Site Sponsors
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 251 to 300 of 355

Thread: Should I or not?

  1. #251
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    The histogram cannot be trusted. It was described here.

    ISO 35 and 40 seconds would give you much cleaner shadow than ISO 100 and 15 seconds, but ISO 100 and 15 seconds would give you 2.5 stops more highlight details.
    This sort of indicates you are a little confused between exposure and DR. DR does not increase with ISO. Also, less exposure reduces signal. By changing exposure, you are simply changing where the DR of the sensor fall on the luminance range of the scene. I don't find your statement saying anything.

  2. #252
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    This sort of indicates you are a little confused between exposure and DR. DR does not increase with ISO. Also, less exposure reduces signal. By changing exposure, you are simply changing where the DR of the sensor fall on the luminance range of the scene. I don't find your statement saying anything.
    The DR stays the same for ISO 35 and ISO 100 (the orange part on the line I plotted).

    After ISO 100, if you increase the ISO, you start to lose DR (the blue part on the line I plotted).

  3. #253
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    Sony has no cable style and due to their proprietary plug, you can't find one on the web that works. I would friggin love to be able to use the A7 for my night work, but there is no intervalometer solution for it that takes you past 30".
    You may be interested in that hack, then: Sony Alpha NEX Cameras and E Mount Lenses: Sony A7 Wired Intervalometer Hack

  4. #254
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    The DR stays the same for ISO 35 and ISO 100 (the orange part on the line I plotted).

    After ISO 100, if you increase the ISO, you start to lose DR (the blue part on the line I plotted).
    You mean the plot of manufacturer ISO to measured ISO? That is an ISO plot. Don't you need a DR axis?

    But, anyway. if DR stays the same, then you are not actually getting more DR at ISO 100, you are just under exposing and reducing signal. So, ISO 35 is still better. There is no benefit to ISO 100 in terms of image quality.

  5. #255
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    I don't have a 32 or 90 by my hand. I can only show you the difference between a cylindrical stitch from a pano and a rectilinear stitch from a pano.

    Below are the two stitching methods from the same set of pano shots.

    Cylindrical: note the curved lines that should otherwise be straight horizontal lines.


    Rectilinear: straight lines are straight, but corners are soft.
    Once again, you are not answering the question, which was about comparing two rectilinear panos, one made by shifting and one by panning with a longer focal length.

    It was not about comparing cylindrical and rectilinear projections. We already know the difference.

  6. #256
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,925
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Should I or not?

    Here is what I have learned.

    If you want a pan, not stitch, the closer you are to 50mm or past, the easier the construction of the file will be. If you attempt a nodal pan with a 14mm lens, you will have ton's of problems, more so if the lens is in a horizontal position. Even if you are nodal, it still won't matter. Just take a 14mm lens and pan it across a scene, you can easily see how elements in the distance change perspective as you move. This is just part of it with a ultra wide.

    You also have to be level if you want anywhere near a good solution. Being level it key.

    With stitching, level is not required and with a tech camera, you are moving the back, thus no parallax. issues. Again not true with a Canon solution where the movement is within the lens. However you can counter most of this by moving the camera the same amount in the opposite direction, (Jack wrote a very nice article on just this process several years ago).

    If I want to nodal stitch, I tend to move the camera in the vertical as the distortions are less and most tools will come up with a better solution.

    NOTE, in outdoor landscape you can get away with a ton of errors, as no one know exactly how that one rock looked, or tree or mountain in the distance. With architecture, this is not true as lines within building have to line up and features also have to line up. This is where sticking is much easier to work with. and or use a 23mm Rodie with a bit of rise or fall or both to help with straightening out the shot. Here the Canon solution will work just as well, (at least in my experience, however the 17mm TS-E will not hold the corners as well and it has a bit of coma problems, (smear on the edges).

    My pref. is always stitch, to 15mm past that and you may have too much color cast crosstalk issues to contend with that you won't recover it without a ton of work (Rodie 40mm IQ260), this mainly is with blue skies, with no clouds to help break up the blue. Nothing is harder to get right is a shift across a pure blue sky with no clouds, (at least from my experience). Here a nodal pan is much easier and if I can get a level solution I will always set up the 35mm Schneider and go that way or the 28mm Rodie, which ever I happen to have with me.

    The 60mm XL is a dream shifting lens, up to 25mm of shift for me and it's also very very easy to get a nodal solution on since it's such a small lens.

    Paul

  7. #257
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    You mean the plot of manufacturer ISO to measured ISO? That is an ISO plot. Don't you need a DR axis?

    But, anyway. if DR stays the same, then you are not actually getting more DR at ISO 100, you are just under exposing and reducing signal. So, ISO 35 is still better. There is no benefit to ISO 100 in terms of image quality.
    Didn't have time to plot a DR axis. I'll describe: DR stays the same in the orange part, but continues to decrease in the blue part, then stays the same in the green part.

    ISO 35 is nothing better than ISO 100. If you use the same shutter speed and the same aperture, you do not get better image quality if you shoot at ISO 35, when compared against shooting at ISO 100.

    On the other hand, ISO 100 would be better than anything above ISO 100.

    Anything below ISO 100 is just extended ISO (marketing hype).

  8. #258
    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
    Once again, you are not answering the question, which was about comparing two rectilinear panos, one made by shifting and one by panning with a longer focal length.

    It was not about comparing cylindrical and rectilinear projections. We already know the difference.
    Don't you already see the soft corners? With a wide rectilinear lens can you expect such softness in the corners?

  9. #259
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Don't you already see the soft corners? With a wide rectilinear lens can you expect such softness in the corners?
    You are still not answering the question.

    Hint 1: you have soft corners in your posted sample, but would need a lens you do not have to make it by shifting.

    Hint 2: the answer is a simple question of trigonometry, something like 1/ cos (theta).

  10. #260
    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
    You are still not answering the question.

    Hint 1: you have soft corners in your posted sample, but would need a lens you do not have to make it by shifting.

    Hint 2: the answer is a simple question of trigonometry, something like 1/ cos (theta).
    I guess I know what you are talking about. I'm probably wrong with the 800mm f5.6 part, and even the 90HR part. I'll test it when I have time. Thanks for pointing out

  11. #261
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Didn't have time to plot a DR axis. I'll describe: DR stays the same in the orange part, but continues to decrease in the blue part, then stays the same in the green part.
    DXO mark shows a decrease in DR from ISO 35 to ISO 100. Perhaps your data is wrong.

    ISO 35 is nothing better than ISO 100. If you use the same shutter speed and the same aperture, you do not get better image quality if you shoot at ISO 35, when compared against shooting at ISO 100.
    The point of ISO is a change in the S/N ratio. Why shoot them at the same exposure? Don't you want better S/N?

    On the other hand, ISO 100 would be better than anything above ISO 100.
    Sure. And below ISO 100 is better too.

    Anything below ISO 100 is just extended ISO (marketing hype).
    No, it is not. Even if your assertion that DR does not change is true (DXO Marks shows something different), you are getting a better S/N ratio at ISO 35. You yourself point out noise in your evaluation of images. Shooting to minimize noise is a valid method. There is more to image quality than DR.

  12. #262
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    DXO mark shows a decrease in DR from ISO 35 to ISO 100. Perhaps your data is wrong.

    The point of ISO is a change in the S/N ratio. Why shoot them at the same exposure? Don't you want better S/N?

    Sure. And below ISO 100 is better too.

    No, it is not. Even if your assertion that DR does not change is true (DXO Marks shows something different), you are getting a better S/N ratio at ISO 35. You yourself point out noise in your evaluation of images. Shooting to minimize noise is a valid method. There is more to image quality than DR.
    dxomark has no plot for any DR below ISO 100. sensorgen has no either.

    DR is bound by two things:

    a) SNR in the shadow, and

    b) highlight details.

    At the same shutter speed and aperture between ISO 35 and ISO 100, you have the same SNR in the shadow, as well as the same amount of highlight details, hence the same DR, and also the same image quality.

    At the same shutter speed and aperture between ISO 100 and ISO 200, you have (about) the same SNR in the shadow, but one stop difference of highlight details, hence less DR for ISO 200.

    Sure, of course, you can shoot at ISO 35 and 40 seconds but I can also shoot at ISO 100 and 40 seconds and achieve the same image quality and DR as yours.

    When I shoot at ISO 100 and 40 seconds, if you shoot at ISO 200 and 40 seconds, you have less highlight details as I have; if you shoot at ISO 200 and 20 seconds, although you have the same amount of highlight details as I have, you have less SNR in shadow, hence inferior image quality.

  13. #263
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,272
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Should I or not?

    Pradeep: "Just wanted to hear from the folks here if they have any advice for me."

    Be careful what you wish for.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #264
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    dxomark has no plot for any DR below ISO 100. sensorgen has no either.

    DR is bound by two things:

    a) SNR in the shadow, and

    b) highlight details.

    At the same shutter speed and aperture between ISO 35 and ISO 100, you have the same SNR in the shadow, as well as the same amount of highlight details, hence the same DR, and also the same image quality.

    At the same shutter speed and aperture between ISO 100 and ISO 200, you have (about) the same SNR in the shadow, but one stop difference of highlight details, hence less DR for ISO 200.

    Sure, of course, you can shoot at ISO 35 and 40 seconds but I can also shoot at ISO 100 and 40 seconds and achieve the same image quality and DR as yours.

    When I shoot at ISO 100 and 40 seconds, if you shoot at ISO 200 and 40 seconds, you have less highlight details as I have; if you shoot at ISO 200 and 20 seconds, although you have the same amount of highlight details as I have, you have less SNR in shadow, hence inferior image quality.
    You are saying is that if I ignore ISO and shoot at any give exposure I end up with the same thing regardless if the ISO is at 100 or 35. But that is not news--if I do the same thing I usually get the same result. But if you shoot one image at ISO 35 and one at ISO 100 you are getting better S/N at the ISO 35 exposure. Kind of the point of ISO. Not everything in photography is just about DR. Exposure and S/N are actually important.

  15. #265
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,925
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    You are saying is that if I ignore ISO and shoot at any give exposure I end up with the same thing regardless if the ISO is at 100 or 35. But that is not news--if I do the same thing I usually get the same result. But if you shoot one image at ISO 35 and one at ISO 100 you are getting better S/N at the ISO 35 exposure. Kind of the point of ISO. Not everything in photography is just about DR. Exposure and S/N are actually important.
    I believe this is the whole misconception of CCD and raising the ISO. As I understand it all you are changing is the metadata there is no signal increase as with CMOS. This an issue the I have brought up many times.

    Wayne Fox over a year ago showed a great test that also pretty much proved this. It was a post on this site but I can't find it anymore.

    The exception to this is sensor plus where you do in effect increase the gain 4:1 by pixel binning. Totally different than increasing gain on a chip as is done with raising the ISO on CMOS.

    I welcome any dealer to please chip in here with any facts that prove me wrong on this as I have been trying get a straight answer for years, is there really a such a thing as higher ISO than base on a CCD or is it just a metadata setting and no gain is being done on the chip.

    As to the look of CCD vs CMOS this is a person by person decision as everyone will see it differently.

    Paul

  16. #266
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    I believe this is the whole misconception of CCD and raising the ISO. As I understand it all you are changing is the metadata there is no signal increase as with CMOS. This an issue the I have brought up many times.

    Wayne Fox over a year ago showed a great test that also pretty much proved this. It was a post on this site but I can't find it anymore.

    The exception to this is sensor plus where you do in effect increase the gain 4:1 by pixel binning. Totally different than increasing gain on a chip as is done with raising the ISO on CMOS.

    I welcome any dealer to please chip in here with any facts that prove me wrong on this as I have been trying get a straight answer for years, is there really a such a thing as higher ISO than base on a CCD or is it just a metadata setting and no gain is being done on the chip.

    As to the look of CCD vs CMOS this is a person by person decision as everyone will see it differently.

    Paul
    Paul, you are talking about a CCD being ISOless. That is true. But this is a different topic about exposure.

    Voidshatter simply believes where the point there is no longer a loss in DR is the native ISO and there is no point in using another value for exposure. I am saying that signal can be a valid reason for using a lower ISO than the point Voidshatter believes to be the "base" ISO. In this case, ISO 35 on the IQ180. The ISO 35 will give greater signal and that has a positive effect on the image as you are increasing signal to noise--noise is not going to be changing, but your signal increases. From the positive responses I see from IQ180 users, it appears they see the benefits as well. ISO 35 in this case is more than a gimmick.

    There are plenty of times I "overexpose" when I know I can increase quality at base ISO. There is no impact on DR, but there is an impact on image quality. I am sure I am not the only photographer that understands the benefits of more signal regardless of impact on DR.

  17. #267
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    You are saying is that if I ignore ISO and shoot at any give exposure I end up with the same thing regardless if the ISO is at 100 or 35. But that is not news--if I do the same thing I usually get the same result.
    You do not get the same result between ISO 100 and anything above ISO 100. ISO 100 is the turning point, hence the lowest native ISO setting. Anything below ISO 100 is useless (extended, marketing hype).
    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    But if you shoot one image at ISO 35 and one at ISO 100 you are getting better S/N at the ISO 35 exposure. Kind of the point of ISO. Not everything in photography is just about DR. Exposure and S/N are actually important.
    Show us proof that ISO 35 gets you better image quality.

  18. #268
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    I believe this is the whole misconception of CCD and raising the ISO. As I understand it all you are changing is the metadata there is no signal increase as with CMOS. This an issue the I have brought up many times.
    Actually there is signal increase (i.e. in the blue part of my plot). Anything above ISO 100 for the IQ280 results in real ISO sensitivity increase, affecting the data recorded in the RAW file.

  19. #269
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Paul, you are talking about a CCD being ISOless. That is true. But this is a different topic about exposure.

    Voidshatter simply believes where the point there is no longer a loss in DR is the native ISO and there is no point in using another value for exposure. I am saying that signal can be a valid reason for using a lower ISO than the point Voidshatter believes to be the "base" ISO. In this case, ISO 35 on the IQ180. The ISO 35 will give greater signal and that has a positive effect on the image as you are increasing signal to noise--noise is not going to be changing, but your signal increases. From the positive responses I see from IQ180 users, it appears they see the benefits as well. ISO 35 in this case is more than a gimmick.

    There are plenty of times I "overexpose" when I know I can increase quality at base ISO. There is no impact on DR, but there is an impact on image quality. I am sure I am not the only photographer that understands the benefits of more signal regardless of impact on DR.
    If your claim is true, then you are saying that anyone who shoots a D810 at ISO 64, D800E at ISO 100, 5D3 at ISO 100 is a fool. They should have been shooting a D810 at ISO 32, D800E at ISO 50, 5D3 at ISO 50, right?

  20. #270
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    is there really a such a thing as higher ISO than base on a CCD or is it just a metadata setting and no gain is being done on the chip.
    It really depends on the camera design. Some CCD cameras use a variable amplifier before the ADC, some simply shift the digital value. With a well designed 16 bits ADC, the second system is not necessarily worse than the first.

    A CCD (and Cmos) pixel is just like a bucket that will fill up with photons till the bucket is full. The full value is typically about 50-60 thousands photons for the sizes used in MF sensors (about 6 µm). With 16 bits, the ADC can count between 0 photon, 1 photon, 2 photons, ... till 65535 photons. So it can count all possible values.

    Doubling the analog gain means that for each photon, we count 2. So the ADC will count: 0, 2, 4, ... 65534, when we have 0, 1, 2, 131068 photons. But we cannot get 131068 photons, the bucket never holds that many, so we lose some possible values.

    Doubling (or quadrupling) the analog gain makes sense if we only have a 12 or 14 bits ADC. A 12-bits ADC can only count up to 4095 values, far less than the 50 thousands a pixel can hold. So, when we have lots of light and the well may fill up, we count the photons by groups of 16 and everything is fine. When we know that we may only get about 16 thousands photons, because it is darker, we may raise the analog gain and count them by groups of 4. If it is very dark and we get at most 3-4 thousands photons, we may want to count them one by one.

    That is how it works when there is no noise (except the noise inherent to the discrete nature of photons), of course. But noise does not fundamentally change the model, it just adds a small random number of photons to each bucket (typically up to 10-20).

  21. #271
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    31
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Paul, you are talking about a CCD being ISOless. That is true. But this is a different topic about exposure.

    Voidshatter simply believes where the point there is no longer a loss in DR is the native ISO and there is no point in using another value for exposure. I am saying that signal can be a valid reason for using a lower ISO than the point Voidshatter believes to be the "base" ISO. In this case, ISO 35 on the IQ180. The ISO 35 will give greater signal and that has a positive effect on the image as you are increasing signal to noise--noise is not going to be changing, but your signal increases. From the positive responses I see from IQ180 users, it appears they see the benefits as well. ISO 35 in this case is more than a gimmick.

    There are plenty of times I "overexpose" when I know I can increase quality at base ISO. There is no impact on DR, but there is an impact on image quality. I am sure I am not the only photographer that understands the benefits of more signal regardless of impact on DR.
    Again with the



    IMO you're both talking around each other on different topics. Void is apparently talking about the CCD being ISO-less. As in the native ISO of the IQ160/180 is ISO 100 (whether that meets ISO 100 spec is up for debate). And anyone using ISO35 is simply doing the ETTR. What you are saying is that you like exposing at ISO 35 because it is cleaner, i.e. ETTR.

    So in actuality both of you are "right". My interpretation is:

    Exposure ISO - Actual ISO - ETTR (stops)
    35 - 100 - +1 2/3
    50 - 100 - +1
    100 - 100 - 0

    So yes you can choose to shoot at any of these ISOs, but what you are doing is "ETTR" which is, from what I read, what you want. Now whether you shoot at ISO35, or ISO 100 with +1 2/3 exposure compensation and then use C1 to reduce exposure, the net effect would be the same (as I understand it)

    Void on the other hand is all about shadow retrieval so he thinks folks who shoot at ISO35 or 50 (when the actual ISO is 100 and all you're doing is "ETTR") are fools. I personally feel that ETTR makes a modicum of sense if one can get the desired shot (no shake, etc) so I am fine shooting at fake ISO35/50 and not having to dial exposure back in software (if indeed that is required) but I am also fine shooting at ISO100 to get higher shutter speeds. Horses for courses.

    That is all. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

  22. #272
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    141
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    I believe this is the whole misconception of CCD and raising the ISO. As I understand it all you are changing is the metadata there is no signal increase as with CMOS. This an issue the I have brought up many times.

    Wayne Fox over a year ago showed a great test that also pretty much proved this. It was a post on this site but I can't find it anymore.

    Paul
    I remember reading it too, but I can't find it either. But it is also mentioned here starting at #19:
    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-f...rocessing.html


    --Steve.

  23. #273
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by steve_cor View Post
    I remember reading it too, but I can't find it either. But it is also mentioned here starting at #19:
    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-f...rocessing.html


    --Steve.
    That was only for the old backs and not even accurate for the P45+.

    The P45+ has two real ISO settings: 50 and 100. Anything above 100 is ISO-less (i.e. the same as 100).

    The IQ280 is ISO-less between 35 and 100, but would really start to increase ISO sensitivity and clip highlight after 100.

  24. #274
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    So, the base ISO on something like a 5D3 is actually say, 400?

  25. #275
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Base native ISO for 5D3 is 100. After 100 the actual sensitivity starts to increase.

  26. #276
    Senior Member Chris Giles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Hello, 645z user here.
    Chris Giles Photography

  27. #277
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Giles View Post
    Hello, 645z user here.
    Huhh....... Typical smug 645z user. :

    Who wants to use a camera that has no faults...... Very boring!
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #278
    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?

    Can we please get back on topic. Your really off course here
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #279
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    Pradeep: "Just wanted to hear from the folks here if they have any advice for me."

    Be careful what you wish for.
    Stephen, I've got a splitting headache right now and I need some :sleep006:

  30. #280
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    By panning you would get spherical information, which would be less than ideal when you stitch a very wide angle of view in the 4:3 or 3:2 format. You would get rather soft corners in the output image if you force a rectilinear stitch out of the spherical information. If you fail to find the correct nodal point you also risk getting parallax.

    On a technical camera such like the Alpa MAX or Arca RM3Di or the Cambo equivalent you can have lateral movements and vertical movements at the same time. This is the easiest way to get parallax-free rectilinear stitching. It is essentially a way to help you enjoy what can be captured by a sensor as large as the whole image circle of the lens. You simply have a sensor with size beyond the current technology
    I'm a little confused by the statements I've highlighted.

    Firstly, with regards perspective, it doesn't matter how you go about capturing a "very wide" field of view - nodal or shift makes no difference whatsoever. It's how you choose to project the captured stitch that is important.

    Secondly, you are always working with "spherical information" when taking photos. If you shift stitch, you're relying on the lens to "force" a rectilinear projection. if you nodal stitch, it's the output from the sitching software that determines the projection. There are of course a multitude of different projections that can be chosen - some of which are actually much more suited to extreme wide-angle shots than rectilinear.

    (Determining the correct nodal point is a no-brainer if you choose to stitch that way, so that's a bit of a red herring.)

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.

  31. #281
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Much as I appreciate the education, all this is bringing the SNR of the thread way down for me.

    The longer I ponder this issue, the more confusing it gets

    The way I see it now, I have three options:

    1. Go for the best image quality: Meaning, keep the IQ180, get a tech cam, Rodenstock or similar lenses and invest the time and energy to master the whole process. I cannot sell the 645DF+ body because then the system is useless for any 'casual' photography. Therefore added cost, probably another $10-15K. In my present position in life, I may be able to come up with the money but not the time.

    2. Stay where I am, almost best IQ: Keep the IQ180 back and the 645DF+ body and lenses I currently own, work harder at getting the most out of it. Not the best solution for me philosophically but probably painless. Added cost: Nil, except for depreciation of present equipment, which applies equally to option 1.

    3. Sell everything, move to a different MF system (I definitely want to stay with MF at present): My own reading suggests the best bang for the buck is the Pentax 645Z right now. Same sensor as the IQ250, better handling and better high ISO performance than the Phase system and at an incredible price. Added cost: nil, if I sell the Phase and buy this, may have quite a bit of money left over. Down side: IQ perhaps not quite as good (need to do more reading on this).

    Thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Anybody here used both Phase and the Pentax? Is the quality that much different? At present the Pentax lens line up is much like the Sony E Mount, very few and expensive.

  32. #282
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    Much as I appreciate the education, all this is bringing the SNR of the thread way down for me.

    The longer I ponder this issue, the more confusing it gets

    The way I see it now, I have three options:

    1. Go for the best image quality: Meaning, keep the IQ180, get a tech cam, Rodenstock or similar lenses and invest the time and energy to master the whole process. I cannot sell the 645DF+ body because then the system is useless for any 'casual' photography. Therefore added cost, probably another $10-15K. In my present position in life, I may be able to come up with the money but not the time.

    2. Stay where I am, almost best IQ: Keep the IQ180 back and the 645DF+ body and lenses I currently own, work harder at getting the most out of it. Not the best solution for me philosophically but probably painless. Added cost: Nil, except for depreciation of present equipment, which applies equally to option 1.

    3. Sell everything, move to a different MF system (I definitely want to stay with MF at present): My own reading suggests the best bang for the buck is the Pentax 645Z right now. Same sensor as the IQ250, better handling and better high ISO performance than the Phase system and at an incredible price. Added cost: nil, if I sell the Phase and buy this, may have quite a bit of money left over. Down side: IQ perhaps not quite as good (need to do more reading on this).

    Thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Anybody here used both Phase and the Pentax? Is the quality that much different? At present the Pentax lens line up is much like the Sony E Mount, very few and expensive.
    I can't comment on Phase vs Pentax, but I can comment on everything else from experience.

    Option 4 -

    Sell the DF and lenses.
    Keep the IQ180
    Buy a tech cam and a Rodie or two and never look back.
    Buy a casual camera for your casual photography (one of those little Fuji things for example).

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #283
    Senior Member Chris Giles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    I can't give you more options but say what I'm doing.

    645z and almost all the lenses for the ultra image quality.
    Canon 5DSr for the ultra wide lenses for the 11-24mm range and Tilt Shift lenses.

    All highly affordable. I still get my medium format look and competitive IQ but have the most flexible combined system around.

    Lots of fun to be had there.
    Chris Giles Photography
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #284
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    I can't comment on Phase vs Pentax, but I can comment on everything else from experience.

    Option 4 -

    Sell the DF and lenses.
    Keep the IQ180
    Buy a tech cam and a Rodie or two and never look back.
    Buy a casual camera for your casual photography (one of those little Fuji things for example).

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.
    Gerald, thank you for your response. I already have the A7R for 'casual' and the RX100 for 'even more casual' use. If I wanted to stay with those I would not have started this thread.

    But I see your point too. In order to get the best image possible (what constitutes that is another debate altogether), a tech camera and a Rodie is the way to go. And yet, as I said earlier, there are many situations where your combo simply does not work.

    Is it too much to ask when you spend $50K on a camera system to do things the way you want it to?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #285
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Giles View Post
    I can't give you more options but say what I'm doing.

    645z and almost all the lenses for the ultra image quality.
    Canon 5DSr for the ultra wide lenses for the 11-24mm range and Tilt Shift lenses.

    All highly affordable. I still get my medium format look and competitive IQ but have the most flexible combined system around.

    Lots of fun to be had there.
    Thanks Chris. Your review of the Pentax is what got me thinking about that as an option.

  36. #286
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    I'm a little confused by the statements I've highlighted.

    Firstly, with regards perspective, it doesn't matter how you go about capturing a "very wide" field of view - nodal or shift makes no difference whatsoever. It's how you choose to project the captured stitch that is important.

    Secondly, you are always working with "spherical information" when taking photos. If you shift stitch, you're relying on the lens to "force" a rectilinear projection. if you nodal stitch, it's the output from the sitching software that determines the projection. There are of course a multitude of different projections that can be chosen - some of which are actually much more suited to extreme wide-angle shots than rectilinear.

    (Determining the correct nodal point is a no-brainer if you choose to stitch that way, so that's a bit of a red herring.)

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.
    Someone else already pointed out that I could be wrong with this. I accept that I might have been wrong. I need to shoot a resolution chart to confirm this when I have my lenses back.

  37. #287
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post

    Is it too much to ask when you spend $50K on a camera system to do things the way you want it to?
    Actually I think that the situation is actually worse when you are at this level. The systems become more focused on particular tasks versus universal tools.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #288
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Back to the topic, I would probably suggest the same as Chris: get two Sony sensors:

    A7R / A7R-II / A9 and Canon TS-E for the wide angle (even the site owner is using this solution, how lame! come on, this is supposed to be a site to top-up faith for technical cameras!)

    Pentax 645Z and *recently released* lenses such like the 28-45 super sharp.

    These are a lot easier to use than a technical camera.

  39. #289
    Senior Member darr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    980
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    Much as I appreciate the education, all this is bringing the SNR of the thread way down for me.

    The longer I ponder this issue, the more confusing it gets

    The way I see it now, I have three options:

    1. Go for the best image quality: Meaning, keep the IQ180, get a tech cam, Rodenstock or similar lenses and invest the time and energy to master the whole process. I cannot sell the 645DF+ body because then the system is useless for any 'casual' photography. Therefore added cost, probably another $10-15K. In my present position in life, I may be able to come up with the money but not the time.

    2. Stay where I am, almost best IQ: Keep the IQ180 back and the 645DF+ body and lenses I currently own, work harder at getting the most out of it. Not the best solution for me philosophically but probably painless. Added cost: Nil, except for depreciation of present equipment, which applies equally to option 1.

    3. Sell everything, move to a different MF system (I definitely want to stay with MF at present): My own reading suggests the best bang for the buck is the Pentax 645Z right now. Same sensor as the IQ250, better handling and better high ISO performance than the Phase system and at an incredible price. Added cost: nil, if I sell the Phase and buy this, may have quite a bit of money left over. Down side: IQ perhaps not quite as good (need to do more reading on this).

    Thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Anybody here used both Phase and the Pentax? Is the quality that much different? At present the Pentax lens line up is much like the Sony E Mount, very few and expensive.
    If MFD is not a good fit, I would move on and stick with what has worked for you in the past. Having gear that is technically beautiful is quite ugly while collecting dust.

    Good luck with your decision.

    Kind regards,
    Darr
    "Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
    Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #290
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post

    3. Sell everything, move to a different MF system (I definitely want to stay with MF at present): My own reading suggests the best bang for the buck is the Pentax 645Z right now.

    Thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Anybody here used both Phase and the Pentax? Is the quality that much different?

    Pradeep

    Based on your intended usage (wildlife and landscapes) and thoughts you've expressed in the thread I would say a Pentax 645Z is a worthy option.

    I used a Pentax 645D for about 1.5 years as my entry into the MF world. Very well built, weather sealed and a perfect layout of controls. I used a lot of Pentax and Hasselblad V lenses (with Fotodiox Pro adapter). I would recommend the following lenses based on experience:

    - Pentax 90mm: Weather sealed and perhaps the only medium format lens with image stabilization. Superb image quality.
    - Hasseblad V 40mm CFE IF
    - Hasselblad V 250mm Superachromat

    In my experience these three lenses have stellar image quality. There are certainly others that you might want to try.

    By all accounts 645Z is an improvement over 645D which is very good to begin with - so you won't be disappointed if you decide to go this route.
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  41. #291
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Back to the topic, I would probably suggest the same as Chris: get two Sony sensors:

    A7R / A7R-II / A9 and Canon TS-E for the wide angle (even the site owner is using this solution, how lame! come on, this is supposed to be a site to top-up faith for technical cameras!)

    Pentax 645Z and *recently released* lenses such like the 28-45 super sharp.

    These are a lot easier to use than a technical camera.
    Thanks Void.

    I went one step further. I have the A7R and bought the Nikon 14-24 f2.8, fitted a Nikon-Canon adapter to it and then a Canon-Sony adapter (metabones)on top of that and plugged it into the A7R. Great pictures of the northern lights in Iceland. I've used my Leica 50 Summilux on the A7R too, along with many of the Canon lenses, including the big 600 MkII. All work well, with limitations of sorts of course.

    While everyone here waxes eloquent on the merits of the tech camera with the CCD backs (I do not deny the ultimate quality of such a combo), people do not accept the fact that it is a very limiting set up, perfect for when you have good light and ample time. If I had a super expensive digital back, I would also want it to be able to do night skies, cityscapes at night, pre-dawn landscapes. I would also occasionally want to be able to take pictures of my family without having to pose them while I fiddled with the focus/LCC etc.

    And before people say I should use a 'casual camera' for family portraits, I would suggest that if you can take pictures of models with the IQ180, why not aspire for the same quality for your own family? Can't do that with a tech camera.

  42. #292
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,925
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    Much as I appreciate the education, all this is bringing the SNR of the thread way down for me.

    The longer I ponder this issue, the more confusing it gets

    The way I see it now, I have three options:

    1. Go for the best image quality: Meaning, keep the IQ180, get a tech cam, Rodenstock or similar lenses and invest the time and energy to master the whole process. I cannot sell the 645DF+ body because then the system is useless for any 'casual' photography. Therefore added cost, probably another $10-15K. In my present position in life, I may be able to come up with the money but not the time.

    2. Stay where I am, almost best IQ: Keep the IQ180 back and the 645DF+ body and lenses I currently own, work harder at getting the most out of it. Not the best solution for me philosophically but probably painless. Added cost: Nil, except for depreciation of present equipment, which applies equally to option 1.

    3. Sell everything, move to a different MF system (I definitely want to stay with MF at present): My own reading suggests the best bang for the buck is the Pentax 645Z right now. Same sensor as the IQ250, better handling and better high ISO performance than the Phase system and at an incredible price. Added cost: nil, if I sell the Phase and buy this, may have quite a bit of money left over. Down side: IQ perhaps not quite as good (need to do more reading on this).

    Thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Anybody here used both Phase and the Pentax? Is the quality that much different? At present the Pentax lens line up is much like the Sony E Mount, very few and expensive.
    Lot of good advice has been given here, so much you may need to back a way for a day or two.

    My thoughts on this last post:

    1. Find a dealer, and work with them, especially if you are interested in a tech solution
    2. Read Don's post, on tech cameras, in this forum. The tech solution is totally different than what you are doing now. And unless you move to a CMOS back at the same time, the workflow will be possibly more than you want to take on.
    3. Don't forget, you own a 180. This is still the top end back from Phase and really anyone else.
    4. Hopefully if you end up not deciding to keep the 180, you can work with a dealer that can help you move to another back/camera.
    5. If you sell the 180 on the web, I would for sure be careful.
    6. Sorry you are not closer to Arkansas, I would love to meet you and show you my setup, Arca and you could use your back and see the workflow and take the images back to consider. If you get down this way, look me up as I can easily take some time to show you the tech (Arca) solution. PM me if you need my contact info, but it's on my website also.
    7. Consider the CI Lake Tahoe event in April. There will be a lot of tech gear there, and at least 1 or 2 CMOS backs.
    8. As nice as the Pentax Z sounds, it's not for me, as there are no movements, and no service center in the US. At least for now. For some this not a big deal, but for me it is. Everyone handles the stress of a repair differently.

    I wish you the best on the decision, but sitting on a IQ180 for now may be the best decision. Phase will be bring out new backs either this year or next. Your 180 will hold the best resale value of any Phase back out there IMO.

    Sincerely
    Paul

  43. #293
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Before I dumped my IQ260 CCD back I asked myself the following questions:

    Do I shoot portrait in studio? Hell no. CCD is best for this, but no I don't shoot these.

    Do I shoot wildlife or wedding? No, and CCD would be not suitable for these.

    Do I shoot landscape / cityscape? Yes. What do I shoot? The milky way, the sunset and the sunrise (backlight). Nothing else. Do I benefit from CCD? No. Do I get better image quality than a D800E? Hell no. For 3 stops of less DR, I get alignment issues for bracketing. I get tiling issues from the CCD. I get limitation from the darkframe NR. The very limited Live View also made me miss great moments. Forget about the milky way.

    Do I shoot interior? Probably, but a Canon 17 TS-E or 11-24 should serve better.

    Is there any good to keep the IQ260 collecting dust? A future trade-in is possible should there be a fullframe CMOS back, but I see it depreciating at a speed no slower than other digital backs. It would be more worthwhile to find something else that I can actually use while I wait for a possible fullframe CMOS back, and produce something better than the D800E for my use cases.

    These pretty much concluded the inevitable fate of my IQ260 getting dumped. It was a hard decision. Sunk cost had been holding me back from making a rational decision because I had been prone to loss aversion and framing effects for months.

    After all, you would have to look forward anyway. Determine your use cases. Find what's best for you and move on.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #294
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Should I or not?

    I don't know any tech cam users who "do not accept the fact that it is a very limiting setup". I sure find it a limiting setup. I also like it, but have other systems for other needs.

    --Matt
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #295
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    ...

    Is it too much to ask when you spend $50K on a camera system to do things the way you want it to?
    I think your expectations are unrealistic.

    You seem desirous of the best image quality in every situation with a rather specialized $50K+ MFDB system. A jack of all trades and master of none is not the realm here. In other words, you can buy a $100K sports car but it still won't haul trash to the dump like a $20K beat up pickup truck.

    Quite frankly, it doesn't matter what the image quality potential is of your system if you have difficulty extracting that potential and you simply don't enjoy using it either.

    I'd look towards something that you enjoy using----that makes you want to take the camera system out and use it. I'm just shaking my head at where this thread has gone with all its psuedo-academic (emphasis on pseudo) cerebral vomiting. If you're happy reading the DxO charts, stay at home read it online, sell all your cameras, save some $ and call it a day.

    Maybe the easiest enjoyable combination is your A7r and a Pentax 645z. Maybe a cute little Alpa TC and your IQ180. I dunno. I do know that I'd want something that made me happy regardless of system or format.

    I think if I were in your quandary and actually read all the psuedo-cerebral DxO-it-was-on-the-internet-so-must-be-better-than-taking-actual-photos comments, I would just buy a boat.

    ken

  46. #296
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul2660 View Post
    Lot of good advice has been given here, so much you may need to back a way for a day or two.

    My thoughts on this last post:

    1. Find a dealer, and work with them, especially if you are interested in a tech solution
    2. Read Don's post, on tech cameras, in this forum. The tech solution is totally different than what you are doing now. And unless you move to a CMOS back at the same time, the workflow will be possibly more than you want to take on.
    3. Don't forget, you own a 180. This is still the top end back from Phase and really anyone else.
    4. Hopefully if you end up not deciding to keep the 180, you can work with a dealer that can help you move to another back/camera.
    5. If you sell the 180 on the web, I would for sure be careful.
    6. Sorry you are not closer to Arkansas, I would love to meet you and show you my setup, Arca and you could use your back and see the workflow and take the images back to consider. If you get down this way, look me up as I can easily take some time to show you the tech (Arca) solution. PM me if you need my contact info, but it's on my website also.
    7. Consider the CI Lake Tahoe event in April. There will be a lot of tech gear there, and at least 1 or 2 CMOS backs.
    8. As nice as the Pentax Z sounds, it's not for me, as there are no movements, and no service center in the US. At least for now. For some this not a big deal, but for me it is. Everyone handles the stress of a repair differently.

    I wish you the best on the decision, but sitting on a IQ180 for now may be the best decision. Phase will be bring out new backs either this year or next. Your 180 will hold the best resale value of any Phase back out there IMO.

    Sincerely
    Paul
    Paul thank you. It is my day off so I am here more than perhaps I should be

    I am not inclined to go the dealer route for reasons mentioned before. They will only try to sell you what they carry (I don't blame them). I am also not happy with what I believe to be somewhat misleading representation of the upgrade pathway on initial purchase. But that's all history.

    I am not into shifting and movements. I had the Canon 24TSE MkII and sold it a couple of years ago, did not use it enough to justify keeping it.

    I really appreciate your offer. Perhaps when I have the time, a small tech camera and a digital back would be the order of the day. Until then it will have to be a more versatile solution.

  47. #297
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    North Sweden
    Posts
    1,401
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Meh, this is such a weird thread, go and try some stuff and pick whatever you like, people can only comment on what suits themselves.

    For what it's worth, within a month of owning a Leica S I had sold a D800, D800E, lots of zeiss glass and a RX1, for me the difference in handling and output has put the S a million miles from anything I have shot before, most importantly I just love walking around with it, shooting everything from candid family stuff to commercial work, it makes me want to use it. Does it do everything, nope, never had a camera that did, do I care, nope, it does what I want it to do perfectly, therefore it's the perfect solution for me and me alone, it may be for other people but I'm not much bothered about that.

    Just try stuff, keeping a camera you don't use because you will lose money on it is daft, get on with it and buy something you will enjoy using, life's too short and it's photography not life and death! I will say that I have run 2 workshops recently with owners of the 645z, neither stood up to the conditions here, both lost the use of the top screen in low temperatures and both owners picked up the S and were blown away, does that mean they will change? I wouldn't have thought so, should they? Not if it doesn't suit them, is the Z for me? Not even a little bit, just looking through any viewfinder after the S is a disappointment. What I'm saying here is find something for you, try stuff, pick something that will fire your creativity, I honestly don't think there is a camera available today that won't produce great results if you point it at something that interests you. The 180 isn't working for you so get rid.

    Just my opinion of course!

    Mat
    http://matrichardson.com/
    Workshops for 2018! http://www.matrichardson.com/workshops
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #298
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    I think your expectations are unrealistic.

    You seem desirous of the best image quality in every situation with a rather specialized $50K+ MFDB system. A jack of all trades and master of none is not the realm here. In other words, you can buy a $100K sports car but it still won't haul trash to the dump like a $20K beat up pickup truck.

    Quite frankly, it doesn't matter what the image quality potential is of your system if you have difficulty extracting that potential and you simply don't enjoy using it either.
    You may be right, Ken, my expectations are unrealistic but then I was sold the system as a 'panacea' of sorts. Heck, existing users (all having bought into the hype) were saying you can do 'everything' with it, the dealer at the time agreed with all of that too. My naivete I know and I am to blame. But then I found out that the reality is quite sobering. One guy said he routinely took images at ISO800 from moving boats without any problems. Another guy said you tell the difference in an 8X10 print. Somebody else said the DR was the best of any camera out there. I bought into it of course. We all hear what we want to hear really.


    Maybe the easiest enjoyable combination is your A7r and a Pentax 645z. Maybe a cute little Alpa TC and your IQ180. I dunno.
    I cannot keep both the Pentax and the IQ180, that would be too much especially given I also need my Canon stuff for wildlife too.

    I do know that I'd want something that made me happy regardless of system or format.
    Agree completely. I would also like a system that is being used frequently instead of only every couple of months under specific conditions.

  49. #299
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pradeep View Post
    Much as I appreciate the education, all this is bringing the SNR of the thread way down for me.

    The longer I ponder this issue, the more confusing it gets

    The way I see it now, I have three options:

    1. Go for the best image quality: Meaning, keep the IQ180, get a tech cam, Rodenstock or similar lenses and invest the time and energy to master the whole process. I cannot sell the 645DF+ body because then the system is useless for any 'casual' photography. Therefore added cost, probably another $10-15K. In my present position in life, I may be able to come up with the money but not the time.

    2. Stay where I am, almost best IQ: Keep the IQ180 back and the 645DF+ body and lenses I currently own, work harder at getting the most out of it. Not the best solution for me philosophically but probably painless. Added cost: Nil, except for depreciation of present equipment, which applies equally to option 1.

    3. Sell everything, move to a different MF system (I definitely want to stay with MF at present): My own reading suggests the best bang for the buck is the Pentax 645Z right now. Same sensor as the IQ250, better handling and better high ISO performance than the Phase system and at an incredible price. Added cost: nil, if I sell the Phase and buy this, may have quite a bit of money left over. Down side: IQ perhaps not quite as good (need to do more reading on this).

    Thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Anybody here used both Phase and the Pentax? Is the quality that much different? At present the Pentax lens line up is much like the Sony E Mount, very few and expensive.
    1: I don't agree that tech cams are synonyms of "best image quality". I know one reads otherwise on internet forum, I also know that they have specific advantages because one can use movements and I know that their lenses are pretty good. But I also noted the lenses you use and got some ideas about your approach and it would seem that a tech cam would not be a good choice in your case.

    2: You can keep your present camera, but you would have to use it differently or you would simply get more of the same. I don't know how you could do that, you would have to find out yourself. Maybe meeting other users with the same camera would help, you could see how they use their camera.

    3: Any camera with the 50 mpix Sony sensor would have 30 mpix less than your present camera. That is the same difference than between a 40" and a 50" print.
    3b: There are plenty of lenses for the Pentax. You can use older lenses.
    3c: As to lenses and IQ, it depends a lot on your practice. All MF lenses are excellent if you use them at f/8-f/11. Do you do that or do you want to use limited depth of field? In the later case, there are indeed differences.

  50. #300
    Workshop Member Bryan Stephens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    463
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I or not?

    Voidshatter. I have owned and shot the P45+, IQ140, IQ180, and now the IQ260, with both Rodenstock and Schneider lenses on my Cambo. I have also owned and shot the D800, D800e and the D810 along with numerous Zeiss lenses and Nikon G lenses.

    The images that I have obtained with both systems are very good in their own right, but there is no comparison between the images that I have captured with the IQ backs compared to those of the Nikon bodies when I print them in larger scale.

    If you do not print large, then the Nikons are absolutely fine, but I like to print my images 36" or longer on the long side, so the extra detail I get from the IQ backs enables me to do just that, where when I have tried with the Nikon images they look good, but they are missing the extreme detail I achieve with my Tech cam.

    However, do I think the difference in the price points is equal to the difference in the image quality? It is an objective question, but in my opinion, and for what I do with the cameras, no. I also prefer the workflow of using the tech cam as well. As I age, I am sure this will change.
    Bryan

    “You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” — Ansel Adams

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
  •