically when releasing a new product manufacturers (for better or worse) tend to focus on what this product can do that the previous/other ones cannot. Hence the IQ260 was focused very heavily on being a long exposure back, despite the fact it was also quite a nice all-round back and the IQ250 launch marketing is focused very heavily on high ISO, frame rate, and live view, despite the fact it's a quite nice low-ISO back as well (stunning DR from the preliminary testing I've done so far).
A lot of other testing and shooting took place; the images that get published for initial marketing represent a very very small % of those shots.
Also notable that P1 traditionally pushes most marketing and customer outreach to the dealer network. What photographers want to see/evaluate in China, NYC, and South Cape are surprisingly different. So it will take a while for the dealer network to receive their demo units, do the testing relevant to their markets and get that information out.
Then the most important part comes shortly thereafter, the opportunity for photographers to do their own testing and shooting. That's where the rubber really meets the road.
Any product launches with two phases: flash and then substance. For better or worse. We (DT) try to offset this by getting as much real/useful info as possible as quickly as possible, and I think P1 is trying as well by getting the back in the hands of working photographers early in the process. But let's face it, marketing is marketing; if you're looking for marketing to tell you what product is best for you the answer is always "our product is perfect for you"
.
Last edited:
I think Mal was referring to what was actually released at launch for the public to see, both from Phase One and in early hands-on reviews. Ie much focus on the high ISO which is a "new" feature, but too little showing that the CMOS is making good images at base ISO. Which we hopefully will get later on.
Many MF users are skeptical about CMOS performance at base ISO, and in later years DSLR vs MF has been much about CMOS vs CCD some going so far that CCD is a key aspect in what makes the MF look, so CMOS technology will have to prove itself concerning base ISO color rendition.
When this argument rears its ugly head. And it is ugly. It is always one of physics and not of photography, so let them spiral down and down and down. Each photographer must choose their tool, based on how well it works for them. That could be anything. I recently shot a whole series on my iPhone, Lomo style. I have friends plugging away in studios, with regular newspaper and magazine still life contracts, working with P25's. Owned for years and years, they keep going, making great images.
The technical side is far too hyped. This suits the manufacturers, who keep the customer wanting the next technological advance. It helps sales. D800 today, D900 tomorrow.
Now that caught my eye. The ergonomic body, those beautiful lenses and weather sealed. Just make it 4x3 format Leica! For gods sake. ARE YOU LISTENING LEICA?
douglasf13
New member
It may not be great for everyone, but I think it is a step in the right direction. There is a large contingent of medium format film photographers that handhold outside of the studio for fine art or personal use, but the price and high ISO performance of MFDBs, up to this point, has forced most of those shooters into 35mm, if they want to shoot digital.
By simultaneously bringing CMOS and Sony into the MFDB mix, I see this as the first step towards democratizing the format a little bit. Not only is the high ISO going to be better, but, particularly in regards to the less than full frame 33x44 chip, which I believe still only takes a single stitch to make (like 35mm sensors,) I can see Sony getting the cost down of these things over time.
Stefan Steib
Active member
Interesting thread. I have been quiet for now but here comes my analysis how I see this release:
Phase One was under pressure (as are all the other MF makers) for a new CMOS technology (lets spare out the technical details here-I want to see it from a product placement and marketing point of view). Right now the DF+ Body does not make all the users happy, but it is the base platform for the actual back portfolio. Phase One themselves have called their CCD products not idealy suited for sports or action photography, as well as for low light shots with for high ISO (not to be mixed up with long exposure capability with low ISO ! I also think the Pixel Plus is only giving only a second grade solution as the resolution is only a quarter of the full one, but that´s another story).
This gap had to be filled and as you can see from the presentation on the Phase website, that is what the purpose was to reach.
I don´t think this makes much sense on a tech cam, although I understand the interest of many of my colleagues for better focusing also for their tech cams.
As I have proposed here for several times some time ago, the only way to get to a larger (than 24x36) CMOS chip was cooperation with other companies to increase the volume, otherwise the production would have been impossible.
The common denominator for all 4 existing customers of this Sony chip is the format that Leica and Pentax are using (which draws an interesting image of the proportions per company of the projected chips).
So this chip is tailored mainly for a more compact and SLR oriented concept. Phase has used this to scale it as an extension of the existing back portfolio.
If Phase One will make this perfect a full body with incorporation of this chip will be needed. I am nearly sure this will happen in the not so far future.
And - I would not be surprised if they have listened to their customers very carefully and are preparing a solution that will be a market leading body , maybe showing some of the concepts already shown in the industrial cameras.
I welcome this policy very much and for us as HCam producers this chip is also a godsent: it opens a much greater range of available lenses of the world market, very many cover this smaller format. And 50 Mpix is enough for most of todays working tasks( though a bit small for fine art imaging).
It is the right decision, the CCD´s will hold their stake for some more years in the traditional highres range (which they do very well).
This protects the investment of existing customers, opens the market for new ones and extends the usability of the DF+ system -Plus- gives a perspective for a future devellopment.
Well done Phase One. Pure logic and good strategy !
Greetings from Germany
Stefan
Phase One was under pressure (as are all the other MF makers) for a new CMOS technology (lets spare out the technical details here-I want to see it from a product placement and marketing point of view). Right now the DF+ Body does not make all the users happy, but it is the base platform for the actual back portfolio. Phase One themselves have called their CCD products not idealy suited for sports or action photography, as well as for low light shots with for high ISO (not to be mixed up with long exposure capability with low ISO ! I also think the Pixel Plus is only giving only a second grade solution as the resolution is only a quarter of the full one, but that´s another story).
This gap had to be filled and as you can see from the presentation on the Phase website, that is what the purpose was to reach.
I don´t think this makes much sense on a tech cam, although I understand the interest of many of my colleagues for better focusing also for their tech cams.
As I have proposed here for several times some time ago, the only way to get to a larger (than 24x36) CMOS chip was cooperation with other companies to increase the volume, otherwise the production would have been impossible.
The common denominator for all 4 existing customers of this Sony chip is the format that Leica and Pentax are using (which draws an interesting image of the proportions per company of the projected chips).
So this chip is tailored mainly for a more compact and SLR oriented concept. Phase has used this to scale it as an extension of the existing back portfolio.
If Phase One will make this perfect a full body with incorporation of this chip will be needed. I am nearly sure this will happen in the not so far future.
And - I would not be surprised if they have listened to their customers very carefully and are preparing a solution that will be a market leading body , maybe showing some of the concepts already shown in the industrial cameras.
I welcome this policy very much and for us as HCam producers this chip is also a godsent: it opens a much greater range of available lenses of the world market, very many cover this smaller format. And 50 Mpix is enough for most of todays working tasks( though a bit small for fine art imaging).
It is the right decision, the CCD´s will hold their stake for some more years in the traditional highres range (which they do very well).
This protects the investment of existing customers, opens the market for new ones and extends the usability of the DF+ system -Plus- gives a perspective for a future devellopment.
Well done Phase One. Pure logic and good strategy !
Greetings from Germany
Stefan
stephengilbert
Active member
"That's quite the oxymoron!"
Really? What do you think oxymoron means?
Really? What do you think oxymoron means?
johnnygoesdigital
New member
Actually, it's the juxtaposition of contradictory elements in this sentence, "flexible medium format". Perhaps more of a fallacy than a true oxymoron such as... What a big baby!
Let's remember we're talking about the IQ250, not MFD as a whole.
Let's remember we're talking about the IQ250, not MFD as a whole.
Last edited:
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
Actually, I don't find those elements contradictory at all.
... And you are still cherry picking parts of my post ...
... And you are still cherry picking parts of my post ...
MaxKißler
New member
Interesting thoughts Stefan. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Sony is sooner or later entering the MF business and the first to present a mirrorless MF system (A7r on steroids). It's a prospering company and they have enough money to drop a million or two (or a couple) on R+D for a new camera + lenses to wrap around a sensor they already produce. All it takes is a CEO who is enthusiastic about photography and off they go.
Seriously, I was very surprised when they announced the A7/A7r. I knew they made the sensors for the D800 etc. but didn't think they had a camera of their own. Especially since they have the NEX series so I thought they'd stick with the APS-C format.
In fact, they produce so many mirrorless cameras that I think it's hard to keep track of them all. The RX1 is also a 35mm FF camera so why an A7? And why not a MF mirrorless?
My pride on owning a IQ280 just went up !!
Quips aside, I don't understand why the hype about the Live view.
The way I see it, Live view for photography ( not video mind you ) is best utilized for fine art, landscape, still life images. For such images, what you need is a very good base ISO IQ and ability to print big. Both these will be sub-optimal here, compared to the current 60 and 80MP offerings.
Phase should stick to what it does best, rather than bowing to peer pressure.
PS: had a great trip in NZ, will post some images soon.
for posting images here ( I have never before ), what jpg settings do folks here generally use to export from C1 ?
Have a great day,
Saty
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
1200 on the wide side and srgb
ondebanks
Member
Why not?
If you were intending to shoot high ISO with any other format camera, why not use a MF camera instead, for the larger sensor and all that entails?
I mean, think about it: why did people use MF cameras with film? The same film emulsions that 35mm users used, including the "high ISO" ones like Konica SRG3200, Agfachrome 1000RS, Ilford Delta 3200 - all available in 120 format.
And sure, there were MF film photographers who never wanted to use anything faster than Velvia 50 or Tech Pan rated at ISO 35 - just as now, there are MFD photographers who never want to use anything above ISO 50 on their P45+ or IQ160. But the difference is that the film guys could load up a roll of ISO 3200 film anytime they wanted, whereas the DB guys cannot crank their back to a full-res ISO 3200. OTOH, their FFDSLR brethren can.
That's what this is all about: the long-overdue restoration of the universality (format independence) of camera sensitivity, which was the norm pre-digital. As I prefer using MF systems, that is why I've been clamouring for MF CMOS for years now.
Over the past decade, it seems to me, a malaise has seeped into the minds of MF users: a resigned attitude that we cannot shoot high ISO digitally, therefore we should never expect to do so again, and that there's something amiss with anyone who says "Hang on, there is really something wrong with this situation. Why do we tolerate that now 35mm kicks our butt in basic sensitivity, even though we used to kick its butt by sheer size advantage with the same emulsion qualities?"
But restore the sensitivity playing field, and once again, it's just a factor of sheer size advantage. Medium format is finally back on top, in every scenario!
For me, that's why the Sony CMOS-sensored DBs are a cause for celebration. They might not get it completely right in this first iteration - nearly all of us would like a bigger sensor than 44x33 mm, and I'm particularly annoyed at the P1 mandatory dark frame, which is both unnecessary and damaging - but look at the bigger picture: it's as good per pixel as a D800E (yup, the same D800E which was to be MFD's assassin) but it's 70% bigger. Don't you see the amazing possibilities?
Ray
Because DSLRs do it so much better, concerning auto-focus, wide aperture, and sensor dynamic range-wise if we go up in ISO. It's the right tool for the task. Digital 135 also have considerably more resolution than film 135 had, so there's much less reason to step up in format to get more resolution in your high ISO image.
I think it will be extremely difficult for MF to restore the "balance" from the film days in this aspect. But sure, this is one step on the way.
In film high ISO is sometimes (often?) used for the look of the film itself, make a moody picture from the grain. Digital high ISO don't have that charm. If you can shoot low ISO you do it and add moody look in post-processing.
I think some will use this anyway for high ISO despite it's the "wrong tool for the task", simply because they like and are used with the 645DF+ camera and would rather use one camera than have two, and they might not find it as important to have the best high ISO performance if they stumble across those situations quite seldom. And you can probably find some narrow high ISO use cases where it does serve you better than a D4 or 1DX, for example when you need fast sync speed and high ISO at the same time.
I still think that in that price range the IQ260 is for the vast majority of users interested in MF still the most desirable back. Had it been priced after sensor size it would have been different, then the IQ250 would be attractive as an entry-level option. But with current pricing it must be the high ISO (or live view) that you specifically desire. It will take more time and more than one product to associate MF with high ISO and action. But when Pentax and Leica come with their contributions maybe we'll see a change and more MF in current "DSLR territory".
MaxKißler
New member
Ray, I think it's difficult to make direct comparisons. It's true what you say about film but in my humble opinion it's simply a completely different media. For example, shoot 35mm film and 35mm digital side by side and enlarge both to 30x40 (cm). Todays digital 35mm cameras go up to ISO25600 and even if this generally can't be considered "usable" so it's the case with Delta3200. Last time I shot a roll of 120 Delta3200 I was a bit shocked that even when I exposed it as 1000ASA film, it was hardly printable at all.