Site Sponsors
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 355

Thread: Should I or not?

  1. #101
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    Paul, I am not saying that noise reduction never degrades detail. I am saying that if one degrades detail on a 80 mpix back, one may still get enough detail to print big.
    dxomark already normalize the standard deviation of noise by down-sampling the IQ180. It is nowhere as good as the Sony CMOS sensors when you push the ISO to anything above 200 on the IQ180. As I said, a side by side comparison is all you need.


  2. #102
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Stay on to the gear you have is generally a wise advice, but in this case I think it means continue using the Canon system and sell off the MFD gear, as its the Canon system that sees the use.

    I have a Canon system too, I shoot with it perhaps 10 times a year, while I try to shoot with my MFD camera every week (enthusiast photographer so I shoot on spare time). I've thought about selling the Canon, but the cost is low keeping it so I keep it and enjoy it those 10 times a year. Another factor is that with the Canon I can shoot things which is impossible with the Linhof Techno, like sports.

    If it was the other way around, I used my (relatively) high cost MFD gear only 10 times a year, I would sell it, but that's because it's a relatively large sum of money in it - from my perspective. If I would be a billionaire I wouldn't care, so that thing is personal too. It does seem like the cost of the MFD system disturbs you, and when you use it so little I would sell.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #103
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Should I or not?

    So Void, do you think the Sony sensors are better than the IQ 180?

    Is that what you're saying?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #104
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    Paul, I am not saying that noise reduction never degrades detail. I am saying that if one degrades detail on a 80 mpix back, one may still get enough detail to print big.
    I see your point entirely, it's probably one of those issues that each person will have to evaluate. I was just amazed in my work, when I realized how much details were being lost because I had picked a shutter speed that did not allow enough light to certain parts of my files. This is also a huge limitation of a tech camera since you are limited in shutter speeds and can't get 1/2 or 1/3 increments, which do make a difference.

    This was one reason I had had such high hopes on the Acra FS, as it promised 1/10 increments, but it came in at such a cost penalty, I have no moved forward on it. It's not as integrated as the Alpa FPS and costs in the range of 8K once you factor in all the lens tubes (6) for me.

    Paul

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    So Void, do you think the Sony sensors are better than the IQ 180?

    Is that what you're saying?
    It depends on use case. If you stay at base ISO and stay away from very long exposure building up heat and noise and avoid pushing shadow too much, the IQ180 is still the king. However it has its limitations and you just need to figure out which gear is suitable for you.

    I have just noticed that someone traded his IQ180 for an IQ150 without asking for additional cash. Everyone can have his own choice.

  6. #106
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    So Void, do you think the Sony sensors are better than the IQ 180?

    Is that what you're saying?

    The real issue here is DXO does not take any account for the raw processor and C1 is tuned perfectly for there backs. Frankly DXO to me is just a slice of the puzzle but folks use it as gospel when doing comparisons. Not so much here as most understand what DXO does but more on the other forums its like I won't buy it because of the DXO. Its just a piece of the overall quality of the product, especially when there is a file involved that needs to be processed. Reality is there is so much to draw from a Phase file in C1 that to me the numbers are somewhat meaningless.

    Testing under your own conditions and technique is only the way to see what you can draw and its hard to see what others are doing when showing there tests. You just don't know exactly what they are doing when it comes to raw processing which is a art in itself.

    Now the question is are Phase sensors better than Sony. Its a loaded question indeed as Sony does some things better but so does Phase. It really depends on what and how you you are shooting.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #107
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Should I or not?

    My $0.02 to the OP: I agree with the other posts here about the state of DSLR platforms vs MF. There is incredible bang for buck there and performance is excellent.

    I myself actually also mostly use a Sony A7r with Canon TS-E lenses for landscape travel when I don't want to cart around my MF gear. I just struggle with the 3:2 aspect ratio (especially 2:3 in portrait) but I know that's my hangup. You can build an amazingly capable system these days. I very seldom use my Phase One DSLR although that might change now that I have a CMOS back with decent LV.

    For MF shooting then it's a deliberate choice to use my technical camera system. Nothing quite compares although the new mini-view camera systems like the Actus look very appealing. They are closer to the old view camera experience and flexibility that many of us remember and appreciate. Every time I shoot with my MFDB on my Alpa I'm reminded as to why I like this system and the results from it.

    Regarding jumping ship - think about what you enjoy in terms of photography. If the IQ on DF doesn't excite you or is cumbersome compared to your other systems then I'd say at least try a small technical camera with the IQ180. That's the sweet spot for that camera I'd say. If that doesn't appeal and DSLR's are your gig then your shooting numbers are telling you something - time to move on and let it go.
    Last edited by GrahamWelland; 26th February 2015 at 13:05.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #108
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    I would probably have left that thread if Pradeep (the o.p.) had not said he uses an Epson 9900. It is a large format printer and the IQ180 is one of the few cameras on the market that can feed it the amount of pixels it needs (and even that is disputable).

    Pradeep is dissatisfied with the handling of his camera. I can understand that, but he does not have much choice if he wants to print on the Epson 9900 and get the level of detail that the printer is capable of. Pradeep's aim is not to publish web-sized pictures on 500pix and get lots of likes, his aim is to get huge prints on the 9900. And if I have understood correctly, his objective is to do that with the least amount of fuss, the less weight to carry and the fastest setup time. He would also like to get decent results by poor light.

    We have seen on that thread the strangest of advices, mostly involving the use of tech cams with different backs. Tech cams appear more fuss and slower setup time to me. With a different back, Pradeep will lose the ability to produce the most detailed pictures one can get short of 8x10" sheet film. I don't see how these advices are relevant.

    My advice has been to keep the IQ180 and adapt his practice. Pradeep would then keep the ability to feed his 9900 with the amount of pixel that printer loves, at least by good light and on static subjects. By adapting his practice, he may find out how to carry less weight or how to still get pictures by poor light (in that case with slightly reduced quality, one can only do so much without photons).

  9. #109
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    I would probably have left that thread if Pradeep (the o.p.) had not said he uses an Epson 9900. It is a large format printer and the IQ180 is one of the few cameras on the market that can feed it the amount of pixels it needs (and even that is disputable).
    I make 44" wide prints of a lot image from cameras that are not MFD nor FF digital. Many cameras have "enough" pixels (actually, they all do, but that is a topic for another day). That is really not a reason to keep the IQ180. So, you are right, it is disputable.

  10. #110
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    I make 44" wide prints of a lot image from cameras that are not MFD nor FF digital. Many cameras have "enough" pixels (actually, they all do, but that is a topic for another day). That is really not a reason to keep the IQ180. So, you are right, it is disputable.
    I meant: it is disputable that the IQ180 has enough pixels for the Epson 9900.

    80 megapixels on a 44" x 58" is about 194 dpi, a bit low for a perfect print. The 9900 native resolution is 360 dpi, that would be 330 megapixels.

  11. #111
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    It should be quite clear that if you want to shoot animals moving fast with lots of action, a DSLR with a high frame rate is a better choice. Nobody can argue with that.

    What I don't understand are your other examples. For example, you are complaining about poor high iso performance. While it is true that the IQ180 is not a low light marvel, wouldn't the use of noise reduction software mitigate the noise down to a tolerable level? I have a camera that is supposed to be even worse by low light (an H4D-50) and my experience is that the noise reduction in Phocus (Hasselblad software) works very well. It reduces sharpness, of course, but because the camera starts with more pixels than a D800/A7r, I may even get better results in prints nevertheless.

    There was also your example that the camera was too slow to operate at sunset. I have no experience with Phase One, but it cannot be that much slower than my ancient Hasselblad, can it? I have taken pictures at sunset by just putting the camera on a tripod, pressing the mirror up button and then shooting. It was a matter of seconds and I did not need a dark frame. So could you elaborate a bit on how you actually shoot, maybe we could figure out something. Maybe you could also post a link to some pictures that we have an idea (although, considering the thread as a whole, I can understand your reluctance if your pictures do not look like Thomas Kinkade on acid).

    Last but not least, I noticed that you said that you have a zoom. MF zooms are horribly heavy and bulky. Maybe you would enjoy your camera more if you just took one or two primes instead of the heavy zoom. I also use a relatively light tripod compared to some, this is another item on which you could save a bit of weight. MF have a very low vibration level because of their central shutter.
    Jerome, I have the SK 80mm 2.8 LS (it came as part of the package when I bought it), the 45mm Phase f2.8, and a 75-150 Phase zoom. I have actually never used the zoom (just bought it a couple of months ago). I have used both the primes almost equally, perhaps the 45 a little more.

    I know noise reduction works, but one should not need to use it on an image taken at ISO 200, especially when you have to apply some degree of sharpening to most images, no matter what the capture device.

    I will give you an example of the need for speed. I was in New Mexico earlier this month, driving from Bosque to Alamogordo headed for the White Sands monument. It had snowed the previous day. As I came down the mountain pass on 380 I came upon this breathtaking scene, with the little village of Carrizozo in the valley below, the Capitan mountains in the background and the Nogel and Carrizozo peaks in the middle distance. The sun had broken through the clouds and lit up the peaks while the rest of the valley was in cloud shadow. There was snow on the ground and up the mountain slopes. I was so captivated that I immediately pulled off the road and shot off several frames and a pano with my 1DX and the 100-400 MkII (the lens I had on it at the moment). I was shooting at ISO 800 to allow enough shutter speed. Within minutes the sun had gone behind the clouds again and the whole scene had changed. I was standing on the side of the road (there was no shoulder) while wondering if I was going to be run over by a truck coming around the bend. Yes, stupid, I know, but sometimes you take stupid risks for a photo.

    I wished that day that I had the Phase kit with me, but, there was no way I could have gotten those shots with MF, fussing about with a tripod and all. There was no way I could have predicted I would come upon such a scenic vista either.

    There are many such stories and occasions when I've had little time and that's when something like MF would be difficult to use (esp if I had a tech camera to go with it).

    OTOH, I have had great moments with the MF system, shooting from a moving rowboat in Benaras with sharp results (albeit at a slightly higher noise level). Done several shoots of NYC (takes over a minute and longer for a night exposure given darkframe subtraction). Fall colors in CT were beautiful, Bermuda, Iceland, all good experiences.

    BUT, everything about MF needs, nay, demands deliberation, planning. Hard to do that in every situation.

  12. #112
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    552
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Deliberation - yes. Predictable - not necessarily.

    Took the Techno on a trip to Europe, carrying it around in a backpack and traveling by car up in the Alps. Found a wonderful view overlooking a massive valley, and ended up hanging out over a cliff on some small rock, wind ripping, tripod being the only secure part of the puzzle, and making sure not to put a foot in the wrong place. Figured this is what it takes to get some great shots - and not one was of interest.

    Afterwards, exhausted, then saw this view around a bend. What the heck, forget the frozen fingers, maybe, might as well try…. turns out it was the only one worth keeping. Go figure.
    www.gigi-photos.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #113
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    I meant: it is disputable that the IQ180 has enough pixels for the Epson 9900.

    80 megapixels on a 44" x 58" is about 194 dpi, a bit low for a perfect print. The 9900 native resolution is 360 dpi, that would be 330 megapixels.
    The IQ180 has plenty of pixels for the perfect print. A dpi print value is always in context of print size; the larger the print, the lower the dpi needed.

  14. #114
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    I just struggle with the 2:3 aspect ratio but I know that's my hangup.
    You ain't so special. I have the same struggle with 3:2.

  15. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    I know noise reduction works, but one should not need to use it on an image taken at ISO 200, especially when you have to apply some degree of sharpening to most images, no matter what the capture device.
    Actually, other cameras also apply noise reduction at iso 200-400. It is just that they don't tell you. That is a little known fact, but if you use free software to look at files from Nikon, Canon or Sony cameras you will see the native noise that standard software like lightroom hides by default.

    I wished that day that I had the Phase kit with me, but, there was no way I could have gotten those shots with MF, fussing about with a tripod and all. There was no way I could have predicted I would come upon such a scenic vista either.
    I don't carry my MF with me all the time either, but there have been some situations where it was the only camera at hand and there was no time for a tripod and not enough light either, so I used the MF. The results were poor... compared to a MF on a tripod with lots of light, but not necessarily worse than what I would have got with a D800. OK, the D800 wins if it has a stabilised lens or under fluorescent lights (the Hasselblad is more sensitive to poor illuminants than most DSLRs). But what I meant is that the MF is just a camera: if you use it like any other camera, you will reduce its resolution, but not much below what other cameras do when printed at the same size.

    OTOH, I have had great moments with the MF system, shooting from a moving rowboat in Benaras with sharp results (albeit at a slightly higher noise level). Done several shoots of NYC (takes over a minute and longer for a night exposure given darkframe subtraction). Fall colors in CT were beautiful, Bermuda, Iceland, all good experiences.

    BUT, everything about MF needs, nay, demands deliberation, planning. Hard to do that in every situation.
    True, but if you want to print big with stunning detail on your 9900, you will need deliberation and planning with any camera. And, frankly, I don't see where is the problem: simply leave the Nikon in the car for those days where you may come across the view of a lifetime and keep the IQ180 for the travels to Bermuda and Iceland.

    But I suspect that the real problem is that you don't like photographing in a deliberate and planned manner. That is quite possible, there are plenty of people who don't relate to this way of taking pictures: street or news photographers for example. In that case, probably the best decision is to sell both the IQ180 and the printer and do less landscape and more wildlife and action. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as you like it.

    I actually prefer to take pictures in a planned and deliberate manner, but I also know people who much prefer a more impulsive way. It's good: if we were all taking pictures in the same way, the world would be very boring.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #116
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    A dpi print value is always in context of print size; the larger the print, the lower the dpi needed.
    I don't agree with this theory. Neither do the people who like to walk up a large print to have a look at the details.

  17. #117
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    BUT, everything about MF needs, nay, demands deliberation, planning. Hard to do that in every situation.
    I totally disagree with that (but in a supportive, kind way). I have use a lot of equipment that many photographers claim requires demanding and fussy handling. It is all a myth. You simply need to learn and develop the skill to use a piece of equipment. A Horseman SW612 is not your textbook street photography camera, but I use one for exactly that. I have use 4x5 cameras handheld.

    Now, if you are not enjoying your camera, there are two possible scenarios. One is that life is short and there are just better cameras for you. We have all been there. The other is your perception of the camera is wrong and you need to spend some time with it to understand how you can get it to work for you. This just takes time and practice, which might lead back to scenario number one or you may find new possibilities in the IQ180.
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #118
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    I totally disagree with that (but in a supportive, kind way). I have use a lot of equipment that many photographers claim requires demanding and fussy handling. It is all a myth. You simply need to learn and develop the skill to use a piece of equipment. A Horseman SW612 is not your textbook street photography camera, but I use one for exactly that. I have use 4x5 cameras handheld.

    Now, if you are not enjoying your camera, there are two possible scenarios. One is that life is short and there are just better cameras for you. We have all been there. The other is your perception of the camera is wrong and you need to spend some time with it to understand how you can get it to work for you. This just takes time and practice, which might lead back to scenario number one or you may find new possibilities in the IQ180.
    Have to agree with your first sentence in particular. It really is a matter of experience and knowing exactly what you can pull off. Hell people shot sports with speed graphic 4x5 film for years. I shot them out of helicopters for a living. Sure a Hassy was easier on me but I got the same results. You really have to learn to be fast but more important accurate while your getting there. That's plan and simple experience as a shooter and time to learn your tools.

    I just hired a photo crew for my daughters wedding. I'm so sickened by the poor inability of watching them at there inexperience as a shooter and worse pretending to be professional. The group shots they had no ****ing idea what they where doing. I had to actually jump in and set it up. I'm having a hard time writing there final payment because I know before I even get the take they failed 40 percent of the time. This is the inability to learn your gear and be efficient as a shooter. This all just takes time and a lot of it.

    I have taught 25 workshops and the number one biggest thing I see is time on the participants part with learning there gear. It's not easy as its a hobby for them and they are not sweating it out everyday with there gear. It's just a patience thing to learn MF. I can unfold a tripod in less than 20 seconds on the ground ready to put camera on. That's just knowing what I'm doing. Not bragging here it's just a example of getting time under your belt
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #119
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    I don't agree with this theory. Neither do the people who like to walk up a large print to have a look at the details.
    Well, you actually do not have to agree with that, it is simply true. I know a lot of "people who like to walk up a large print to have a look at the details," and agree with me as well--but then those folks have a lot of experience with printing large.

    BTW, a theory is a hypothesis supported by evidence. I am not sure why you would think such a well studied and experienced phenomenon would suddenly be not be true. My experience just reflects the theory. True, I have not printed at every size imaginable, but the largest print I did for an art museum was 10 feet by 12 feet and I can't imagine going larger would suddenly change that dynamic. Unfortunately, there is a lot of confusion surround print size and persistent myths abound. The camera companies reenforced that by linking pixel dimensions to print size base on 300dpi, even though at least one knew it was not correct. But it sells cameras...

  20. #120
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    Actually, other cameras also apply noise reduction at iso 200-400. It is just that they don't tell you. That is a little known fact, but if you use free software to look at files from Nikon, Canon or Sony cameras you will see the native noise that standard software like lightroom hides by default.
    Maybe true, but then in C1, all files should look the same at the same ISO which of course they don't.


    But I suspect that the real problem is that you don't like photographing in a deliberate and planned manner. That is quite possible, there are plenty of people who don't relate to this way of taking pictures: street or news photographers for example. In that case, probably the best decision is to sell both the IQ180 and the printer and do less landscape and more wildlife and action. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as you like it.

    I actually prefer to take pictures in a planned and deliberate manner, but I also know people who much prefer a more impulsive way. It's good: if we were all taking pictures in the same way, the world would be very boring.
    No, absolutely not. I have spent hours knee-deep in the snow simply waiting for the northern lights to appear, just to get a good photograph. I've waited for hours in the baking heat of Kenya/Tanzania while waiting to see if the Cheetah/lion/leopard would do something worth photographing. I've stood in subzero temps in New Mexico at 6 AM trying with freezing fingers to get the focus right on my A7R with a Canon 70-200 lens mounted on it. All of these require patience and perseverance. I CAN therefore do the same with my MF system, provided it can do the High ISO required for both northern lights or pre-dawn scenics. I have no problems with being deliberate or slow when needed.

    I guess I need to use my MF much more than I have.

  21. #121
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    545
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    This discussion reminds me of those about the articulated screen.

    Some people don't want it, some people don't care and some others really want it.
    Isn't better to have it and not use it than needing it and not having it?

    After all, an articulated screen in park position is as good and safe as a fixed one.

    Eduardo

    Quote Originally Posted by gazwas View Post
    But from what Void said these are just trending on 500pix at the moment and a look many seem to like. I think the point is the information is there in the image and while you don't have to pull every highlight and lift every shadow to emulate this look its nice to havd the information than to not. After sll, isn't that why we all purchased MFD in the first place?

  22. #122
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Stay on to the gear you have is generally a wise advice, but in this case I think it means continue using the Canon system and sell off the MFD gear, as its the Canon system that sees the use.

    I have a Canon system too, I shoot with it perhaps 10 times a year, while I try to shoot with my MFD camera every week (enthusiast photographer so I shoot on spare time). I've thought about selling the Canon, but the cost is low keeping it so I keep it and enjoy it those 10 times a year. Another factor is that with the Canon I can shoot things which is impossible with the Linhof Techno, like sports.

    If it was the other way around, I used my (relatively) high cost MFD gear only 10 times a year, I would sell it, but that's because it's a relatively large sum of money in it - from my perspective. If I would be a billionaire I wouldn't care, so that thing is personal too. It does seem like the cost of the MFD system disturbs you, and when you use it so little I would sell.
    One way around this would be, as some have suggested, to simply take just the MF on a trip and nothing else, and try to use that more often overall.

  23. #123
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    One way around this would be, as some have suggested, to simply take just the MF on a trip and nothing else, and try to use that more often overall.
    Will

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

  24. #124
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    81
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    You ain't so special. I have the same struggle with 3:2.
    I must be one of the few guys my age in the world who likes 3:2 more than 35mm, but then again, I like square the most, so what do I know?
    Chris Valites
    Research, Marketing & Support, Capture Integration
    Email-Me
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #125
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Valites View Post
    I must be one of the few guys my age in the world who likes 3:2 more than 35mm, but then again, I like square the most, so what do I know?
    ??? Um, isn't 35mm 3:2? Or do you mean 4:3?
    Will

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

  26. #126
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    The real issue here is DXO does not take any account for the raw processor and C1 is tuned perfectly for there backs. Frankly DXO to me is just a slice of the puzzle but folks use it as gospel when doing comparisons. Not so much here as most understand what DXO does but more on the other forums its like I won't buy it because of the DXO. Its just a piece of the overall quality of the product, especially when there is a file involved that needs to be processed. Reality is there is so much to draw from a Phase file in C1 that to me the numbers are somewhat meaningless.

    Testing under your own conditions and technique is only the way to see what you can draw and its hard to see what others are doing when showing there tests. You just don't know exactly what they are doing when it comes to raw processing which is a art in itself.

    Now the question is are Phase sensors better than Sony. Its a loaded question indeed as Sony does some things better but so does Phase. It really depends on what and how you you are shooting.
    Sorry I have to do this, until at least some people can see that the Sony IMX094 sensor has better dynamic range than the Dalsa 80 MP sensor. Below shows how Capture One v8.1 processes the RAW files of an IQ280 and a D800E:







    The IQ250 is based on the same / similar Sony CMOS tech as of the D800E. Even Phase One admits that the IQ250 has more dynamic range.

    Yes of course you can disagree with dxomark, but my real world tests (with Capture One as shown above), the Phase One's website and also the data from sensorgen.info, *ALL* agree with dxomark.

  27. #127
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Uaiomex View Post
    This discussion reminds me of those about the articulated screen.

    Some people don't want it, some people don't care and some others really want it.
    Isn't better to have it and not use it than needing it and not having it?

    After all, an articulated screen in park position is as good and safe as a fixed one.

    Eduardo
    Speaking the truth against common sense could get you burnt alive. Frankly speaking it's essentially all about two things:

    a) Fight for residual value of outdated gear against depreciation;

    b) Fight for faith to continue using outdated gear.

    If you heavily invested into some exotic gear only to find it surpassed by some new mid-range gear you would of course feel uncomfortable with buyer's remorse. You would then resort to justify your expensive purchase.

    This has always been true for other areas, such like computer hardware. You can buy a $1000 highend graphics card, only to find it crushed by a $600 midrange graphics card one year later. Then the second-hand re-sales value of your $1000 graphics card depreciates down to less than $400. This is how technology evolves, especially for semiconductors.

    The problem here is that most users here are still using the old CCD technology, and this is not the right place to repeatedly speak positive for the new CMOS technology. My posts are more welcome in forums with younger users who haven't heavily invested into CCD bakcs.

    Even if I haven't started this, someone else will do. CMOS will eventually shine.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #128
    Senior Member Dogs857's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Thursday Island - Australia
    Posts
    307
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?



    The headache has subsided a little so I will give it one more go.

    Void by your rational everyone should only ever use the absolute latest technology. Anyone who doesn't immediately buy into the hype surrounding the latest 1% improvement is just stubbornly holding onto their "outdated" "obsolete" "surpassed" equipment because they are idiots and can't see the light.

    Every test you show highlights the CMOS strengths, which we all agree on. Yes it can pull shadows better than a CCD, hallelujah.

    Maybe I should also buy a new car every year as the new model has slightly better performance and another cup holder. Maybe I should upgrade my computer every year because Apple puts something shiny in there, or my phone, or my tv ,or my bread maker.

    There is nothing wrong with speaking positively about the CMOS sensor and how much you admire it. Start a thread labelled "CMOS IS AWESOME" and then post away. If people ask questions in threads then you can link them to your thread and let them know all the information is there. People who want to learn about CMOS (and there are plenty) can go there and be informed.

    What you are doing is trolling through this forum, and populating any thread that mentions CMOS with the same data over and over again. Then you come out with statements like your last one and wonder why you are not being well received.

    Yes, I am heavily invested in exotic gear, namely a tech camera and SK glass. Therefore I wouldn't buy a current 50mp sensor right now as it would mean too much of a financial investment to use it. However just because there is a new sensor out doesn't make my current one a piece of crap.

    Rant over, sorry Pradeep.
    Stop chasing gear, start chasing photos instead.

    Jeff, but my friends call me Dogs
    Likes 7 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #129
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Sorry I have to do this, until at least some people can see that the Sony IMX094 sensor has better dynamic range than the Dalsa 80 MP sensor. Below shows how Capture One v8.1 processes the RAW files of an IQ280 and a D800E:

    Let me save you some time and our beloved forum some valuable disk space by completely agreeing with you that, YES, the new Sony CMOS does have better DR than the Dalsa CCD 80MP sensor.

    This was never the point. If you are going to push files 4 stops to show something great, then say that, but in the proper context. I have a whole crap load of cameras here with the Sony CMOS sensor, and I know what it is capable of as do most people around here. This does not mean that it is better at EVERYTHING than the CCD Dalsa sensor. For example, go expose the two frames you've compared above properly and see which one looks better.

    I don't find myself underexposing by 4 stops very often.

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Speaking the truth against common sense could get you burnt alive. Frankly speaking it's essentially all about two things:

    a) Fight for residual value of outdated gear against depreciation;

    b) Fight for faith to continue using outdated gear.

    If you heavily invested into some exotic gear only to find it surpassed by some new mid-range gear you would of course feel uncomfortable with buyer's remorse. You would then resort to justify your expensive purchase.

    This has always been true for other areas, such like computer hardware. You can buy a $1000 highend graphics card, only to find it crushed by a $600 midrange graphics card one year later. Then the second-hand re-sales value of your $1000 graphics card depreciates down to less than $400. This is how technology evolves, especially for semiconductors.

    The problem here is that most users here are still using the old CCD technology, and this is not the right place to repeatedly speak positive for the new CMOS technology. My posts are more welcome in forums with younger users who haven't heavily invested into CCD bakcs.

    Even if I haven't started this, someone else will do. CMOS will eventually shine.
    This is offensive. You are arguing a case on a slippery slope, with examples that at best make sense in peripheral cases. I responded to your original post thinking that you were actually trying to provide a balanced perspective to the OP. That appears not to be the case. Good luck with the rest of the thread.

  30. #130
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    Most of all I was disappointed with the upgrade policy. When I bought it I was told that the path to the next model would be very easy and relatively inexpensive. When I called a few months ago to see if I could trade in the IQ180 for the IQ250 (figuring I could put the high ISO capabilities to good use and then upgrade to the new camera body when it came out), I was told it would cost me over 20,000 to buy the IQ250 even at trade-in because it was being traded for a 'less expensive model'. Which meant that my $30,000 IQ180 was now worth less than $10,000 in just over a year. Somehow that did not make sense.
    Obviously the OP has some interest in the IQ250.
    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    if there's a picture you can't take with the IQ180, then a IQ250 won't help you either.
    I was objecting this statement as I know there can be reasons to choose the IQ250 instead of the IQ180.

    Obviously many current IQ180 users are trying to top-up faith for the OP to continue using the IQ180. If my different opinions are worth a ban here then this place is not worth my posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dogs857 View Post
    Void by your rational everyone should only ever use the absolute latest technology. Anyone who doesn't immediately buy into the hype surrounding the latest 1% improvement is just stubbornly holding onto their "outdated" "obsolete" "surpassed" equipment because they are idiots and can't see the light.
    1 stop of dynamic range improvement means 200% improvement (i.e. D800E/IQ250 vs IQ280, normalized by down-sampling, for short exposure shots)

    3 stops of dynamic range improvement means 800% improvement (i.e. D800E/IQ250 vs IQ280, at pixel peeping level, for long exposure shots)

    I have never said that your gear is crap. Indeed I envy that you have the light-weighted Schneider SK lenses with symmetric design (nicely flare resistant and virtually distortion free). The P45+ also performs better than the IQ260 in the long exposure territory (I just didn't publish the horrible test results of IQ260 in long exposure because that would harm it further). I totally agree that your gear can produce very decent images, perhaps even better than the IQ260+Roddie combo.

    What could be wrong if I share different opinions for new users to see what's latest and what's available? You repeat the same sentences, I repeat the same figures. Let the audiences decide which one to choose. Why don't you start a thread saying CCD is awesome? Just because you have more people on your side doesn't mean CMOS is bad. I may leave this forum, but time will tell the residual values of the current digital backs.

  31. #131
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    I don't find myself underexposing by 4 stops very often.
    FYI, Hans Kruse does it a lot. I agree that he uses bracketing and he could fix it when shadow noise is beyond control, but I also said that there are cases where alignment could be of a real problem for bracketing.
    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    This is offensive. You are arguing a case on a slippery slope, with examples that at best make sense in peripheral cases. I responded to your original post thinking that you were actually trying to provide a balanced perspective to the OP. That appears not to be the case. Good luck with the rest of the thread.
    I don't stop you from providing a balanced perspective to the OP. You are more than welcome to post comparisons between the IQ180 and the D800E/IQ250 Sony CMOS side by side. Same composition, same date and time. This is much better than talkings of the claimed superiority of one gear over the other.

  32. #132
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    You seem to contradict yourself. You mentioned that "many" do not like, countered by evidence that indeed these were liked by many, then you routed to judge at a higher level.

    This reminds me about Emily Soto. Many other Vogue photographers overlooked her. But time told things. She eventually became popular, and the other oldskool photographers are just jealous of her success.

    In the film era no one shot any landscape of the milky way with foreground in a single exposure. Now with the advancement of technology people start to shoot that kind of pictures, and those are indeed very popular pictures. Even iPhone use that kind of pictures as default wallpapers. If you ever observed the milky way with your human eye you would have known that those pictures are not "real" either. Can you do that easily with a CCD (i.e. single exposure with foreground)?

    Technology is evolving, and rules are changing... Rangefinder became popular. SLR replaced rangefinder. Mirrorless might eventually replace DSLR. CMOS might eventually replace CCD.
    True. But photographers choose the tool they want to do what they want how they want. Awesome that there are more, and more versatile, tools at our disposal now.

    The HDR look is nice but it is not the be all end all of photography. In certain circles, like landscape photography it is indeed extremely popular.

    But man, it is a bit disturbing that all of the images you posted look like they were made by the same photographer even though they were not.

    Yes, the CCD backs can't do a lot of things as good as the new Sony sensors like you have illustrated in almost every thread you participate in but man does not mean they can't do a LOT of things amazingly well and be used to produce stunning and very successful images.

  33. #133
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    31
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Not my image.

  34. #134
    Senior Member Dogs857's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Thursday Island - Australia
    Posts
    307
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    This is a bit unfair.

    Void has provided a lot of useful information in this forum for those looking at the new CMOS backs. Especially with regards to movements and technical cameras. I, and I am sure a lot of others, thank him for this as it saves us a lot of time and potential heartache.

    My issue has always been the way he tends to dominate threads with the same information. As such I don't consider him a troll (even though I used the word trolling) but rather just a little inconsiderate in the language he uses and the repeated posts.

    I think we would lose a valuable resource if Void left the forum, I just wish he would tone it down a bit when the discussion is not really about CMOS v CCD per say.
    Stop chasing gear, start chasing photos instead.

    Jeff, but my friends call me Dogs
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #135
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Obviously the OP has some interest in the IQ250.

    I was objecting this statement as I know there can be reasons to choose the IQ250 instead of the IQ180.

    Obviously many current IQ180 users are trying to top-up faith for the OP to continue using the IQ180. If my different opinions are worth a ban here then this place is not worth my posts.


    1 stop of dynamic range improvement means 200% improvement (i.e. D800E/IQ250 vs IQ280, normalized by down-sampling, for short exposure shots)

    3 stops of dynamic range improvement means 800% improvement (i.e. D800E/IQ250 vs IQ280, at pixel peeping level, for long exposure shots)

    I have never said that your gear is crap. Indeed I envy that you have the light-weighted Schneider SK lenses with symmetric design (nicely flare resistant and virtually distortion free). The P45+ also performs better than the IQ260 in the long exposure territory (I just didn't publish the horrible test results of IQ260 in long exposure because that would harm it further). I totally agree that your gear can produce very decent images, perhaps even better than the IQ260+Roddie combo.

    What could be wrong if I share different opinions for new users to see what's latest and what's available? You repeat the same sentences, I repeat the same figures. Let the audiences decide which one to choose. Why don't you start a thread saying CCD is awesome? Just because you have more people on your side doesn't mean CMOS is bad. I may leave this forum, but time will tell the residual values of the current digital backs.
    Void, I doubt that anyone interested in MFD is disappointed that the manufacturers are producing CMOS backs/cameras.

    This has been a wish for some time now, and the makers are full-filling it thanks to Sony. It definitely breaths new life into the category, especially for those who do specific types of photography and enjoy working with a larger sensor. It also has a better chance of attracting smaller format users to MFD, since the functional aspects and attributes are more familiar.

    Most MFD users are probably quite familiar with CMOS functional advantages due to use of, or familiarity with, high res 35mm type CMOS cameras ... again, thanks to Sony sensors.

    So, I think your enthusiasm for the 50 meg MFD Sony CMOS offerings is warranted. However, that enthusiasm is continually used to discount or vilify some specialized choices that people made to accomplish specific work.

    If the CMOS MFD offering(s) better solves the person's technical requirements or creative needs, then it is most certainly a viable consideration. If it doesn't, then it is a waste of money, and a waste of time worrying about it. In my specific case it brings nothing to the party for what and how I shoot. For others it may be a God sent.

    As to residual value, I again state that the ONLY value in this exotic gear is in the using. A crop frame CMOS back for a 645 system may well become an exceedingly poor investment if the manufacturers offer a FF 645 CMOS back in the near future ... which is highly likely in order to combat the impending rash of 50 meg 35mm cameras that is on the horizon.

    Personally, if I were buying a DB, I would NOT invest in a Crop Frame 50 meg one. Been there, done that with CCD backs and APSc in 35mm.

    Now a 80 or 100 meg FF CMOS would catch my attention. Or, in my case a 60 or 70 meg CMOSIS in the Leica S system I now use. Since Leica chose to keep the new S(007) CMOS sensor meg count the same as the S2 and S(006), I will keep my S(006) CCD camera and put my money into more glass ... (recently adding the yummy S-100/2 ) If my technical requirements or creative needs change in future, then I'm pleased that Leica will have the CMOS choice to consider.

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #136
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    I think this and serveal other recent posts by Void have been very interesting and informative. Very much in the essence of getdpi in they are from very informed oppinions of real users rather than that of dealers alone. Calling such a person a troll who FREELY provides such a wealth of information is both deeply offensive and childish and if anyone should be reined in are the 'troll callers' just because they don't agree with Voids opinion.

    Sure Void is very vocal but rather than comments complaining about his participation, trolling, him being a headache or repetative, why not just go elsewhere to avoid your annoyance and let us others appreciate his posts. I don't think he has evey said an IQ180 is rubbish and current owners of CCD chipped backs stupid for using them. He has stated in the right conditions the IQ180 is still king of quality, however n the context of the OP has suggested the OP might want to try a CMOS chipped back/camera over their current CCD one so to enable continued enjoyment if MF photography.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #137
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jianghai View Post
    Not my image.
    Void ain't no troll. He is a very intelligent person who has taken a ton of time to post his findings. I find it sad that some people would such as being a troll.

    Every person can make choices and the information he has provided will make it easier for someone to see the differences between the performance of a CCD chip and CMOS.

    For most people, the purchase of a Phase One back should not be a decision taken lightly, it wasn't for me. I challenge anyone on this site to find 10% of the information he has shown on Phase One's site, it's not there we all know that. Sure the dealer community will let you rent a back and test it, (but for some of us that is not as easy as it sounds). I commend Leaf for letting Guy have the Credo 50 for his review as it was very enlightening for me as to the capabilities of the 50MP chip. I personally disagree with the opinion that Phase One shouldn't have to provide any information, it's up to the dealers. That's not how I see a leading company to handle this.

    Many have stated, that there has been a ton of information on this already. In reality there really hasn't been a ton of information on this. Look at the timeline:

    Jan/Feb of 2014 the 250 was announced
    Soon after DT released some tests taken indoors in a library
    LuLa published a white paper by DT expanding on the tech and why the Phase
    was special
    I don't know of really any other tests.

    Soon word of mouth spread about crosstalk and just how terrible it was and within a week or so, it was just an automatic decision that the 250/150 could not be used in outdoor shooting situations with movements due to crosstalk. But no one every really published anything showing this that I am aware of, if so please point me there. Crosstalk effects all sensors, or at least most of them, I know it effects the 260, as I can see the effects on blue skies with extreme shifts.

    I for one GREATLY appreciate the posts made by Void has made for several reasons. As far as I know his posts and Guy's testing of the Credo 50 are the first ones to show that the 50MP CMOS chips can work with movements past 10mm outdoors. The time he took to both shoot all of this and then work it up into a well written post is commendable.

    It has for sure changed my opinion on if I could use a 250 in my outdoor work, with movements.

    Again, I find the use of the term "troll" very offensive in this situation and extremely short sighted. This is a public forum about medium format cameras and he has provided nothing but facts, facts that he has backed up with images.

    I see the information, I can read it, and make my decision where it matters in my next purchase.

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

  38. #138
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Should I or not?

    Void I don't really agree with your last post with a images that are not white balanced and one is green than saying the green is blown out. Also the D800e looks like mush and/or the luminance value is so high it lost all its detail. Problem is we are not sure of the processing and I do think we all agree the DR is higher in the CMOS chip . But I'm not going to sit here and argue these points it's just a circle of confusion that gets us nowhere. We all know CMOS will have better high ISO values as well, no one disputes that.

    Now from a owner of 5 CCD backs. P25, P30, P40, P65 temporary, IQ 140 and IQ 160 and shot the IQ 180 many times, the real bottom line on CCD backs is really all about color depth and tonality. Having said that I tested and posted right here a big test on the Credo 50 and I really liked it a lot. My take away from it was highlights blew faster than I can remember than CCD but outside the higher ISO and DR abilities it still lacked to a small degree the color depth. Now this is not a scientific statement but a gut feeling as I did not do anything directly against a CCD but I will say its a great start for MF CMOS. Is it the be all, have to say no but it is damn close. Like Marc when the FF CMOS bigger chips hit the market it might be way to hard to resist. Now having said all that CMOS in MF is something we all been screaming for a long time since it brings us better live view , higher ISO values, and some better DR. Every MF shooter all agree with my last comments that's what CMOS can bring. Here is the rub as good as the IQ 180 is and it's very very good its a worthless piece of junk in a upgrade path. Phase shut those folks out from doing a lateral trade to the CMOS backs, so it leaves guys like the OP here scratching there head as the value keeps dropping, it maybe called a dinosaur at this point but it still performs to the upmost quality standards. Seriously as far as detail in a image nothing can touch it. But it does have other limitations that lends itself to lower ISO values and slightly less DR which frankly IMHO is such a overrated argument for DR. Anyone worth there salt can pull detail with good technique and raw process. Hell I have to add black to almost any Sony A7r image I take. Otherwise it looks to flat.

    The real issue here with the OP and other IQ 180 users is there stuck with a older CCD back which still performs amazingly well but its depreciation is killing there mind set. Which I totally understand the value part even though they can use it till it dies. But I digress the real issue here is the OP and that's what we as a forum need to address is he is having a hard time with its use and getting great images from it. This is the real problem as its a expensive paper weight to him. That is not a good thing at all. Plus it's dropping value faster than ants eat a piece of bread. I totally understand his dilemma. Been here done that and lost money doing it. That's not fun anymore
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #139
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Should I or not?

    BTW I'm not crazy about the troll comments folks these are insults that need to be left off this forum. You all know how this forum runs and that don't fly well. As owner/moderator lets leave those at the door. You can always like anything else change the channel and ignore it.

    Let's get back to the topic at hand because there are many folks in these kinds of situations that need some good advice.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  40. #140
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Should I or not?

    I sold my P45+ that I loved, but when the upgrade path went price crazy I have now switched to the 645Z and could not be happier. It even works well with my Hasselblad V lenses with Fotodoix adapter which for me is a plus.

    The Pentax 55/2.8 (44mm equiv) is super sharp and well sealed as is the Pentax 28-45 (22-35 equiv) and both work well for landscape. For portariure the 150/2.8 (120mm equiv) will be my next lens.

  41. #141
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    552
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    Void ain't no troll. He is a very intelligent person who has taken a ton of time to post his findings. I find it sad that some people would such as being a troll.

    Every person can make choices and the information he has provided will make it easier for someone to see the differences between the performance of a CCD chip and CMOS.

    Many have stated, that there has been a ton of information on this already. In reality there really hasn't been a ton of information on this. Look at the timeline:

    Jan/Feb of 2014 the 250 was announced
    Soon after DT released some tests taken indoors in a library
    LuLa published a white paper by DT expanding on the tech and why the Phase
    was special
    I don't know of really any other tests.

    Soon word of mouth spread about crosstalk and just how terrible it was and within a week or so, it was just an automatic decision that the 250/150 could not be used in outdoor shooting situations with movements due to crosstalk. But no one every really published anything showing this that I am aware of, if so please point me there. Crosstalk effects all sensors, or at least most of them, I know it effects the 260, as I can see the effects on blue skies with extreme shifts.

    I for one GREATLY appreciate the posts made by Void has made for several reasons. As far as I know his posts and Guy's testing of the Credo 50 are the first ones to show that the 50MP CMOS chips can work with movements past 10mm outdoors. The time he took to both shoot all of this and then work it up into a well written post is commendable.

    It has for sure changed my opinion on if I could use a 250 in my outdoor work, with movements.

    Again, I find the use of the term "troll" very offensive in this situation and extremely short sighted. This is a public forum about medium format cameras and he has provided nothing but facts, facts that he has backed up with images.

    I see the information, I can read it, and make my decision where it matters in my next purchase.

    Paul
    On another thread on Getdpi, tjv is testing a CMOS back on a Techno with a Rodie 55, and his prelim results suggest that 12 and 15mm is quite workable. He hasn't yet posted crops, but will. Due to the back's fabrication, it shifts better along its long side, but results are just coming in. Hope its ok to mention this.

    There is also testing of the CMOS back in action on Paula's Linhof Studio page.

  42. #142
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Should I or not?

    After testing the Credo I felt 12mm was my max before getting into trouble as you can see in the review I went back and redid some tests just for that. That's with a Rodie 40 HR lens which is maybe a good test lens as it's very popular among tech cam shooters. 15mm if your willing to do extra work to it. You do get a magenta cast but more important the detail holds up in the corners
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  43. #143
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Void I don't really agree with your last post with a images that are not white balanced and one is green than saying the green is blown out. Also the D800e looks like mush and/or the luminance value is so high it lost all its detail. Problem is we are not sure of the processing and I do think we all agree the DR is higher in the CMOS chip . But I'm not going to sit here and argue these points it's just a circle of confusion that gets us nowhere. We all know CMOS will have better high ISO values as well, no one disputes that.
    I have changed the settings as per criticize.

    First of all, allow me to say that the white balance does not affect the levels of each channel out of R, G, B, G2 out of the Bayer Array. White balance is just a vector to render colors for the JPEG output from the RAW data. What I show here is that in the test shots the D800E still has about 2/3 EV room for the highlight in the sky from being blown out, while the IQ280 is at the edge. You can apply different white balance in Raw Digger but it will always show you the same levels for each channel out of R, G, B, G2 if you hover your mouse to the same pixel. But let's not worry about that for now, because I have changed the white balance for these two to match up closely and you can see that the D800E here still have more room for highlight:





    Then let's move to the shadow part. For white balance purposes I illustrate below where I used the "Pick White Balance Tool" in Capture One in each image. I picked something that I consider to be neutral:



    As can be seen, even if I pick the same neutral area for WB purposes, these two sensors have different characteristics in the color cast in the pushed shadow. Obviously in this case the D800E had some green cast in shadow noise, while the IQ280 may had some magenta cast in shadow noise. You might have your own preference but I can't say either is neutral on shadow noise.

    Then let's move to the noise reduction and sharpening part. Please be aware that the IQ280 was equipped with a Rodenstock 40HR, which of course would destroy the sharpness of the Nikon 24mm f1.4G. I have now reduced any luminance of NR and sharpening down to 0 for both images. Now I consider it to be a more fair comparison for shadow SNR:





    Personally I would say that even the down-sampled IQ280 shadow has more noise. I could upload the RAW files and PM you the link if you have any doubt. I don't want people to think that I am just faking up things and demote the dynamic range of the Dalsa CCD. I understand that it is quite easy to troll the medium format digital forums with a D800E (and now a 5DSR), just like it is quite easy to troll the Canikon forums with Sigma Art lenses, so it might be an inappropriate example here to use the D800E for comparison purposes, but what I wanted to demonstrate to people is just the potential of this Sony CMOS sensor (which is also used in the IQ250). Feel free to give any subjective or objective judgement on this dynamic range thing.

  44. #144
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Pradeep

    I am a very recent entrant into the MF inferno and read your post with interest. I am by no means an expert but I am sympathetic to your predicament so I'd offer my point of view.

    You mentioned that your brief journey has been "very unproductive". You also mentioned that you are "primarily a landscape and wildlife photographer" - lets talk about these ...

    For wildlife, I can totally relate to your frustration with your setup. A DSLR would offer much faster frame rate, much faster and more advanced auto focusing ability and a far wider range of telephoto lenses suited for that purpose. So if wildlife is your passion then you ought to make the switch, as its unlikely that benefits of a CMOS IQ3XX (or whatever) will overcome shortcomings w.r.t. reach, focus, frame rates etc.

    Now for landscape. Does your "very unproductive" experience apply here as well? Its surprising if that’s the case. For landscapes, the need for deliberate and tripod based shooting is common even for DSLR shooters. Image quality in good lighting would certainly favor IQ180, compared to any DSLR. And in low lighting - based on all the information already shared - a CMOS back or DSLR would be better. I guess you ought to ask yourself for clarity:
    (i) What percentage of your landscape shooting is in poor lighting conditions?
    (ii) Realistically what is the longest exposure time you want to be able to use?

    You expressed your unwillingness to get into technical cameras, but that would certainly help one of your stated areas of interest i.e. Landscapes if you were to consider that as an option.

    If you shoot more landscapes than wildlife, then you have one of the finest photographic tools already, in IQ180. I would urge you to dig deeper and try to overcome the obstacles that have been the cause of frustration.

    On the other hand if you shoot more wildlife/action than landscapes or more landscapes in low lighting, needing long exposures, then I guess you ought to sell your gear ASAP - while it still has value and get something that fits your needs.

    Good luck with your choice.

    Cheers!
    -Jawad
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #145
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32° 31' 37.06" N, 111° 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    I've owned several CCD backs much like Guy has. I've owned a P30+, P45+, P65, IQ160 and now an IQ180. I've also owned (and used) a Leica M9 which was also a CCD sensor. During this same time I've owned and used Canon, 1Ds, 1DsII and a 1DsIII and now a Sony A7r both converted to full spectrum and one that isn't.

    I've processed files from all the above cameras and in each case the files I liked the most (and this is subjective) are the ones taken from a CCD sensor. I've also sold multiple images taken from all the above cameras and in non of those sales could a client ever tell the difference nor did they say anything.

    Addressing the OP. Shortly after moving the MDF I found that I wasn't shooting as many files as I used to with the 35mm cameras. What I did find was that what I did capture was much better, better color, better range, and I could print larger. (I normally print in the range of 40x30, 30x60 and 40x60.)

    Upgrading medium format system remind me of the early days of personal computers; it seemed that if you brought the latest greatest on Monday it would be obsolete by the end of the week. Or at least we were made to think that.

    If you continue to hunger after the next greatest camera system you'll go broke. Give what you have a chance.

    You say you're primarily a landscape and wildlife photographer; well so am I. The greatest thing I love the most about my 180 is the ability to capture in 35ISO. I've shot wildlife in Jackson Hole for several years using a P65 then IQ160 as well as either a 300mm Mamiya and recently the beautifully heavy 240LS with 2x extender on a older DF body. I'm also looking forward this winter to do it again with the 180.

    What I've found so far is this - I love shooting full frame. I also love the lower ISO of the 180 whether I'm shooting on a tech camera or the DF. Regarding live view - I don't use it nor do I miss not using it. Yes, the 180 can do LV under proper circumstances however when I'm setup with the tech cam I'm more than likely shooting tethered to a Surface Pro 3 and have a much larger screen to check focusing and if I need to I can also do LV.

    Most people who go into MFD face the same issues as you have. It sound like you are going through an adjustment period. Did you buy your kit from a dealer? Has that dealer offered support?

    Take a step back and rethink your options. By the way this thread has gone it appears to have lost sight of your question(s). The way I see it is you have the option of keeping what you have and get better acquainted with it. The second option is to get out of MFD and cut your loses. The final option is that if you really think the newer 250 suits you better is go for it, knowing you'll never recoup the cost of the upgrade in what you'll be offered as a trade-in. Remember this, if you're thinking of the last option you have by all rights a much better back with the 180 (full frame higher resolution to name 2) than with the 250 (which is a crop sensor and different CCD).

    Best of luck, and I hope we can get back on track to helping you out rather than preaching who good one system is over another as I don't feel it answers your core question.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #146
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Smile Re: Should I or not?

    As I've said in an earlier post on this thread, it was never my intent to start a CMOS vs CCD war. However, thread drift is inevitable and often welcome as I've realized in my long years on the net (starting with Usenet in '92).

    For the record, I DO very much appreciate Void's posts and the painstaking work he has done in providing the samples. It has been a great learning experience.

    My intent, for now, is not to switch over to a CMOS sensor necessarily although I did consider it and checked to see if sideways upgrade was possible. My entire issue has been with the MF system overall, and whether it still represents good value. I am aware that that is a very subjective thing and it is all about how much money one can 'blow away' on what is essentially a hobby although a very serious one. I am very fortunate in having a wife who is fully supportive - she did give me a somewhat hard time initially when I told her I was planning to buy the MF kit :-)

    Why does one buy a BMW over a Ford? That is the essence of this debate, and if I am looking for the best IQ in my photos then there is no question about owning an MF system. The next question is whether I can upgrade to a BMW with an X-drive with ease or not and if it is worth doing it. In the snow belt, for sure, but in California, doubtful. And then, what is the trade-in the dealer is willing to give.

    The result (and consensus here, I believe) appears to be that the IQ180 is still the best high resolution back there is. When it is replaced by a FF CMOS I may consider upgrading, if the price is right.

    I really appreciate all the posts here in response to my query. I felt a bit foolish initially for starting this thread but I am truly overwhelmed by the warm and generous response. Unlike another 'pro' forum I've been on, there is no intimidation here and no brow-beating by people who 'know too much'.

    GetDPI needs more exposure in the photo community.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #147
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Should I or not?

    Well maybe bias but this is a great forum and more importantly when we started it was to get away from the brow- beating. Here is one thing I am most proud of is the experience of the people here geniuely want to help folks and sometimes even with that experience people are jerks about how good they are. Not the case here and that is the big difference. Your questions are not only yours but shared by others and even though someone is not posting in this thread they are listening and sitting in the same boat as you. Heck I banged my brain around so long when i had these backs and asked the same questions. As they say never a dumb question and yes sometimes we move OT and thats okay too as long as we eventually get back to the heart of the matter.

    As far as GetDPI needing more exposure I agree but we are never after numbers but quality members. Far more important to me and owners here. Now would I like to see us have more advertisers , no question we all need money. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #148
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    As to residual value, I again state that the ONLY value in this exotic gear is in the using. A crop frame CMOS back for a 645 system may well become an exceedingly poor investment if the manufacturers offer a FF 645 CMOS back in the near future ... which is highly likely in order to combat the impending rash of 50 meg 35mm cameras that is on the horizon.

    Personally, if I were buying a DB, I would NOT invest in a Crop Frame 50 meg one. Been there, done that with CCD backs and APSc in 35mm.

    Now a 80 or 100 meg FF CMOS would catch my attention. Or, in my case a 60 or 70 meg CMOSIS in the Leica S system I now use. Since Leica chose to keep the new S(007) CMOS sensor meg count the same as the S2 and S(006), I will keep my S(006) CCD camera and put my money into more glass ... (recently adding the yummy S-100/2 ) If my technical requirements or creative needs change in future, then I'm pleased that Leica will have the CMOS choice to consider.

    - Marc
    I can't agree with your statements here. The rules for semiconductor is that you generally get an update about every 18 months or so. Of course the Canon 5DSR brings a great hit to the MFDB market, but the D800E was also the case.

    Of course you could wait, but who knows what will Phase One announce later this year / early next year. Probably a 48x36mm CMOS. Will you buy it? You still risk getting overwhelmed by a 54x40mm CMOS after about 18 months. Even if Phase One announces a 54x40mm CMOS, will you buy it? You still risk getting overwhelmed by another 54x40mm CMOS with higher pixel count or higher SNR after about 18 months. Even if they announce two fullframe CMOS sensors now, but with different pixel count (hence different degree of tech-cam compatibility), which one would you choose? The higher pixel count one but stuck with lesser lenses, or the lower pixel count one for greater tech-cam lenses? You still won't get the once-for-all invincible solution. You will get smashed by newer products after about 18 months anyway. Phase One is a company aiming to maximize profit by trying to earn all your cash in your wallet. Do you really think that they will sell something invincible? What they want is a hierarchy of ecosystems stimulating consumption. You keep upgrading, they keep making profit.

    You purchased the Leica S system and I can understand why you want some bigger chip. Every man has the feeling that "size matters". I just came down from the largest CCD chip so I am not so desperate about sensor size as you are, because I am pretty clear why sensor size is not the dominant factor here when it comes down to an evolution of technology. Still remember people who invested in the P65+ or H4D-60? They once thought that they sit on the pinnacle of image quality with the largest chip. What happened when the 80 MP Dalsa came out? Now what? That largest chip may not even have more residual value than the much smaller Sony CMOS sensor when you can't find the appropriate buyer. I could also claim that we all know that CMOS is the trend, it would be a rather poor investment for any CCD back at this stage, even for the fullframe CCDs.

    I would suggest to look forward and make rational decisions. Do not let any sunk cost to depress you. If the gear is the right tool for you then just enjoy it. If not, then sell it and move on.


  49. #149
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    I can't agree with your statements here. The rules for semiconductor is that you generally get an update about every 18 months or so. Of course the Canon 5DSR brings a great hit to the MFDB market, but the D800E was also the case.

    Of course you could wait, but who knows what will Phase One announce later this year / early next year. Probably a 48x36mm CMOS. Will you buy it? You still risk getting overwhelmed by a 54x40mm CMOS after about 18 months. Even if Phase One announces a 54x40mm CMOS, will you buy it? You still risk getting overwhelmed by another 54x40mm CMOS with higher pixel count or higher SNR after about 18 months. Even if they announce two fullframe CMOS sensors now, but with different pixel count (hence different degree of tech-cam compatibility), which one would you choose? The higher pixel count one but stuck with lesser lenses, or the lower pixel count one for greater tech-cam lenses? You still won't get the once-for-all invincible solution. You will get smashed by newer products after about 18 months anyway. Phase One is a company aiming to maximize profit by trying to earn all your cash in your wallet. Do you really think that they will sell something invincible? What they want is a hierarchy of ecosystems stimulating consumption. You keep upgrading, they keep making profit.

    You purchased the Leica S system and I can understand why you want some bigger chip. Every man has the feeling that "size matters". I just came down from the largest CCD chip so I am not so desperate about sensor size as you are, because I am pretty clear why sensor size is not the dominant factor here when it comes down to an evolution of technology. Still remember people who invested in the P65+ or H4D-60? They once thought that they sit on the pinnacle of image quality with the largest chip. What happened when the 80 MP Dalsa came out? Now what? That largest chip may not even have more residual value than the much smaller Sony CMOS sensor when you can't find the appropriate buyer. I could also claim that we all know that CMOS is the trend, it would be a rather poor investment for any CCD back at this stage, even for the fullframe CCDs.

    I would suggest to look forward and make rational decisions. Do not let any sunk cost to depress you. If the gear is the right tool for you then just enjoy it. If not, then sell it and move on.

    Well, I tried to be somewhat friendly. Sigh.

    "Every man thinks size matters" ... what an ignorant thing to say ... a bit socially backward rhetoric that's not the norm here on Get Dpi.

    If I were, as you say "desperate for sensor size", I would not have migrated from a Hasselblad H4D/60 to a Leica S.

    Sensor size and meg count are two different subjects. Many would like a FF sensor for their FF 645 system but do not necessarily need or want a huge meg count. I'd venture to say that a FF 645 CMOS camera with 50 meg would be quite satisfying to many. Since the sensor size of the S system is set (with-in that proprietary system it IS FF), then I wouldn't have minded more resolution for some studio applications ... and wouldn't have cared if it were CCD or CMOS.


    Have a day.

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #150
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32° 31' 37.06" N, 111° 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    This is quickly turning into a train wreck, in your face exhibits, name calling and the old if you disagree with me you must be a fool.

    Sad
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

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
  •