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 P25 vs the Phase 65 Plus backs

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yea but than you have another system which on one hand is good and on the other a pain. What we need or at least i do is a 40 meg sensor with sensor plus at a lower cost. Now that would swing my money over. But your point is well taken and once again that darn balancing act we have to do
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The increase in resolution is there over the P45 plus yes it is not a major jump up but it is there. FF is another for the wide shooter although it is not much but again it is there. I do agree Eleanor 30 mpx at 1600 would be much better option. That is something I could use. I do events sometimes and ISO 800 is the norm and yes i should maybe have the D3 or something but I do like shooting MF for it and it get's the use i paid for it. I do want to get my money out of this system and if the sensor plus gives me some advantage than I do like that technology. I just hate thinking about buying another system when this one works so well for most of my work. It's like a system you have that your not crazy about to begin with. No offense against Nikon or Canon but i just want to get away from 35mm if I can
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I, at least ,was not suggesting that the the 60mp files from the P65 at base ISO would not offer real, tangible advantages in terms of resolution over a D3X. Phase has stated that the resolution advantages of the P65 over the P45 are relatively modest and not the "real" justification for upgrading. To Phase, the "real" benefits are the ability to shoot cleaner higher ISO files at 15mp, along with future, but yet to be identified, upgrades in the sensor. It is there where I feel the big fallacy lies. I have little doubt that a 15mp file from a P65 at 1600 ISO will fare poorly compared to a 24mp file from a D3X at 1600 ISO. I don't shoot at anything other base ISO and do not even own a DSLR, but if I wanted to shoot at high ISO (and I would presumably also want world class AF to go with it), I would get myself a D3X for the 1/3 the price of the upgrade from a P45 to a P65. (And get a gorgeous LCD thrown in as well.)
Well, points well taken ... but I don't think the D3X is the high meg machine to use as a comparison since it's pretty much topping out at 1600.

Question I have is how much of the near 645 FF 60 meg sensor are you using when set to 15 meg? What's the crop factor, if any?
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Well, points well taken ... but I don't think the D3X is the high meg machine to use as a comparison since it's pretty much topping out at 1600.

Question I have is how much of the near 645 FF 60 meg sensor are you using when set to 15 meg? What's the crop factor, if any?
It's still full-frame, but they've "combined" 4 pixels for 1 -- so IOW, you get a single 12 micron pixel at ISO 1600 instead of 4 @ 6 micron. Clever idea, and I am wondering how well it works over simply downrezzing an ISO 1600 P45+ (6.8 micron) file to similar size, which also reduces perceived noise considerably...
 

KurtKamka

Subscriber Member
In my opinion, Phase is going to have come to terms with P65+ upgrade pricing in the near future. Although I'm certain the company wants to recoup its investment in developing its newest technology, the market is very different than when the P65+ product development cycle began. Although there will be some early adopters who will flock to the latest technology, the state of the economy is going to influence the rate of upgrades.

Many that might have chased the next, inevitable upgrade are most likely prioritizing their spending more carefully ... upgrading when a feature set is more clearly met. Especially if the price for the upgrade is a steep one for Sensor + specs that have yet to be released. With the deals available on the purchase of a new P45+ back, it appears as if Phase is trying to generate more revenue/sales. MIght it be because P65+ orders are currently luke-warm?

Kurt
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
It's still full-frame, but they've "combined" 4 pixels for 1 -- so IOW, you get a single 12 micron pixel at ISO 1600 instead of 4 @ 6 micron. Clever idea, and I am wondering how well it works over simply downrezzing an ISO 1600 P45+ (6.8 micron) file to similar size, which also reduces perceived noise considerably...
Downrezzing could produce similar results if they used a quadrature algorithm rather than bicubic.
Perhaps there is a quadrature down-rez plug-in available from someone especially for noise reduction? I bet equivalent results could be had if the downrez could be done at the raw level before color interpolation occurs.
Sandy?...
-bob
 
H

Howard Cubell

Guest
The increase in resolution is there over the P45 plus yes it is not a major jump up but it is there. FF is another for the wide shooter although it is not much but again it is there. I do agree Eleanor 30 mpx at 1600 would be much better option. That is something I could use. I do events sometimes and ISO 800 is the norm and yes i should maybe have the D3 or something but I do like shooting MF for it and it get's the use i paid for it. I do want to get my money out of this system and if the sensor plus gives me some advantage than I do like that technology. I just hate thinking about buying another system when this one works so well for most of my work. It's like a system you have that your not crazy about to begin with. No offense against Nikon or Canon but i just want to get away from 35mm if I can
Guy, I have never shot with a DSLR. I have never been tempted. I went directly from MF film with a Pentax 67 and a Horseman 612 to an H3D-39. For what I do, slow, carefully composed landscape work at low ISO on a tripod for larger prints(30"x36" is the target size), the H3D-39 works very well. I like the style of shooting it offers with an amazingly bright and large viewfinder over the video camera like experience of a DSLR with 500,000 custom options, menu upon menu and 9 FPS. However, I must say that I am intrigued by the reports I read about the performance of the D3X. Nikon seems to have done some remarkable work with it. I really would like to borrow/rent one to shoot side-by-side in a real world shooting environment alongside the H3D-39 and make some large prints. I have no vested interest in any of this equipment or the people who make it. These are tools.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
It's still full-frame, but they've "combined" 4 pixels for 1 -- so IOW, you get a single 12 micron pixel at ISO 1600 instead of 4 @ 6 micron. Clever idea, and I am wondering how well it works over simply downrezzing an ISO 1600 P45+ (6.8 micron) file to similar size, which also reduces perceived noise considerably...
LOVE to see that! Very innovative if it works like the 10 micron "magic" backs.
 

yaya

Active member
It's still full-frame, but they've "combined" 4 pixels for 1 -- so IOW, you get a single 12 micron pixel at ISO 1600 instead of 4 @ 6 micron. Clever idea, and I am wondering how well it works over simply downrezzing an ISO 1600 P45+ (6.8 micron) file to similar size, which also reduces perceived noise considerably...
Our tests show that the latter produces higher IQ at a given size output but there might be some other pluses to shooting a smaller file.
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
In my opinion, Phase is going to have come to terms with P65+ upgrade pricing in the near future. Although I'm certain the company wants to recoup its investment in developing its newest technology, the market is very different than when the P65+ product development cycle began. Although there will be some early adopters who will flock to the latest technology, the state of the economy is going to influence the rate of upgrades.

Many that might have chased the next, inevitable upgrade are most likely prioritizing their spending more carefully ... upgrading when a feature set is more clearly met. Especially if the price for the upgrade is a steep one for Sensor + specs that have yet to be released. With the deals available on the purchase of a new P45+ back, it appears as if Phase is trying to generate more revenue/sales. MIght it be because P65+ orders are currently luke-warm?

Kurt

Actually P65+ sales have been very good. The price range that is under the most distress currently is the $20K - $30K range, which is why we have boosted the value of that purchase significantly with the free lens(s) offer.


Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I don't understand this statement by Phase that the resolution of the 65+ over the 45+ is not a good reason for upgrading. To me the iso 1600 at 15 mg.pixels is a joke for me personally at this upgrade price point and is not even a consideration for a upgrade. I have a 45+ and find the increased resolution a very good reason to upgrade as I do landscape work with lots of very fine detail which can always benefit by very fine resolution. I'm also interested is the prospect of having less color cast in the P65+ files along with a slight increase in dynamic range. A clean iso 400 at 30 megapixels is definitely an attraction to me but not 15 at 1600iso. Just my personal opinions. Eleanor
Eleanor,

I suspect (but don't know and do not have any inside info) that the reason Phase makes that statement is that for the most part modern sensors are now lens limited.

In the case of your 6.8u P45+ sensor, most of the current AF lenses from Mamiya or Hasselblad H will meet or exceed the demands of the central 2/3rds of the sensor at least stopped down a bit, and a few will render corner to corner. The best of the older Mamiya or Hassy MF lenses often only barely render that level in the center. However, drop from a 6.8 u to 6 u pixel pitch, and you've likely just exceeded what a large portion of even the newer AF lenses can deliver; some can still deliver for sure, but I suspect that is two or three from each manufacturer.

Fortunately the latest digital lenses from Schneider (Digitars) and Rodenstock (HRs) are exceptional, and I suspect will deliver in spades to the 6u sensors, and also suspect the most demanding photographers will use the P65+ predominantly on a tech camera that utilizes that glass. In that vein, the P65+ will deliver the best image possible, and yet still fully capable of being used on a contemporary MF body giving it broad appeal to that group.

Final issue is defacto CoC. As we go down in pixel pitch, we can print larger prints from the same sized sensor, but if our viewing distance remains unchanged -- which it seems is the case nowadays -- then we lose visible DoF in the larger print...

From a strictly personal point of view, their are two more issues with the upgrade: First my finances dictate I am *not* an upgrade candidate, at least for this year. Second, I do actually make exposures longer than one minute on a fairly regular basis; I enjoy shooting in early pre-dawn or post-sunset light, and these exposures can regularly go to 2 or 3 minutes at f16 at ISO 50 or 100 -- and in fact, this is the main reason I originally chose a Phase back over the other options.

Cheers,
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Our tests show that the latter produces higher IQ at a given size output but there might be some other pluses to shooting a smaller file.
Fortunately this will be very easy to test once Sensor+ enabled backs are shipping. We'll just shoot it at full res, and then shoot it at 15mp and compare various downsizing techniques to downrez the larger file and compare the two.

I've heard good things from R+D at P1, but until it's in my hands...

FYI: Phase itself was largely responsible for (and holds the patents on) the technology that distinguishes the P65+ chip from other current sensors. This is P1 IP rather than Dalsa IP.

Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One & Canon Dealer | Personal Portfolio
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
A clean iso 400 at 30 megapixels is definitely an attraction to me but not 15 at 1600iso. Just my personal opinions. Eleanor
I would strongly anticipate stellar performance of the P65+ when shot at ISO 400, processed in C1 with modest Color Noise reduction settings, and downrezed in post to 30 megapixels. I'll wait to do the test myself before saying it for sure. But if you look at what the P45+ already does when sized to 30 megapixels at ISO400 then odds are in the P65+s favor.

Then again, maybe you mean "clean" as in "fully free from any noise". It's just my opinion, but the "noise" produced by a P1 back processed in C1 with zero luminance noise reduction is, at anything but the highest ISO offered, a very pleasing film-like grain which does not detract from the image.

Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One & Canon Dealer | Personal Portfolio
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Ain't no such thing as no noise, ever.
It is just not noticeable noise, or maybe pleasing noise, or mayve annoying noise.
That would be a signal to noise ratio of infinity (BOGGLE)
if the signal to noise ratio is limited to some limit less than infinity and if the signal need be above zero for it to be useful, then we might be led to say that without noise, there is probably no signal, if you get my drift.
Hell Tri-X ain't Tri-x without noise. We buy it BECAUSE the noise is pleasing
-bob
 
Top