Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 82 of 82

Thread: New camera from Phase One?

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,501
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    The holy grail is all about the journey, not the attainment...
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #52
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Dante's Inferno can't have much to burn right now...we need some fuel for the hellfire. Like a new "gotta have it NOW" Phase body.

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    I don't think you guys will have to wait too much longer.

    Paul
    Paul Caldwell
    [email protected]
    www.photosofarkansas.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,588
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    It's been ages, but I'm mostly sure the wait will be worth it for those that have stuck it out. If I owned an IQ back, I'd be holding out for multiple autofocus points, an integrated power solution that doesn't require the use of addition power in the body, customisable viewfinder options and a more responsive and accurate AF mechanism. Here's hoping!

    I think Hasselblad must be due to drop an update soon, too. We're getting into the "season", I think. I see they've discontinued the H5D-50 CCD and are offering "end of line" deals on it and the H5D-40. Woudn't be surprised if Phase and Hasselblad both release new bodies, backs and updates and about the same time. I'll watch on from the sidelines hoping that Hasselblad improve their back interface and update the screen, and Phase / Leaf owners get their long awaited new camera.

    In the meantime, Leica S owners still wait for the 007. Their decision to stay with 37mpx confuses the hell out of me –*their reasoning seems like weak excuses. Then again, there's no debate about Leica's beautiful glass or the handling of the S body...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #55
    Senior Member malmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Well if I had Methuselah's genes I might not worry but the years are slipping away and I wait, we wait but WHEN will it come??????


    Mal

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    At this point, I'd think the camera will be biased towards upcoming CMOS backs and will push future sales of CMOS backs. Not sure how relevant it will be for the old CCD IQ/P+backs.

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,057
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    In the meantime, Leica S owners still wait for the 007. Their decision to stay with 37mpx confuses the hell out of me –*their reasoning seems like weak excuses. Then again, there's no debate about Leica's beautiful glass or the handling of the S body...
    If glass is the only argument, then there is no argument as the world passes them by. 51MP versus 37MP is 36% more. That is not a small number. But it is also what more you can do with that 51MP sensor and how it handles high ISO. One can probably get 3-4 new 645Z bodies at $7500 for the price of one CMOS S 007 model.

    I sometimes shoot with an S body friend and during a recent sunrise I mentioned I was using 1600 to 3200 ISO for the DOF I wanted. He laughed and said those ISO levels were going to ruin my shots. I understood his comment coming from a 400ISO max device. BTW, my shots were just fine.

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    I was thinking about the "new" body a bit last night and really after a bit of thought, I am curious what everyone is looking for? Phase is limited to design by the fact that they have backs that are detachable. To me this eliminates quite a bit of the features I wanted to see, namely:

    1. EVF, this would imply mirrorless and a lot more dedicated communication between the back and camera. In all the cameras I have used that have a EVF the communication between the sensor and EVF is a dedicated pipeline of data, and I can't see this working with a back that can be removed.

    2. Mirrorless, all the lenses out there right now (besides tech glass) are designed to be used in with a mirror box. So if the new body went mirrorless, then all current lenses would not work, unless some form of new adapter was created. An adapter to push the distance back of the rear element. New lenses could be built around a mirrorless solution but there are a huge number of users that would not be able to take advantage of this.

    3. LIveview, well, until CMOS is the standard, everyone out there with CCD will still see the same issues that are out there now, so only the 50MP backs can really take advantage of any enhancements to LiveView. To me, that's not anywhere near the total number of backs out there currently and by far most of the folks here are still on CCD style backs.

    4. Tilting LCD, again limited by the fact that the current backs all have an excellent LCD. To create an LCD that moved would mean somehow encapsulating the back with the camera so that an LCD on the camera would be the one to view. Current Phase backs, need access from the rear, so unless the new camera's LCD lifted up, allowing the back to be connected, then coming back into position I can't see any tilting LCD option. (to me this is a huge need in MF as it's very hard to get down low and view a LCD that will not move) I have wondered if in the future Phase would offer a tilting LCD on the MF back? That would be great, and would work well with a new camera body.

    5. AF, sure the DF+ only has 3 really 1 point, center, so I can see room for improvement. But without an EVF style viewer, you could only see the AF points in the optical viewfinder, like in the current DF+. The backs all have excellent touch screens, wouldn't it be great to see a AF design that allowed you to tap on the location on the screen? Well, that would mean you need live view CMOS Liveview, I believe? So again the vast majority of current backs would be not able to take advantage.

    Not at all trying to be negative, I am just asking others to look at current DSLR bodies which have all the integration that everyone seems to be asking for in the new Phase One body. I just can't see it getting there unless you have a CMOS solution, or a brand new design of CCD that has more integration. Either way current CCD backs are not going to have the handshake that is needed.

    The new body may be a perfect compliment to the CMOS backs Phase now has, but the CCD's are all over a year old in design, unless Phase has built in features that have not yet been turned on?

    I am just curious what others are looking for what they feel the feature set will be considering that the vast majority of backs out there in use are still all legacy CCD?

    Paul

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    1. EVF (...)
    2. Mirrorless (...)
    3. LIveview (...)
    4. Tilting LCD (...)
    5. AF (...)
    1: I moved to MF, because I do not want an EVF, so obviously I am not looking for that.
    2: That exists, it is called a tech cam.
    3: That is a feature of the back, not of the camera.
    4: That is a feature of the back, not of the camera.
    5: That is an important feature: on my H4D, I appreciate that I have a very accurate AF which focusses with an accuracy of a fraction of mm on whatever I chose to focus on. I am not sure that PhaseOne user have it so good (really: I don't know).

    I am just curious what others are looking for what they feel the feature set will be considering that the vast majority of backs out there in use are still all legacy CCD?
    As I said, AF is a possibility. Some features of the competition would probably be nice to have:
    -better exposure metering, some kind of matrix metering would be nice in some cases (not very important for me)
    -detachable finder, so as to use a waist level finder (and please, make it collapsible, not like the HVM!)
    -better weather sealing, as Pentax is doing
    -two tripod mounts, as Pentax is doing
    -maybe studio shooters would appreciate a built-in wireless flash or some kind of built-in flash meter (Hasselblad has a built-in flash meter, but I have never used it)

    That is all I can think about for the moment, but I am sure others will chime in with better ideas.

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,057
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Paul 2660
    Sounds like a 645Z to me.

  11. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    462
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    Paul 2660
    Sounds like a 645Z to me.
    While I love mine, there are certainly a lot of things that could have been improved.

    1. Size - The 645Z is still based on the size of a camera that had a film back, even though it's now a fully integrated camera, and could have been made much slimmer. Take a look at the following cutaway view of the 645Z: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...2015_CP%2B.jpg
    There is so much space between the sensor and rear LCD, that those lazy Pentax engineers have freaking mezzanine connectors and risers linking the electronics together instead of ribbons... compared to the compact structure of modern electronics, this looks like something out of the early 2000's.
    The distance from the ф symbol above the top LCD to the rear of the camera could have been sliced down by half or even to a third, with absolutely no practical negative points, except for some repositioned features and a smaller top LCD (who cares?).
    In fact, it would even have been better as the rear LCD could have been nested deeper into the body to accommodate your nose or reduce the tunnel effect on the viewfinder, but instead the LCD actually protrudes out further than the back buttons!

    2. Better paint job - I'm dead serious! My bought-since-release Canon 5D2 that I've been using for ages has less wear on it then the 645Z I've had since November!

    3. Vertical grip - Man, how I miss these... but not before Pentax slims the 645 down as per point #1. If they can make a 645X with add-on grip that weigh together as much as the old Z did alone, that's what I'd want. At least the square chunky form-factor of the Z makes it more tolerable to use in portrait than smaller cameras.

    4. Strap lugs - Make those darn strap lugs removable or recessed into the body... Does anyone even really use neck straps anymore?

    5. Fix live view pls - I'm glad this isn't a mirrorless camera, as the exposure simulation on live view needs ironing out and it has way too much rolling shutter anyway.

    6. No joystick - From 2015 onwards it should be made against the law to release any DSLR-style camera without touch controls to also lack a joystick, regardless of price.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    1: I moved to MF, because I do not want an EVF, so obviously I am not looking for that.
    2: That exists, it is called a tech cam.
    3: That is a feature of the back, not of the camera.
    4: That is a feature of the back, not of the camera.
    5: That is an important feature: on my H4D, I appreciate that I have a very accurate AF which focusses with an accuracy of a fraction of mm on whatever I chose to focus on. I am not sure that PhaseOne user have it so good (really: I don't know).
    1. Fine, but great eyesight looking thru a teeny tiny viewfinder or groundglass with darkcloth over your head is really hip and all that, but is a "perishable" skill....just sayin

    3 and 4 I disagree alltogether. Why not make LV a separate feature integrated to the camera, not the back? For studio it would be a godsend!
    It would allow for highest quality LV (EVF) through the viewfinder regardless of what digital back is on the camera. We would be tethered of course and project to large screen or net conference with AD like Zoom...And because it would use a dedicated video chip, focused on the mirror, it would allow for numerous advantages that do not affect the CCD or CMOS chip at all, leaving them free to do what they were made for, capture.

    We actually have taped small video cameras with separate tether feeds to our cameras....seriously, its that important to the multiple people on set at any given time.
    I own both CCD and CMOS MFD and can tell you that we rely heavily on LV in studio work both with and without tech cams. The CMOS MFD (IQ250) is certainly a lot better than the CCD but neither is all that great. A dedicated LV only sensor with dedicated LV software with all bells and whistles would get me and a few thousand of my studio brethren to open our wallets.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    1. Fine, but great eyesight looking thru a teeny tiny viewfinder or groundglass with darkcloth over your head is really hip and all that, but is a "perishable" skill....just sayin
    The viewfinder on MF cameras is not tiny. Just saying

    Moreover, I am not so young any more and I do need reading glasses. But the viewfinder on my MF camera has a diopter adjustment and I don't need my glasses for using it.

    3 and 4 I disagree alltogether. Why not make LV a separate feature integrated to the camera, not the back? For studio it would be a godsend!
    It would allow for highest quality LV (EVF) through the viewfinder regardless of what digital back is on the camera. We would be tethered of course and project to large screen or net conference with AD like Zoom...And because it would use a dedicated video chip, focused on the mirror, it would allow for numerous advantages that do not affect the CCD or CMOS chip at all, leaving them free to do what they were made for, capture.
    Wouldn't it be simpler to request an HDMI out on your cmos back? It only needs to be integrated with the back if you want to project the image to a large screen. This is what I meant when I wrote that it is a feature of the back, not of the camera: it does not need a new camera to integrate that feature.

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    The viewfinder on MF cameras is not tiny. Just saying

    Moreover, I am not so young any more and I do need reading glasses. But the viewfinder on my MF camera has a diopter adjustment and I don't need my glasses for using it.
    Jerome_m,...always thinking of yourself! Very selfish of you ...
    Hmmm...I think I will take a picture sometime of 6 or 7 people (photographer, set designer, art directors, stylists, ...etc) all "in line" behind a 645 camera to peek through the viewfinder and directing their assistants to make adjustments thru the that "huge" viewfinder ....and oh yes, there is a ladder because the camera is 10 feet in the air over the center of the set on a boom arm...



    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    Wouldn't it be simpler to request an HDMI out on your cmos back? It only needs to be integrated with the back if you want to project the image to a large screen. This is what I meant when I wrote that it is a feature of the back, not of the camera: it does not need a new camera to integrate that feature.
    No, HDMI, USB2,3,C, FW800...it doesn't matter...it is NOT the function of the chip to provide LV...those chips are not meant for live video feed. The LV image is crappy compared to even the cheapest off the shelf vidcams and the controls and brightness adjustments, even with C1 are not there. Also, the chip we payed tens of thousands of dollars for and can render incredible capture detail uses up valuable battery power, heats up, degrades quality, crashes....etc. For instance, my $30K IQ250 doesn't even allow me to white balance the video feed in LV, will deplete its battery in LV in minutes.... I mean, is it too much to ask to even be as good LV as a Canon 40D for $200??

    All jokes aside, EVERYTHING is projected to large screen, or video conferenced with off-site art directors...or both. I can't speak for others, but the camera viewfinder is almost a vestigial organ these days in our studio ...a useless appendage left over from some bygone era.

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    No, HDMI, USB2,3,C, FW800...it doesn't matter...it is NOT the function of the chip to provide LV...those chips are not meant for live video feed. The LV image is crappy compared to even the cheapest off the shelf vidcams and the controls and brightness adjustments, even with C1 are not there. Also, the chip we payed tens of thousands of dollars for and can render incredible capture detail uses up valuable battery power, heats up, degrades quality, crashes....etc. For instance, my $30K IQ250 doesn't even allow me to white balance the video feed in LV, will deplete its battery in LV in minutes.... I mean, is it too much to ask to even be as good LV as a Canon 40D for $200??

    All jokes aside, EVERYTHING is projected to large screen, or video conferenced with off-site art directors...or both. I can't speak for others, but the camera viewfinder is almost a vestigial organ these days in our studio ...a useless appendage left over from some bygone era.
    Then, if you do not want the MF chip to provide live view, the solution would be to replace the existing viewfinder by one with an integrated video camera. On a camera with an interchangeable viewfinder, that solution could be provided by a dedicated accessory. That would be relatively straightforward to do for the Hasselblad H camera, where the viewfinder can be replaced. Yet: nobody is producing that as an accessory, so maybe the big market is not there.

    If you want the MF chip to produce a better live view, you will need to wait for a better chip. The problems you note about live view on the present cmos backs can only be solved when Sony will produce a second generation of the cmos chip.

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    OK, but wouldn't it just be easier on everybody if LV were a camera function instead?

    The Sony CMOS chip in the MFD backs (including Hasselblad) is very nice, but LV is better in a 12 year old Canon chip. Canon's implementation of LV in their Utilities software is superior to C1 as well. Thats why we have 2 new Canon 5Sr's on pre-order and not giving up our Canon gear just yet.
    But like you said, maybe the market isn't big enough. I wonder though, because every single solitary commercial shooter I speak to and PM with across the country says the same thing. We all agree, but I guess a few dozen suffering pros does not a market make...

    So my feeling is/was that PhaseOne could do themselves a favor and the end user a favor by putting some effort into this area. And because it isn't something available in any other camera body (you said so yourself) it would give them a leg up, as well as what others in this thread have mentioned.
    Peace! Happy shooting!

  17. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    OK, but wouldn't it just be easier on everybody if LV were a camera function instead?
    It seems that we don't understand each other. There is no "camera function" or "not camera function". The video signal must come from somewhere and that somewhere is either:

    1. the MF chip or
    2. another sensor


    1 was not possible at all with ccd chips and is not satisfying with the present cmos chip (for reasons I could explain but this would only obscure the discussion)

    2 is possible and would only require designing a video viewfinder. But it would give you a video feed, but not really "live view".

    I wonder though, because every single solitary commercial shooter I speak to and PM with across the country says the same thing. We all agree, but I guess a few dozen suffering pros does not a market make...
    I understand that. I am not denying that a video feed is wanted by commercial shooters. I am just explaining what the technology allows from an engineering point of view.

  18. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Yes, a relatively inexpensive 2nd sensor built into the camera viewfinder (looks at the mirror just like OVF) with separate usb or wifi feed to LAN
    That makes it a "camera function". Just like WiFi on my IQ250 is not technically a "sensor function"

    In any case, thanks for the explanation, I think I get your drift. We do this all the time now in our studios, usually by attaching a cheap Canon to the viewfinder on the DF+ or ground glass on the tech cam, not sure why it would be a "engineering problem"....we use duct tape

  19. #69
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    If it can't be done with duct tape, it ain't worth doing.
    Bill CB

    www.billcaulfeild-browne.ca
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Agreed, Bill! Without WD40, Duct Tape, and Legos...not sure how I would get anything done in product studio! I am, technically, an engineer, btw...went to school and everything! But I just live in California, am originally from the backwoods of Virginia so don't get bogged down over-complicating matters.
    Now if you see any gear of mine up fer sale in the future, kindly forget about this whole duct tape thing ok?

    Jerome, maybe this is a semantics thing? What is the difference between "Live View" video feed, and "Viewing Live" + video feed??? I don't get it. Live View by definition is seeing what the camera sees, whether that is physically looking thru a viewfinder with an eyeball or viewing a facsimile video feed off a sensor is completely irrelevant. Both are "Live View". Its just that the video feed variety can be shared. I don't remember anything that stipulates that "Live View" is defined as only coming from the actual sensor that will be doing the final capture. Why would that be relevant?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #71
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    124
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egor View Post
    Jerome, maybe this is a semantics thing? What is the difference between "Live View" video feed, and "Viewing Live" + video feed??? I don't get it. Live View by definition is seeing what the camera sees, whether that is physically looking thru a viewfinder with an eyeball or viewing a facsimile video feed off a sensor is completely irrelevant. Both are "Live View". Its just that the video feed variety can be shared. I don't remember anything that stipulates that "Live View" is defined as only coming from the actual sensor that will be doing the final capture. Why would that be relevant?
    What I meant is that any video feed which is not directly coming from the sensor will not have some advantages which you have been enjoying on your Canon camera, for example the ability to focus very precisely directly on the chip. But if all you need is a live video feed from your viewfinder, that may not be essential.

    I have actually seen devices consisting of a small video camera to be attached to a viewfinder, which is similar to what you are doing with duct tape.
    Last edited by jerome_m; 31st May 2015 at 05:02.

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,588
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Photos of new camera and suggestion of three new IQ3 backs over at LuLa:
    http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/...opic=99658.140
    Looks good to me!

  24. #74
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Hey Don, do I win the pool? I did say June...

    Ok, so I cheated. I saw that the head honcho from CI was headed back from "vacationing" in Denmark....

    ken

  25. #75
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,802
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    Hey Don, do I win the pool? I did say June...

    Ok, so I cheated. I saw that the head honcho from CI was headed back from "vacationing" in Denmark....

    ken
    And Kevin Raber posted on his FB page that he was off to Denmark at the same time
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"

  26. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Looks good! (and hey lookiethere....detachable viewfinder and secondary sensor....hmmm)
    I knew all that bellyaching would pay off some day!

    Full disclosure: I have no idea what it will really be like, just wishful thinking on my part. I am sure those are not the droids I am looking for...moving along now...

    Cant wait to read all about it tomorrow!

  27. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Yes it will be interesting but I believe it's Tuesday per other comments on lula.

    Still can't see much even with a detachable viewfinder unless it's independent of the camera sensor. Since most are backs are CCD. Obviously with the newer 35x backs coming also there has to be some new comm feature required.

    Expect a pretty big $$ to get there also.

    Paul

  28. #78
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    Hey Don, do I win the pool? I did say June...

    Ok, so I cheated. I saw that the head honcho from CI was headed back from "vacationing" in Denmark....

    ken
    Okay, I cheated a bit as well - figured the announcement would come in June with shipping shortly afterwards. I had hoped to have one in time for my trip to the Palouse next week but looks like I'll have to wait a little longer.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  29. #79
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    From everything that's been leaked it looks like it'll be a winner. Like the idea of same batteries in both body and back.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  30. #80
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Libby View Post
    From everything that's been leaked it looks like it'll be a winner. Like the idea of same batteries in both body and back.
    Using the same batteries is smart. But I really really like the EJJI Li-ion battery capacity better----I don't think anyone has run one down yet!

  31. #81
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,802
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    Using the same batteries is smart. But I really really like the EJJI Li-ion battery capacity better----I don't think anyone has run one down yet!
    Err, I have

    Stick a Leaf Aptus on a DF+ body and forget about it for a couple of months and voila one dead EJII in need of a recharge. (And before you ask, yes, the DF+ and Aptus were turned off)
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"

  32. #82
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: New camera from Phase One?

    I've run one down as well a couple winters ago shooting wildlife in Jackson Hole. Stopped working couldn't figure out what the hell did wrong until I noticed the battery level after I got it working again good thing I had a spare close by in the truck. This was after spending several days stalking/shooting a herd of buffalo. So while not common it can be done.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

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
  •