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?

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
One very quick comment regarding tech cameras - they are all much the same, meaning a piece of metal with a digital back on one end and a lens on the other. Some cost more than others and some less. Some offer more bells and whistles but at a higher cost. In the end there really isn't a bad tech camera some like a particular brand over another but in the end it'll be the digital back and lens that will either make it or break it. One other comment - lenses for tech cameras can be/are very expensive so be prepared for sticker shock however they are well worth their value.
:thumbs: What Don said.

All of the current crop of technical cameras are excellent and you already have pretty much the ultimate landscape digital back in terms of colour, resolution and tonality with your IQ180.
 

gazwas

Active member
OK, I'll play devils advocate here -

Looking at your earlier posts and complaints about your frustrations with MFD, I would personally not recommend going down the tech camera route. Tech cameras, particularly with the IQ180 is plagued with shooting limitations, potential IQ issues and a whole load of extra work involved with getting the max out of the system. This is then all topped off with a massive increase in camera, lens and focus mount cost and I personally feel if you are looking at investing yet more it might be better spent as Void has been suggesting on the IQ250 upgrade to a more universal back than an even more frustrating and subject limiting tech camera with your current IQ180.
 
Last edited:

danlindberg

Well-known member
:thumbs: What Don said.

All of the current crop of technical cameras are excellent and you already have pretty much the ultimate landscape digital back in terms of colour, resolution and tonality with your IQ180.
+1
Mate your IQ180 with an Alpa TC and SK60 and you have an amazingly potent landscape cam in the lightest and tiniest package possible! It would be the Leica M in medium format for size.
Focus and exposure guesstimation, zero latency, level the cam on tripod and it does not get easier than that! (also easy to have a library with LCC's with no movements for safety) If you have deep shadows, bracket a couple of shots and move on.
Its pure, not complicated and truly stunning files with shimmed back and adjusted lens!
 

jerome_m

Member
OK everyone, perhaps a major thread shift is in order. You lot have rejuvenated me and I am so glad I started this topic. Self doubts are slowly but surely dissipating :)

So, the quest for the ultimate in IQ for landscapes (well, that's why I bought the darn thing in the first place) requires a different approach - slow, deliberate, methodical, and if low-light, use a tripod always.

Accepted. Would somebody tell me, what is the best (or easiest) way to improve from the ancient DF+ body? Does anybody know anything more about the rumored body upgrade from P1? Is there another body I can put the IQ180 back on, short of a tech camera?

If I were to invest more time and go the tech camera route, what are my options? What lenses, what body, and is there a website that can point me in the right direction? As I said, it is primarily for landscapes, so wide angle (probably 50mm and under for the FF back). I am not going to jump into this without some serious thinking but maybe it is time to start the process.

I am really wary of dealers and would rather avoid asking them - my experience in general with dealers (from automotive to cameras) is that they will use every argument to convince you that their product is the best. I don't blame them, they need to make a living and have convinced themselves that indeed such is the case.
Unfortunately, forum threads tend to sound a bit like dealer's sales pitch lately.

Could you please tell me what is wrong with your DF+ body, SK 80mm 2.8 LS and 45mm Phase f2.8? If I have no idea what points you don't like about these, I can't tell you if another camera would be improved on these particular points.

At the moment, all we know is that:
-high iso is poor (not a body problem, may be improved by changing your processing)
-the system is too slow to set up (won't be improved by a technical cam, maybe you could use a monopod for those times when you have to be quick? - I do, maybe you could do the dark frames in advance or dispense with them)
-AF is not as advanced as on DLSRs (indeed, no solution to that, but AF should be very accurate, is it?)
-you like the lenses and the sharpness you get from large prints (so that part will not be improved by a new camera or lens)
-you don't like the distortion on the lenses (doesn't capture one correct that automatically?).

You gave us actually very, very little info on your practice, the reasons you are dissatisfied or the kind of landscape pictures you like to take. There is not much we can do with your questions. OTOH, you have one of the best system on the market, many of the (landscape) photographers who use it are ecstatic about it. Why are they pleased when you are not?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
OK, I'll play devils advocate here -

Looking at your earlier posts and complaints about your frustrations with MFD, I would personally not recommend going down the tech camera route. Tech cameras, particularly with the IQ180 is plagued with shooting limitations, potential IQ issues and a whole load of extra work involved with getting the max out of the system. This is then all topped off with a massive increase in camera, lens and focus mount cost and I personally feel if you are looking at investing yet more it might be better spent as Void has been suggesting on the IQ250 upgrade to a more universal back than an even more frustrating and subject limiting tech camera with your current IQ180.
Honestly, from my perspective, this is sound advice.

IMO, working with a tech camera takes a particular type of personality ... those with that personality make it sound no-brainer, yet it can be difficult for others ... and I'm one of them.

At times we all hanker for the very best possible performance ... I'd love a 650 Hp sports car that can do amazing things, but fully realize my spontaneous personality would likely result in my immediate death before I mastered driving it :eek:

Perhaps the OP has to rectify what he is willing or able to do, and what his personality may be, with what he wants from the tools needed to do it.

Often we assume the personality needed to accomplish work we like, and then set out on a frustrating and fruitless task. Just because we like some approach, doesn't mean it is right for us.

I think this where artistic and craftsmanship intersect. The tools are there to do our bidding and it is that bidding that needs to be defined well enough to make the right choice of tools.

Shooting sports and landscapes is too generic. A million photographers do that. What is it that you want to do with-in those catagories?

Personally, I did that for myself, I jettisoned a box car full of MF gear/backs/lenses and zeroed in on the Leica S that I now use because it fits my spontaneous nature, love of using lighting, has superlative optics, yet is exceedingly simple to use. Not that I recommend it for anyone else, but it fits me.

Best of Luck,

- Marc
 

satybhat

Member
Sorry to chime in a bit late.
Here's what I feel.
Mostly when it comes to camera gear, a buyers remorse is followed by a sellers remorse.
Do not sell your gear prematurely. I guess you have already decided that.
Having said that, a small disclaimer: The gear I have: IQ280, 75-150LS, 120macro, 45D and 80D. Alpa STC, 40HR and 70HR. I also have the Leica M9, MM and a bunch of lenses.
Most recently, I acquired the Hasselblad xpan and a Leica M6 and M3. Too much gear? Yes. Buyer's remorse ? You bet. I have used all of the above gear over the last year, and I suppose the only consolation is that renting an equivalent amount would have been far too costly. Of course I have had a lot of good images.
Recently I have been toying with the idea of selling all the M gear and changing to a Leica S with 2-3 lenses. Still unsure about that. When that happens, I might want to change again. The cycle goes on. The problem is my own psyche. Not the gear. Not the incremental improvements that voidshatter or anyone here waxes green with (all respect to him, btw, his data resource and presentation is flawless ). People do it all the time. But we should be fortunate to have this first world problem. I say this first hand, having experienced both ends of the money spectrum. So don't waste your time on remorse. Get good images (they all are good, in that they have left you with a nice experience when you took them, even if you were to delete them on the basis of certain criteria.
Coming back to the topic, I have come to believe the IQ280 (or IQ180) is meant for a singular purpose: To make the cleanest possible images at ISO35 with planned, proper exposures. Use it anyhow else and the results may be sub-optimal. Used in the manner above, the results are superlative.
Best luck.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Agree and given your having issues now than a tech cam may not be the best choice its also another 20 grand to add to your system. With the IQ 180 it's even more a issue since you need very expensive rodenstock glass. It's also not the best tech cam back either. Frankly given your situation you maybe better off bolting that 180 to a Hassy body.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I also would not buy a Leica S right now either until you see what's coming next from them. Right now you would be buying old tech . Very good but still tech like your 180.

Honestly right now your chasing pixels and that is not always a good thing.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
One other point with a IQ 180 is your not doing it any favors by throwing good glass on it you really need to throw the best in class at it. With that DF back you need to pick up the mirror and take any vibration out if it to gain the best results. The IQ 180 requires the best technique you can muster.
 

gazwas

Active member
Just an observation and nothing scientific with hard concrete evidence but as amazing as getdpi is, it does have a select number of enablers that speak very highly of tech cameras and make newer users feel rather empowered to jump steaight in feet first (probably guilty also in the past). I have then noticed a lot of those new users last about 18 months and you see all their kit in the buy and sell section priced at a big loss.

Make what you will of that but (no offence OP) I get the impression you might end up belonging to this group also.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
One thing is for sure, Life is too short to get stuck with something you don't like. I just read about Simon Harper's passing, hard to believe.

Find the equipment you like, and shoot it and don't worry about the rest. If you feel the 180 is not the right solution, it's got plenty of value on the web to sell, and you might find a dealer that will take it back in trade enough that works for you.

Believe I am talking to myself too here. :)

Take a few days, and think about it.

Paul
 

jerome_m

Member
you maybe better off bolting that 180 to a Hassy body.
As much as I like my Hassy body, I don't see how that would solve the problems at hand. What would Pradeep win?

Better AF? Hasselblad AF is tops, but is the AF from Phase One less accurate? (Honest question: I don't know)

Better lenses? Pradeep seems to be happy with his lenses. He has a 80mm, and I don't think the Hasselblad 80mm is much different. He also has a 45mm, which has no equivalent in H mount. The only choices would be the HC 35mm, which is only good for landscape use when stopped down and the HC 50mm. The second version of the HC 50mm is as good as it gets, but is the 45mm really much worse? Besides, the 45mm is faster.
Pradeep should also realise that the HCD 28 and HCD 24 do not quite cover his IQ180. Last but not least, I would not know how to correct the distortion of the H lenses on an IQ back (in Phocus, it is automatic).

The rest of the specs appear to be similar between the two bodies. Is there something I have forgotten?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Reason I mentioned Hassy was it sounds like he does not like the DF. Here is where a dealer comes in , you try the Hassy see if it fits you better. I did forget about some of the lens limitations. But I do think those lenses have corrections in C1. Have to look into that for sure
 

Pradeep

Member
Unfortunately, forum threads tend to sound a bit like dealer's sales pitch lately.

Could you please tell me what is wrong with your DF+ body, SK 80mm 2.8 LS and 45mm Phase f2.8? If I have no idea what points you don't like about these, I can't tell you if another camera would be improved on these particular points.
Jerome, I think your post is one of the most perceptive in this thread.

At the moment, all we know is that:
-high iso is poor (not a body problem, may be improved by changing your processing)
I think it is more a limitation of the back, and will definitely be better with a CMOS sensor, which is why I thought of the IQ250, but I would rather have a FF sensor, else for the money the forthcoming Canon 5DR would be way more cost efficient, though obviously not at the top in terms of quality.

-the system is too slow to set up (won't be improved by a technical cam, maybe you could use a monopod for those times when you have to be quick? - I do, maybe you could do the dark frames in advance or dispense with them)
Yes, won't be improved with a tech cam, but if the final goal is the best IQ, I am prepared to be slow and deliberate.

I didn't know you could dispense with the darkframe or do it in advance (Guy would say 'get to know your camera better').

-AF is not as advanced as on DLSRs (indeed, no solution to that, but AF should be very accurate, is it?)
-you like the lenses and the sharpness you get from large prints (so that part will not be improved by a new camera or lens)
-you don't like the distortion on the lenses (doesn't capture one correct that automatically?).
AF is hard even with the A7R once you mount a canon tele on it, have to use live-view which we know is not really good on the IQ180. I tend to use manual focus and repeated evaluation on the back for getting the DOF right, and of course this too is part of the 'slow and deliberate' approach.

I am told the lenses that go on the tech cameras are sharper else why bother with the whole thing?

C1 does not even recognize the 45mm Phase One lens! Distortion is very difficult to correct which is not the case with my images of the NYC skyline with the Canon lenses.

You gave us actually very, very little info on your practice, the reasons you are dissatisfied or the kind of landscape pictures you like to take. There is not much we can do with your questions. OTOH, you have one of the best system on the market, many of the (landscape) photographers who use it are ecstatic about it. Why are they pleased when you are not?
I have no 'set' practice. I like landscapes of all sorts, cityscapes, seascapes, fall colors, waterfalls, mountains, whatever looks good. My favorites are sunsets and sunrises especially with something good in the foreground (cliche', yes, I know). I also love to do panoramas, particularly of city skylines.

I bought the system because at the time (and even now) it is the largest sensor with the highest resolution out there. My reasoning was simple - I wanted the best IQ I could get. It was a workshop out in the arctic, there was no internet, no opportunity to do any research (I didn't even know Phase One would be there) and all I had to go on was the opinion of other users and what I saw on my laptop in the images taken by the trial kits). None of this is any excuse, but I had to make the decision before returning home and commit myself else I would not get the discount. Again, it was my decision only and I am not blaming anybody, just explaining the fact that I probably walked into it without doing my homework properly.

What I did not realize then was that it would be a different style of shooting, take much longer to make images (a problem when the light is changing rapidly), the process is terribly unforgiving of any vibration/shake in long exposures, indoor images (portraits) are another problem altogether with specialized flash units/controllers (maybe I am wrong about this one). IOW, it takes much more effort and time to get a properly exposed and sharp image but when it happens the results are magical.

One example: Shooting the Manhattan skyline from the Brooklyn Bridge park at night (one of my favorite locations here), I found that I could not stand at my usual place in the park. The long exposure was over 30 seconds (and then the dark frame). Even with a sturdy tripod, standing on concrete, there was enough vibration in the ground from the trains passing over the Manhattan bridge to cause blurry images. I had to move 200 feet away from the bridge, losing the perspective I desired. There is very little you can do about something like this, unless it is a sensor that allows higher ISO with the same low-noise profile. Yes, I could reduce the exposure by raising the ISO on the IQ180, but then I lose the ultimate in quality (don't all sensors do their best at the 'base/native' ISO?), which is the purpose of buying the system after all.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
After reading this and to speed things up and more important get to a level of accuracy that you can see easier, focus easier and know you nailed it than a CMOS sensor like the Credo 50 or IQ 250 maybe a better solution. You hit live view on the backs and the mirror locks up and your exactly on live view mode via like Nikon, a Canon and Sony. When I tested the Credo 50 on the DF I never even looked in the finder. Lol

It seriously made the process easier and you want to stick with the highest pixel count as possible than this maybe the answer.

Now crop factor vs FF a endless debate no question but having several crop factor backs and FF it really is just a lens thing. For the DF and the 28mm your actually better off cutting off the corners and you get I think like a 33mm framing. Still wide and worst case you can do a Pano. Now everything becomes longer obviously but there are many folks shooting crop backs and very pleased with them. I made these choices several times even went from a 160 to a 140 with and without a tech cam and it really was not as bad as I thought.

My whole reasoning here is you still stay in MF here without dropping down to 35 and you get the benefit of CMOS 35mm. Yes you will take a bath on the upgrade which I think sucks big time but you do gain a lot of functionality but more important for you it may just make your life and images a lot better. Again get one in your hands and try it first. Now I'm Going to say something I should not say , you went to a workshop where the premise is to buy not really to understand the system first, frankly they did you a disservice and yes I taught one of there workshops and they are fun but they are all about sales, not about teaching you how to really work with them. Plug here, our workshops are about teaching not buying. There is a difference. Honestly this maybe your best option and you gain functionality, speed, accuracy and a little easier to feel comfortable with. This is not a CCD vs CMOS debate far from it but one to help you and that's why you asked in the first place. I'm reading all your options and posts and that Guys conclusion, right or wrong but the way I see it.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Here is the rub to all this and I have been down this upgrade path once too often. The trick now is at some point the best upgrade path will be on the CMOS side. This happened twice already once with getting on the Dalsa side of the house and once with getting on the FF side of the house. Phase in there infinite wisdom gave us decent upgrades when we where already on the Dalsa side but crap from going from Kodak to Dalsa. They do it the FF frame side as well now it's you get punished going from CCD to CMOS but once in CMOS when the FF comes out and your in CMOS already it's not a bad upgrade up. This is hard to explain in the written form but really the bottom line is we won't see CCD backs anymore . So those upgrade to CMOS will hurt but at some point in time you will have to jump over.
 

jerome_m

Member
I think it is more a limitation of the back, and will definitely be better with a CMOS sensor, which is why I thought of the IQ250
Well: yes, of course. Although probably not as much as Phase One wants us to believe.

Yes, won't be improved with a tech cam, but if the final goal is the best IQ, I am prepared to be slow and deliberate.
Maybe you should try to be slow and deliberate with what you have first. ;)

I didn't know you could dispense with the darkframe or do it in advance (Guy would say 'get to know your camera better').
I am not entirely sure about that, since I do not have an IQ180.

AF is hard even with the A7R once you mount a canon tele on it, have to use live-view which we know is not really good on the IQ180. I tend to use manual focus and repeated evaluation on the back for getting the DOF right, and of course this too is part of the 'slow and deliberate' approach.
On my ancient H4D-50, I just point the AF zone at a feature with sufficient detail, press the AF button and the AF is set where I want. It rarely misses, even when checked afterwards on the computer. I can't imagine that Phase One would be that much worse. Maybe your camera needs to be calibrated?

I am told the lenses that go on the tech cameras are sharper
That is what one reads on forum. Let just say that I doubt it and hope I do not start another flame war.

C1 does not even recognize the 45mm Phase One lens!
I can't imagine that to be true. OK: maybe it is true, in which case you have all reasons to be furious, but you should definitely check.

What I did not realize then was that it would be a different style of shooting, take much longer to make images
It is a bit more involved, but it should not take "much longer to make images". You keep saying that and I keep wondering why.

indoor images (portraits) are another problem altogether with specialized flash units/controllers (maybe I am wrong about this one).
Normally, you use a studio flash and flashmeter indoor. It is 100% manual but quite simple once one has learnt it.

Even with a sturdy tripod, standing on concrete, there was enough vibration in the ground from the trains passing over the Manhattan bridge to cause blurry images.
Well... yes, but that would be a problem with any camera on a tripod. And I am sure that you do not take all your landscape near train tracks, so...

There is very little you can do about something like this, unless it is a sensor that allows higher ISO with the same low-noise profile.
You should not believe the high iso hype. I mean: sure, modern CMOS are better, maybe one or 2 ev, but low noise is only possible when you have enough light. Whatever you may read here or there, cameras hit limitations due to fundamental principles.

Yes, I could reduce the exposure by raising the ISO on the IQ180, but then I lose the ultimate in quality (don't all sensors do their best at the 'base/native' ISO?), which is the purpose of buying the system after all.
You reduce the quality from the output of your IQ180. But since you start so high, you may still have better quality than lesser solutions. This being said, if you believe that you will take the majority of your pictures at iso 400-800, get a cmos back. Or a Pentax 645z, which is quite good and a lot cheaper.

Actually, this may be your best choice: get a 645z. You appear to have sufficient financial ease for this proposition to make sense: you get the Pentax as a second camera, try both in parallel, and sell the one you don't like in 6 months.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
I think the number one thing that many photographers (including those in Dante's Inferno) forget---- is the pure enjoyment of photography; the process and the magic that generates the excitement to participate as a photographer.

It doesn't matter if a camera or a sensor is "the best" if it doesn't give you the enjoyment in the process we call photography. And maybe some of that can be addressed by knowing/learning how to use equipment better. But the end result is the same: if the camera or process doesn't make you feel warm and fuzzy, you've lost a large part of that magic and excitement that made you want to participate as a photographer.

For myself, I purchased the Sony A7r (yes, a Sony branded sensor that Void keeps pushing. Is he a paid Sony representative? :D) And guess what? I disliked it----a lot. Never mind this "wonderful sensor"---the camera lacked the magic in the process. I converted it to IR/full spectrum, and the magic came back. And yes, I've shot with the IQ250---and guess what? For me there was no magic! The point here is to shoot with whatever gives you the most enjoyment in the process---whether that is a Sony RX1 or a Phase MFDB.

If you want to exploit the weakness of a particular camera or sensor---you can do exactly that (as Void has done). But honestly, in the many years I have shot with MFDBs (645M, P30, P45+, P65+, IQ180----yes in the realm of the greatest of enablers :p) I have rarely, if ever, run across a situation where I felt confined as a photographer or wishing, damn, I wish I had a MFDB with a CMOS sensor. I guess I'm used to working with the tools I have in any given situation and making it work. It's called photography and I enjoy the process.

And you can easily find some incredible work here---Dan Lindberg comes quickly to my mind, and even when he was using an older generation MFDB, you could hardly say his photography was constrained by the sensor. His talent and eye for composition simply sings. *wow* not a Sony sensor in sight! :rolleyes:

The membership rolls here in Dante's Inferno places everyone in what I call "rarefied air." I think a fair bet is that the demographic is middle-aged or older, well-educated, and lives fairly comfortably compared to our counterparts confined to lesser-endowed Nikon and Canon brands :ROTFL: We're pretty damned lucky, with even older generation MFDBs holding their ground well against recent generation DSLRs. Presumably those that invested in MFDBs did so with a particular purpose in mind, and I know for me that enjoyment in the process continues to be a large part of why I use a MFDB.

I'm not particularly fond of the Phase DF---it works, and I know all the foibles to make it work well. And yes, a new Phase body is definitely on the way soon. :) I very much enjoy using the IQ180 on a Cambo, and think I enjoy it more each time I use it. I've recently adapted my lenses to use the xume system to allow me to use filters more easily, not because I need to, but because it's part of the process I enjoy.

Changing to a Sony CMOS sensor will not change that. If I bought an IQ150/250, it would be to use live view on a Cambo Actus (yes, John Milich's fault). But the interest is in the process, not the sensor.

So my advice is to ignore the Voidshatter inspired rants and raves over Sony CMOS sensored MFDBs. Ignore the calls for a new technical camera or a particular platform. Go back and find what inspires you to participate in this thing we call photography. If you enjoy the process and make beautiful imagery, everything else will fall into place. If that means leaving the MFDB world behind, do it. If it means buying a new CMOS MFDB, do it. Life is short, and in the scheme of things, photography is a rather small investment that can give a lot of enjoyment.

Or you can get a boat. :ROTFL:

ken
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I also would not buy a Leica S right now either until you see what's coming next from them. Right now you would be buying old tech . Very good but still tech like your 180.

Honestly right now your chasing pixels and that is not always a good thing.
I agree, except you can find used S2 for very good prices.
But I also would probably wait until we see how the new sensor in the S 007 will work.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I know Tom but your still buying into old tech and that value keeps dropping. This all sucks big time. But Leica needs to make the change and than see where that goes.

Only thing good here is the lenses will stay and continue on.
 
Top