The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Should I or not?

Pradeep

Member
Yes, I am thinking of abandoning hope.

Exciting though my brief journey into the MF world has been, it has been very unproductive. In the last year and a half since I bought the IQ180 I've only shot about 1000 images compared to around 50,000 with my Canon gear in the same period. There are many reasons, perhaps the inability to shoot at ISO over 200 (even at that I feel there is too much noise), very old camera to go with it, lack of live view, need for a tripod most of the time, etc. I did spend a lot of time trying to get the most out of it but it has not been easy. I realized before I bought it that there would be challenges but I did not realize it would be that difficult. My fault, yes.

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.

So I soldiered on, hoping I would be able to get more use out of my present system. Even tried out the 250mm SK LS prime, bought another lens (75-150). Paid $750 for repair of the shutter release mechanism on the camera body.

Sadly, I have still not been able to use it despite having traveled to South Africa and having done local tours in the US. The gear cannot replace DSLRs (at least not right now) and to carry both systems into the field is just too much.

Which brings me to the present. Given my experience with the Sony A7R, the news of the Canon 5DS/R and my existing multiple Canon bodies, is it worth it for me to hang on the MF system or should I cut my losses and sell it all?

I am primarily a landscape and wildlife photographer, do not make a living from it and do not do portraits or studio work - other than family pictures now and then. While the results from the MF are stunning and the large prints I've made truly 'immersive' as they say, I am not sure that is enough to carry on with the system. I am not going to be able to get into the esoteric world of tech cameras at all, so further 'improvement' in my images is very unlikely.

I am not sure if I should wait for a CMOS version of the IQ180 - what if the trade-in is equally expensive? The new camera body rumored to come out in April will be no less than $5000 if that. Granted the lenses are great and would hold value for me, but that's about it.

Has anybody been in a similar situation. Are others thinking of jumping ship?

It is not just about the money (who am I kidding!), it is the whole experience I guess that has been 'difficult'. In my quest for the ultimate in image quality I may have indeed bitten off more than I can chew. I guess it is buyer's remorse a year later, I don't know.

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

Thanks.
 

jagsiva

Active member
It would all depend on what you're looking for. In my case, when I think of how shot with Canon/Nikon, now I shoot far fewer frames, but I have far more keepers, and I remember each one on that list of keepers. There is a lot more contemplation of images I want to capture even before I get to the location.

If your intent was to replace a DSLR with an IQ180/DF, you will find severe limitations. But for specific areas of your interest, say landscape, I think you can get much better results.

For me, a tech cam, makes all the difference for what I am shooting. The difference between the DF and and a modern high-MP DSLR is not worth the hassle. I'm sure pro fashion photographers will disagree and their needs are entirely different.

I was in Arizona/Utah in the fall, lugged my Nikon kit and used it once for about 40seconds. The rest of the time was the IQ180/Arca. I was in Death Valley last month and just took my MF kit.

I find that I am much slower, much more relaxed, and far more focused in what I am doing. This also has the benefit of enjoying the location I'm at rather than just machine gunning 300 shots at each spot.

This may all sound very slow, but I'm now at a point where when I am with others using DSLRs or Mirrorless cameras, I am usually the first one done. Mostly because, I have already planned on what I want from the location. I go, plop down my tripod, camera, mount a lens, Take a handful of shots, review them and done.

I have a lot of Nikon and Sony A7r bits as well, but I would not say it is often when I cross-use these platforms.
 
Last edited:

Paul2660

Well-known member
You just asked the question I have asked about 10 times in the past 2 years.

You are correct that Phase One has chosen to make the path, financially impossible. If you have a P45+, you will get the same trade in for a 150/250 as your 180, actually you will get more last time I checked Phase was still giving 24K or so.

I know all the dealers will come in with all the great news about "team Phase One" and the reasons we can't get there. BS, Phase One could easily do it. They are private and can set the price anywhere they want. They for some reason don't want to and for sure they don't have to. Or the CCD backs are really massively over priced and Phase knows this and doesn't want them back, sure hope this is not the case.

Here are some thoughts:

1. you have some excellent lenses, Phase will coming out with a new camera body this year, and I would sure wait.
2. There should be a full frame CMOS in 2016, and maybe then Phase One will wake up and offer a decent trade in, maybe they won't as I guess the lines are still quite long to buy their backs. History says they will, but it's anyone's guess.
3. Your 180 is still currently the largest MP camera around in practical use, if you want to move, sell it openly as you will get a more realistic price. They do sell, but I realize it's a big amount of cash changing hands, so do your homework on the buyer.

I know I often come across as a Phase hater, I am not. I use the IQ260 whenever the conditions will allow it. I strongly feel that up to the 260 Phase One fully represented their products truthfully and honestly. The 260 was an exception as it will never get close to 1 hour with a usable image. But no one forced me, I went willingly. The images that can be captured with a IQ260 in the right conditions, (good light) are wonderful files and I love to work with them. I just feel that the 250 offers a more workable all round back for my needs and like you I feel that a trade in should be offered that is not such a financial bath.

Paul
 

jlm

Workshop Member
i would comment that shooting "only" 1000 shots with the MF, compared to 50,000 with the canon is a plus for MF
 

mmbma

Active member
the iq180, when used to its full potential, could be the last MF digital back you'll need in your lifetime. Don't focus on the newest and latest gear, least of all in medium format. IQ180 delivers some of the best commercial and professional work in the world... if there's a picture you can't take with the IQ180, then a IQ250 won't help you either.

If you want High iso, buy a canon 5ds on the side and save some money.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I guess I would ask why you are not using it? What makes it less attractive? Sometime a camera does not click--no pun intended.

Perhaps you need something closer to your Canon, like the Pentax 645Z. Perhaps your Canon is it and maybe the new 50MP body will be your answer.

The chase for image quality is seductive. How can we not be in love with the richness in our art? But if you are not happy and not actually making pictures, what is the point of technical quality? The photographs you take with an iPhone will always be better than the pictures you don't take with your IQ180. (Yes, I think everyone has bought a high-quality system that did not work out for them, or they will.)
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
the iq180, when used to its full potential, could be the last MF digital back you'll need in your lifetime. Don't focus on the newest and latest gear, least of all in medium format. IQ180 delivers some of the best commercial and professional work in the world... if there's a picture you can't take with the IQ180, then a IQ250 won't help you either.

If you want High iso, buy a canon 5ds on the side and save some money.
In world where everything stood perfectly still I might agree with you, but that's not the case. There are a lot of situations where the base iso of the 180 can't get the job done, in a outdoor landscape situation as you can't get a fast enough shutter speed and there is no such thing as high iso on any of the CCD backs.

Paul
 
if there's a picture you can't take with the IQ180, then a IQ250 won't help you either.
This is so untrue. In the long exposure territory even the IQ260 can easily outperform the IQ180. For high contrast scenes (which requires a single exposure for high dynamic range) the IQ250 can overwhelm the IQ180 even if you try to down-sample the IQ180 to the same number of pixels. You just have to admit how fantastic the Sony CMOS sensors are.





 

jagsiva

Active member
Those look just horrid. Not sure what other settings were used, but 4 mins with the 280 is well outside the 2 minute exposure limit.

having said that, hands down the CMOS backs are better at noise and LV. The CCD backs, do other things like tech cam and resolution better for now. I also don't think the P1 upgrade policy has been what was "expected" over the last couple of generations of backs. They have also done a number things that are quite annoying like not introducing features in older backs available in newer ones - some of these would not be that difficult to implement; and like paul mentioned, the PR has been working a little overtime. I ended up returning an IQ260 Achromatic back after a disappointingly long wait.

Nonetheless, for what I do, the IQ180/280 and Rodie lenses provide the best out there. So some of these posts on noise, long-exposures etc. are a little out there and I'm not sure I see the basis for them in real-world shooting situations. As far as long-exposure and noise go, my experience with the CCD backs is not consistent with what is shown above.

For example, I dug up a file that had some deep shadows and was poorly exposed. I was setting up and needed to check focus hence the frame. You can see four versions of the frame below, with an exposure of 90seconds. The adjustments are what I see above, +2 stops, HDR sliders maxed, noise correction at default:

1. Unedited
2. With LCC (LCC is already lifting up the exposure)
3. Adjusted +2 stops, HDR slides at max, pixel noise moved from 50-80 - Those white things are star trails, not noise.
4. 100% of adjusted file




 
As far as long-exposure and noise go, my experience with the CCD backs is not consistent with what is shown above.
Some 2 cents:

a) You have a good copy of the 80 MP Dalsa sensor.

b) You did not heat up the back when you took the picture (isn't it cold and dry during night in desert?) - I always used LiveView to compose and focus so I heat up the back. Temperature and humidity play important roles determining the shadow noise.

c) Check the subsequent exposures (where the back should have built up heat) - do you still have good shadow recoverability?

d) Compare it side by side against a D800E / A7R.

My D800E can shoot the trail of the sun in a single exposure (can you do that with a CCD?):





 

jagsiva

Active member
Not sure there is such a range in sample variations in sensors at this level, but cannot comment either way. As for heating up the back, this was my 6 or 7th shot, as I was setting up the 23HR first. It was cool, but the back was certainly not cold. In your tests, were you using Zero Latency by any chance?

I don't need to compare these shots with the A7R or D800 or D800E. I have all those bodies, so you might say I am equally vested in any of the options. However, the images I wanted could not have been captured (barring some extreme frankencamera contraption) by either when compared to the kit I had on hand - IQ180/Rm3Di.

Again, we are into exploring theoretical limits. All I was saying is that the CCD backs are not as bad as what was being shown in these images.

If you test extremes, I'm sure you can make a case for any camera. An iPhone is absolutely the best if I also want to FaceTime my kids from the same device.

These comparisons and tests need to be in the context of the intended use cases and work-flow. For example, if one needs to push exposure by 4 stops globally, then the iA mode on an A6000 might work best -- I have never had the need for this. Another example, I think the A7S is better in shadow noise and shadow recovery than the IQ250, but there are several other reasons why one would choose to use the IQ250, and I doubt it is common place for someone to cross-shop these for the same intended use.

"My D800E can shoot the trail of the sun in a single exposure (can you do that with a CCD?):"

Really? Who cares...my D800E can do the same, my A7R can do it a little better, and my IQ180 sucks at it, but what's the point? Knowing the limits and strengths of each system and picking the right one for the job, surely's got to trump anything else.
 
I don't need to compare these shots with the A7R or D800 or D800E. I have all those bodies, so you might say I am equally vested in any of the options. However, the images I wanted could not have been captured (barring some extreme frankencamera contraption) by either when compared to the kit I had on hand - IQ180/Rm3Di.
I assume that you are utilizing the tilting capability on the Arca-Swiss tech-cam for the 23HR (which can't be done by Alpa or Cambo), which is wider than the Canon 17mm TS-E on an A7R for single exposure purposes? In this case then yes your setup is one of a kind and there is no need to compare. But for the scene you shoot I can easily get more number of pixels and wider angle of view than you can with a Canon 17mm TS-E and a Canon 5DSR (120 MP, 11mm equivalent). Alternatively, a Canon 24mm TS-E and a Canon 5DSR can do 120 MP and 15mm equivalent (more number of pixels than yours, same angle of view).

Another example, I think the A7S is better in shadow noise and shadow recovery than the IQ250, but there are several other reasons why one would choose to use the IQ250, and I doubt it is common place for someone to cross-shop these for the same intended use.

"My D800E can shoot the trail of the sun in a single exposure (can you do that with a CCD?):"

Really? Who cares...my D800E can do the same, my A7R can do it a little better, and my IQ180 sucks at it, but what's the point? Knowing the limits and strengths of each system and picking the right one for the job, surely's got to trump anything else.
I'm just showing you why the IQ180/IQ280 has inferior dynamic range when compared against the D800E's Sony IMX094 sensor (the IQ250 is based on the same/similar tech as of the IMX094 sensor but just a tad larger in size). No, the A7S won't have better control of shadow noise. Currently the IQ250/D800E/D810/A7R/645Z etc have the best dynamic range.



 
Last edited:

Dogs857

New member
Void sure does love his CMOS, but I think he fails to realise not everyone pixel peeps, shoots into the sun and wants everything to look HDR.

It does seem Phase has its head firmly planted somewhere it shouldn't when it comes to upgrading their customers backs. I believe that a lot of people had the same issues trying to cross from a 180 to a 260. It's kind of like saying once you buy a GSXR-1000 you can never trade it in on a cruiser because you just want to slow down a bit.

I owned a 180 and had to sell. I bought a D810 and felt let down. I sold everything (and my soul) to get back into MF because I never felt so connected to my photography as I did using a tech camera with a MF back. Sure there is a bit less DR (not an issue), high ISO is terrible (I shoot landscapes exclusively so this is no concern at all) no Live View (not a huge issue as I have a ground glass) and is not fast to shoot at all. I love it and couldn't consider going back to 35mm again. But that is me, and what drives my passion could mean stuff all to someone else.

My suggestion would be to only use your MF gear for the next 3 months, no DSLR at all. Really give the MF a good shake. Find out what you like, what you hate, whether it will be a massive problem for you or not. If the passion and enthusiasm for using the gear is not there then its time to get something that makes you want to get out shooting. You can argue about technical data till the cows come home, but shooting is a very personal thing.

By then Phase may have a new camera out, this could be a game changer for you. But if you are unhappy with ISO200 limitations a new camera won't help that.
 

malmac

Member
I have an IQ180 which I use for landscape photography as a personal passion - not commercial.

It is not really that clever to show that the IQ180 has short comings - We do have to look at where a person sits in terms of ownership. There are those who own an IQ180/IQ 280/160/140 what ever and there are those who don't. Obviously those who don't need to be aware of the CCD back short comings if they are thinking of buying into MFD - and for this reason the work Void has been posting is much appreciated.

But for those of us who paid a large amount of money when these CCD backs came out - we need to decide - do we stick at it or do we bail out.

I have decided to stay with the IQ180 and I will buy a new 5Ds or r in due course which I will use for the things an IQCMOS back does so much better than my IQ180.

I doubt I will now buy a new Phase camera body (that time has passed) even if one ever comes out - if my DF dies I will probably just buy another 2nd hand body and keep shooting till my IQ180 back dies.

If the results from a new Canon 50MP camera is really disappointing - I may be tempted to buy a Rodenstock HR40 for my Cambo tech cam (which currently has no lens) - time will tell.


Mal
 

Dogs857

New member
Agreed

I may not share Voids enthusiasm but he has done a great job for those wishing to research the new CMOS backs.

As for the OP you hinted a few times that you think CMOS will improve your MF experience. Can you elaborate on that at all?? It may be that something you think is a problem can be fixed or at least have a decent workaround (Wayne Fox's Live View trick is one that comes to mind). If you are after a fast operating, easily portable option then you may be waiting a while in MF.

I do not envy you. It's a hard decision whichever way you go.
 

richardman

Well-known member
The true "Dark Side" is to of course move to 4x5 or 8x10 :) I shot just over 260 sheets (50% color 50% B&W), did my own processing so that's still less than $1000. A V750 gets me 1Gig scan...

Sorry :)
 
Void sure does love his CMOS, but I think he fails to realise not everyone pixel peeps, shoots into the sun and wants everything to look HDR.
I don't mean to force everyone to shoot HDR, but what could be too wrong to have the flexibility to handle high contrast scenes, despite the fact that the most valuable landscape shots are indeed sunrise and sunset?

Imagine what you can do when you have a camera with excellent dynamic range. Some random pics from others grab'ed from the internet (all shot with IMX094 sensors, same/similary IQ250 tech, better dynamic range than any other current sensors including IQ280 or A7S):

Forest Symphony by Yan L (D800E): https://500px.com/photo/67358143/


Brick red Albi, Phoenix in the Sky by Xi Chen (D800): https://500px.com/photo/54476936/


GalacticDance by Jay Daley (D810): https://500px.com/photo/82387683/


NationalDay fireworks by Senthil Kumar Damodaran (A7R): https://500px.com/photo/79475455/


Lightof the Earth by Banan Tarr (D800): https://500px.com/photo/80581445/


TheShadows and the Sun by Max Rive(D800E): https://500px.com/photo/86401691/


TheDictator by Max Rive (D800E): https://500px.com/photo/83999949/
 
Last edited:

Dogs857

New member
Void

Firstly I don't know whether you should be posting other peoples photos without permission.
Secondly some of these are obvious HDR images that can be done with any sensor
Thirdly I had a sony sensor and didn't like it

It's not for everyone, this is the bit you don't seem to understand. I have never said that you are wrong for liking the new CMOS from Sony, but you continually insinuate that everyone else is for not jumping onboard.
 
Firstly I don't know whether you should be posting other peoples photos without permission.
Then tell them. If any author is upset I'll remove the corresponding picture.
Secondly some of these are obvious HDR images that can be done with any sensor
I've spent long enough conversations why bracketing wouldn't always work (for me at least).
Thirdly I had a sony sensor and didn't like it

It's not for everyone, this is the bit you don't seem to understand. I have never said that you are wrong for liking the new CMOS from Sony, but you continually insinuate that everyone else is for not jumping onboard.
I know it's not for everyone, at least not for you, but forum is a place to allow free and open speaks of different opinions. You could also share why you dislike Sony sensors. :thumbs:
 

thrice

Active member
I'll comment that the last two shots are by Max Rive. Since he hasn't been credited in the posting and didn't watermark his images.
 
Top