Menu
What's new
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!

645Z firmware update - including turning off dark frames at least!

GrahamWelland

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Oh, if only Phase One were listening ... there are many of us I suspect who would happily accept the compromise of post processing NR and have this as an option with our MFDBs.

I was shooting with a 645Z user this last week and I have to say that it really is a very very desirable DSLR platform and certainly shows up the Phase One DF & MFDB combination. (He also has the 645 DF+ & IQ180).
 
Ed Hurst

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Absolutely Graham. Clearly there are other factors to consider when choosing a system (lenses, software, dealer support, etc.) but I wouldn't choose another MF camera body over the Z! The only competitor's feature I can think it lacks is HB's TrueFocus, but you can't have everything...
 
K

Kolor-Pikker

Member
Ed Hurst said:
Absolutely Graham. Clearly there are other factors to consider when choosing a system (lenses, software, dealer support, etc.) but I wouldn't choose another MF camera body over the Z! The only competitor's feature I can think it lacks is HB's TrueFocus, but you can't have everything...
Click to expand...
Also leaf-shutter lenses. And more modern lenses in general. Especially with apertures wider than 2.8... can't have everything...

A bit off topic, but does anyone here have experience with the 90mm macro and 28-45mm? For the price they're asking, I feel like they should damn well be best in class, but there is almost no information about em.

I might make the jump into MF soon (stay tuned!) and I have the chance to acquire a friend's Pentax lenses that include a 55mm 2.8, 105mm 67 2.4 via adapter and 120mm macro, but what I really only want is the 90mm for a few reasons:
- stabilized for hand held shooting
- 2.8 aperture
- good portrait/indoor length (120mm feels too long IMO)
- 1:2 macro easily enough for me
- Ming and Lloyd say it has "sensational" optics, but I only have their word for it (although I take their words with respect).

Just as my 85L spent time glued to my 5D2, I believe the 90mm might be the only lens I would even need on the 645Z, second opinions?
 
P

Paul2660

Well-known member
If only you could open the files in C1. Has anyone found a work around. Will c1 open a 645z raw file converted to a DNG? DNG created by the Adobe DNG converter?

I don't know if Phase will ever allow no dark frame processing on the CCD backs as the dark frame is integral to processing out a clean file. But with the 250 / 150 I agree Phase should be able to allow no dark frames as all other companies allow this be it a DSLR or medium format CMOS.

Paul
 
Last edited:
G

gerald.d

Well-known member
Paul2660 said:
If only you could open the files in C1. Has anyone found a work around. Will c1 open a 645z raw file converted to a DNG? DNG created by the Adobe DNG converter?

I don't Phase will ever allow no dark frame processing on the CCD backs as the dark frame is integral to processing out a clean file. But with the 250 / 150 I agree Phase should be able to allow no dark frames as all other companies allow this be it a DSLR or medium format CMOS.

Paul
Click to expand...
Question:

Two dark frames. Both taken at same exposure duration and sensor temperature, but at different moments in time (possibly even days apart).

How different would they be?
 
ondebanks

ondebanks

Member
GrahamWelland said:
Oh, if only Phase One were listening ... there are many of us I suspect who would happily accept the compromise of post processing NR and have this as an option with our MFDBs.
Click to expand...
There's still hope that Phase One might catch up with that go-go decade, the 1990s*

Ray :ROTFL:

* Megavision and Sinar DBs had optional dark frame subtraction when Clinton was President.
 
ondebanks

ondebanks

Member
gerald.d said:
Question:

Two dark frames. Both taken at same exposure duration and sensor temperature, but at different moments in time (possibly even days apart).

How different would they be?
Click to expand...
They would be identical (other than stochastic noise, which is true of any pair of frames).

We do this all the time in astronomy. Regulated cooling to a set temperature point means that last year's dark frames are still good for this year's data.

Ray
 
V

voidshatter

Member
ondebanks said:
They would be identical (other than stochastic noise, which is true of any pair of frames).

We do this all the time in astronomy. Regulated cooling to a set temperature point means that last year's dark frames are still good for this year's data.

Ray
Click to expand...
This is false. Stuck pixels could develop over time. Hot pixel noise is also related to humidity, pressure, static electricity over the surface of the sensor, etc, not just all about temperature.
 
ondebanks

ondebanks

Member
Paul2660 said:
I don't Phase will ever allow no dark frame processing on the CCD backs as the dark frame is integral to processing out a clean file.
Click to expand...
Yeah...BUT...why does it have to be Phase themselves who apply that processing? That is the nub of the matter. They don't credit the user with the smarts to take care of such a simple process themselves, at a more appropriate time.

I tried pressing this with a Phase staffer once and got nowhere...he couldn't comprehend that there might actually be users who don't want it all internally perfected in-back and won't subsequently pipeline the images through C1. And there was such a superior attitude of "we know what's best for you" about the whole thing.

It's an arrogance culture within the company. You see the same thing in some other firms too - when they know they make the best product on the market, they develop a disdain for customer suggestions pointing out that the best could still be better.

Ray
 
ondebanks

ondebanks

Member
voidshatter said:
This is false. Stuck pixels could develop over time.
Click to expand...
OK, I'll give you that. But it would be a really small minority of pixels. I'd much rather spend a couple of daylight minutes tweaking out new stuck pixels, than lose half of every precious clear night to taking long dark frames. We don't expect quite the same perfection in using library dark files, because as Graham said above, we "happily accept the compromise of post processing NR" because it is a compromise which is really worth making.

voidshatter said:
Hot pixel noise is also related to humidity, pressure, static electricity over the surface of the sensor, etc, not just all about temperature.
Click to expand...
Interesting...can you cite a reference for its dependence on those other factors? And do they affect the ~99% of well behaved, low dark current pixels as well, or just the ~1% of hot pixels?

Ray
 
F

f8orbust

Active member
Paul2660 said:
If only you could open the files in C1. Has anyone found a work around...
Click to expand...
In another post I believe Anders (Torger) mentioned he had written a converter, in order that he could see how the Pentax files rendered in C1 (pretty much identically to the IQ250 files IIRC). Unfortunately he didn't want to distribute it publicly in case P1 got annoyed.

When serial-P1-upgrader Michael Reichmann bought one, I kind of suspected Pentax must be on to something - and this just proves (yet again) that they are.
 
kdphotography

kdphotography

Well-known member
GrahamWelland said:
Oh, if only Phase One were listening ... there are many of us I suspect who would happily accept the compromise of post processing NR and have this as an option with our MFDBs.

I was shooting with a 645Z user this last week and I have to say that it really is a very very desirable DSLR platform and certainly shows up the Phase One DF & MFDB combination. (He also has the 645 DF+ & IQ180).
Click to expand...
Just go ahead and fess-up, Graham. It just doesn't sound right when you keep talking in third person....

:ROTFL:
 
T

tjv

Active member
This is great news for Pentax shooters and proves without a doubt –*especially considering Hasselblad have enabled 32min exposures without dark frame on their models that use the same sensor – that the chip itself should be capable of acceptable results when pushed. Pentax are usually pretty forward thinking with this stuff and getting the most out of Sony sensors, so this bit of good news doesn't surprise me.
 
V

voidshatter

Member
GrahamWelland said:
Oh, if only Phase One were listening ... there are many of us I suspect who would happily accept the compromise of post processing NR and have this as an option with our MFDBs.

I was shooting with a 645Z user this last week and I have to say that it really is a very very desirable DSLR platform and certainly shows up the Phase One DF & MFDB combination. (He also has the 645 DF+ & IQ180).
Click to expand...
With a Phase One digital back e.g. IQ250/IQ260 you just choose "Aerial mode" in camera mode, then the dark frame NR is disabled.
 
V

voidshatter

Member
ondebanks said:
Interesting...can you cite a reference for its dependence on those other factors? And do they affect the ~99% of well behaved, low dark current pixels as well, or just the ~1% of hot pixels?

Ray
Click to expand...
There's nothing for me to quote. I did a long exposure shot of the sun trail (single exposure over 2 hours) and the battery life did not allow the dark frame NR on site. After that I attempted controlled temperature but it could not work perfectly. The distribution of stuck pixels (more than half) are pretty random even at the same temperature.

https://500px.com/photo/67886275/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top