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!

IO160 to IQ260 thoughts?

Pemihan

Well-known member
I might have the opportunity to upgrade my IQ160 to a IQ260 for a very reasonable price and would like to pick the brains of those of you that have done the same upgrade. I’m primarily using my tech cam with Rodenstock 40HR, SK60XL and SK120 Aspheric.

My main reasons to think about doing this is the long exposure capabilities. I often find myself in the 60 seconds range with the 160, so alone for this it might be worth it. For shorter exposures, 15-45 seconds, are the files from the 260 much cleaner?

Regarding issues like tiling, did you feel the 260 behaved better?

Wifi is not a deal breaker for me, I don’t think I will use it much if at all.

I know the 250 might be even better, but I like my 40HR on the full frame sensor and don’t want to go down in sensor size.

I have read a lot of the technical stuff, but would like to hear from those of you that have done the same.

Thanks
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
Peter...With your style of photography, why not IQ180 (or stick with IQ160 and wait for full frame CMOS)? The price of IQ180 is very attractive nowadays.
Unless you do lots of long exposure, IQ260 will not add much to IQ160. I like my IQ260 for long exposure. IQ250 is not an option as it's not a full frame.
I've never owned IQ160 but owned both IQ180 and 260. For 30-45 sec exposure, IQ of 180 is no different from 260.
Your pictures are already awesome, why in rush. Wait for a bigger upgrade, full frame CMOS?

Pramote
 

gazwas

Active member
As above, IQ160 to IQ260 is a waste of money and offers nothing special to justify the expence IMO. Long exposure files I've seen from the IQ260 were not that great, just good for a Dalsa chipped back and if LE is what you really need P45+ or CMOS are much better.

I'd wait for FF CMOS and see how it performs with your tech lenses before rushing to upgrade now.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I did the IQ160 to IQ260 upgrade and didn't regret it at all because I also wanted the ability to shoot longer exposures than the IQ160 was able to manage. Even 30s on the IQ160 would result in files that I would have to process significantly or render as monochrome files due to the numerous hot pixels. The IQ260 was a significant improvement over the IQ160 in every respect with the new sensor.

Wifi? Meh. Watch for the wifi cover on the top of the back as they have a tendancy to lift slightly when warm (I didn't bother getting mine fixed with better adhesive but if you're concerned about water tightness I would ask if it's been fixed).

Very very long exposures beyond 10-15 minutes certainly weren't perfect and no doubt the P45+ was better but being able to do it at all with a full frame sensor was really the most important aspect of this back for me. It is true that the IQ150/250 is significantly better but not if the sensor size is important to you which I believe it is. (I have more flexibility in this respect although I do miss the extra real estate at times but its early days).

I did suffer from some centrefolding with my back so I'd be sure to watch for that and get the back test & calibrated.

With hindsight, I'd have probably kept my IQ160 and bought a P45+ for use in those few occasions where I wanted to shoot longer than 30s. At the time when I upgraded the cost was about the same.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Thanks Pramote,

Yes IQ180 have crossed my mind too, just not sure how it will work for my style of shooting. I shift a lot 10-12mm left right for 16/9 panos with my 40HR.

I'm not in any rush at all to upgrade, I just might have the opportunity to buy a 260 for about the same as I could sell my 160 for, basically making it a free upgrade..

But yes a full frame tech cam friendly CMOS would be awesome, but I' sure that will be in quite a different price range.

Peter

Peter...With your style of photography, why not IQ180 (or stick with IQ160 and wait for full frame CMOS)? The price of IQ180 is very attractive nowadays.
Unless you do lots of long exposure, IQ260 will not add much to IQ160. I like my IQ260 for long exposure. IQ250 is not an option as it's not a full frame.
I've never owned IQ160 but owned both IQ180 and 260. For 30-45 sec exposure, IQ of 180 is no different from 260.
Your pictures are already awesome, why in rush. Wait for a bigger upgrade, full frame CMOS?

Pramote
 
Last edited:

Pemihan

Well-known member
Gazwas, thanks for your input.
Yes I would love a full frame CMOS that works with tech wides..

Peter

As above, IQ160 to IQ260 is a waste of money and offers nothing special to justify the expence IMO. Long exposure files I've seen from the IQ260 were not that great, just good for a Dalsa chipped back and if LE is what you really need P45+ or CMOS are much better.

I'd wait for FF CMOS and see how it performs with your tech lenses before rushing to upgrade now.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Thanks Graham,

So you're saying that you did see an improvement with the 260 even on shorter exposures in the 30-60 second range? Was that with LEM on at ISO 140 or at base ISO 50?

I really don't care about the wifi, don't think I would use it at all. I know about the cover on top and will for sure check that if I move forward with this. The back was in for a repair in July 2014, so they might have fixed it at that point.

Yes the sensor size is important to me, so the 150/250 is out.

As I mainly do B&W tiling is my main issue with the Dalsa CCD backs. The first 160 I got was horrible in this regard so it was returned and I then got to test a number of backs and handpick the best of the bunch, but nevertheless I still see the issue on and off.

The CMOS sensor in the 150/250 only have one readout channel and thus no tiling. Hoping the same will be the case once a full frame CMOS is released and that it will work beautiful with tech wides :)

Peter

I did the IQ160 to IQ260 upgrade and didn't regret it at all because I also wanted the ability to shoot longer exposures than the IQ160 was able to manage. Even 30s on the IQ160 would result in files that I would have to process significantly or render as monochrome files due to the numerous hot pixels. The IQ260 was a significant improvement over the IQ160 in every respect with the new sensor.

Wifi? Meh. Watch for the wifi cover on the top of the back as they have a tendancy to lift slightly when warm (I didn't bother getting mine fixed with better adhesive but if you're concerned about water tightness I would ask if it's been fixed).

Very very long exposures beyond 10-15 minutes certainly weren't perfect and no doubt the P45+ was better but being able to do it at all with a full frame sensor was really the most important aspect of this back for me. It is true that the IQ150/250 is significantly better but not if the sensor size is important to you which I believe it is. (I have more flexibility in this respect although I do miss the extra real estate at times but its early days).

I did suffer from some centrefolding with my back so I'd be sure to watch for that and get the back test & calibrated.

With hindsight, I'd have probably kept my IQ160 and bought a P45+ for use in those few occasions where I wanted to shoot longer than 30s. At the time when I upgraded the cost was about the same.
 

Digitalcameraman

Active member
Pemihan,

I love your images too. And I think you are getting some good advice from the owners that have upgraded, downgraded, even moved sideways.

I know that a 30 sec exposure on IQ160 in warm climates such as Florida is much different than 30 sec in Denver. The ability to shoot with a 10 stop ND filter with water ect warrants the IQ260.

But I cannot tell you what a pleasure it is to use the tech camera with Live view from CMOS. Sure, all we have is 50 MP CMOS now, but we all hope to see that change in the future. And the ability to get great Live View for composing as well as focusing, may be worth the wait. Not to mention you get that long exposure capability from the CMOS, so a lot of benefits.

The side move from IQ160-IQ260 is pretty cost effective right now when dealing with Pre Owned backs. That will change when you go from IQ160 to a future back. So the big question will be how much. We do not know that answer right now.

You already own the best lenses you can buy. So they will work great with either back. Keep making beautiful images.




I might have the opportunity to upgrade my IQ160 to a IQ260 for a very reasonable price and would like to pick the brains of those of you that have done the same upgrade. I’m primarily using my tech cam with Rodenstock 40HR, SK60XL and SK120 Aspheric.

My main reasons to think about doing this is the long exposure capabilities. I often find myself in the 60 seconds range with the 160, so alone for this it might be worth it. For shorter exposures, 15-45 seconds, are the files from the 260 much cleaner?

Regarding issues like tiling, did you feel the 260 behaved better?

Wifi is not a deal breaker for me, I don’t think I will use it much if at all.

I know the 250 might be even better, but I like my 40HR on the full frame sensor and don’t want to go down in sensor size.

I have read a lot of the technical stuff, but would like to hear from those of you that have done the same.

Thanks
 

jagsiva

Active member
I looked at the IQ180 > IQ280 a couple of years ago and decided it was not worth it at all, approx 16K for WIFI. I ended up keeping the IQ180 and purchasing an IQ260 Achromatic which I ended up returning for other reasons, but not relevant to this post.

The IQ160 >IQ260 is a little different as it does give you a new sensor, with the main difference being long-exposures. If this is important to you, there really aren't too many options on FF.

Waiting 12 months maybe the best if that works for you:
1. We will have the second generation of CMOS backs and most likely have a FF offering
2. I would think Dalsa has to have a horse in the CMOS race, right now it has been all Sony. it would be nice to see some competition and diversity, and while the new Sony sensor is great in many ways, the pros/cons vs. CCD on a tech cam are a mixed bag
3. Phase upgrade practices in the past have always favoured skipping a generation, i.e. P+backs to IQ2xx backs made far more sense than from IQ1xx backs to IQ2xx back financially.
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
Once you've had the IQ180, it's hard to step backward. It's such a great back with the highest quality for big print (not only pixel peeping).
I traded the IQ180 to 260 for 2 years but missed it enough to buy it back when the price was right. The one I bought had ~500 shutter counts.
Same as you, I love B & W, therefore, color cast is not a problem with IQ180. You've had more room to work with.
The 180 is like a last-model Mercedes-Benz, it will run for a long long time with much less money. I've used my 1st-generation SUV for 16 years! I believe in buying the best you can afford for everything. Bad habit !!! But at least I don't have to blame the equipments but myself :) My Rodie 23mm/40mm and SK 60mm XL still hold the value quite well compared to the Nikon D800E.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Pramote, do you feel that issues like tiling and microlens ripples are worse on the 180 compared to the 260? Especially when converting to B&W?

Peter

Once you've had the IQ180, it's hard to step backward. It's such a great back with the highest quality for big print (not only pixel peeping).
I traded the IQ180 to 260 for 2 years but missed it enough to buy it back when the price was right.
Same as you, I love B & W, therefore, color cast is not a problem with IQ180. You've had more room to work with.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Thanks Chris!

I might end up just keeping my 160 and see what the future brings. I do love it and only thought of upgrading as I might be able to do it basically for free.

Peter

Pemihan,

I love your images too. And I think you are getting some good advice from the owners that have upgraded, downgraded, even moved sideways.

I know that a 30 sec exposure on IQ160 in warm climates such as Florida is much different than 30 sec in Denver. The ability to shoot with a 10 stop ND filter with water ect warrants the IQ260.

But I cannot tell you what a pleasure it is to use the tech camera with Live view from CMOS. Sure, all we have is 50 MP CMOS now, but we all hope to see that change in the future. And the ability to get great Live View for composing as well as focusing, may be worth the wait. Not to mention you get that long exposure capability from the CMOS, so a lot of benefits.

The side move from IQ160-IQ260 is pretty cost effective right now when dealing with Pre Owned backs. That will change when you go from IQ160 to a future back. So the big question will be how much. We do not know that answer right now.

You already own the best lenses you can buy. So they will work great with either back. Keep making beautiful images.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Thanks jagsiva, food for thought.
Would be really nice to know what the next generation of CMOS backs will be capaple of and how they will work with tech wides..

Peter

I looked at the IQ180 > IQ280 a couple of years ago and decided it was not worth it at all, approx 16K for WIFI. I ended up keeping the IQ180 and purchasing an IQ260 Achromatic which I ended up returning for other reasons, but not relevant to this post.

The IQ160 >IQ260 is a little different as it does give you a new sensor, with the main difference being long-exposures. If this is important to you, there really aren't too many options on FF.

Waiting 12 months maybe the best if that works for you:
1. We will have the second generation of CMOS backs and most likely have a FF offering
2. I would think Dalsa has to have a horse in the CMOS race, right now it has been all Sony. it would be nice to see some competition and diversity, and while the new Sony sensor is great in many ways, the pros/cons vs. CCD on a tech cam are a mixed bag
3. Phase upgrade practices in the past have always favoured skipping a generation, i.e. P+backs to IQ2xx backs made far more sense than from IQ1xx backs to IQ2xx back financially.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Thanks jagsiva, food for thought.
Would be really nice to know what the next generation of CMOS backs will be capaple of and how they will work with tech wides..

Peter
That's for sure a good question. And will the next chip be a Sony, Dalsa or XYZ company.

Questions I have on future:

1. If the CMOS goes full frame, and stays at 50 to 60MP, then as I see it should be OK with current tech lenses. The 50MP current is pitch of 5.3, and seems to be OK with tech lenses up to a certain point. The current 60MP CCD is 6.0 microns and does have a very good range of movements. The 80MP is 5.2, and everyone knows the limitations. So, if a 60MP full frame CMOS comes out and has 6.0 micron pitch, I can't see it working any worse than the current 50MP @ 5.3 micron pitch, possibly better. But if Phase goes to 80 or ever 100MP for the next CMOS, then the pitch will become even smaller, 4.x? and I can't see that working well with a lot of movements, unless something is added to the chip, like the design philosophy of the CMOSIS chip by Lecia. Current retrofocus designs by Rodenstock seem to be at their limit at least on the wide side. Schneider has stated they are getitng out all together of the market of the digital lenses.

2. The next gen comes out at 80 to 100MP in CMOS, what will the price delta be?

3. If the chip is not Sony, the DR will be an unknown until tested. Sony has proven it's excellent DR, both with their 35mm sensors and the 50MP medium format chip in use right now.

It will be interesting to see it all play out and when.

Paul
 

jagsiva

Active member
We are pretty close to limits on diffraction and hardware tolerances in the current 80MP backs already.

I would hope improvements going forward could come in:

1. Larger sensors, towards proper 645 or even 6x6
2. Better noise/DR
3. Multi-shot
4. Some newer version of Bayer that doesn't hurt color resolution
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
Pramote, do you feel that issues like tiling and microlens ripples are worse on the 180 compared to the 260? Especially when converting to B&W?

Peter
Peter,

I've used the Rodie 40mm HR and SK 60mm XL with tilt most of the time and experienced no problem with B&W conversion.
The 180 is very good for the Rodie 23mm and 28mm. It's like point-and-shoot.
I still think the 180 will give me top IQ in B&W in years to come especially with the 44" print.
If you're happy with the 160, stick with it. If you can upgrade to 260 for free. Why not? It's no brainer. You'll get long exposure for free! The 260 actually is not as bad as some people make it sounded. The 44" print still comes out pretty good. I am still very happy with it. I think it's still an exceptional back unless you make a living by shooting stars or shooting to the sun. In general, shadow still looks pretty good with good technique.
The hype of IQ250 will disappear in no time, same as the IQ260. Technology is moving too fast. You can't upgrade all the time. I'll better invest in lenses.
Lately, I've been shooting with the Linhof Technorama 617s more and more. It makes me exciting in photography again. I start to be tired of stitching and all kind of technical jargons. Shooting with it remind me of simplicity and enjoyment which brought me to photography from the beginning.

Happy shooting.
Best regards,

Pramote
 
Last edited:

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I would agree with Pramote regarding the upgraded sensor - worth it if there is little cost if only because of the long exposure capabilities as it is far superior to the IQ160 in this respect.

Be aware of some of the workflow implications of long exposure mode though. If you're normally shooting at ISO50 and expose for more than 10s the back has a nag screen telling you to use long exposure mode and ISO140. You can't disable this. I understand the intention of it to get you to change modes for the best image quality but if you are deliberately creatively shooting a particular duration such as for cloud movement etc with an ND then changing ISO then requires changing filter strength/aperture etc.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
We all see things differently for sure. I see no way the shadow recovery of the 260 comes close to the 250. Even at base ISO. Pull the shadows and the overall loss of details is most noticeable. Not any difference in LEM either trust me I had really hoped that LEM at ISO 140 would be special I did not find that to be the case. If shot in bright to normal light or used with a longer exposure time and the 260 does an excellent job. Need 1/125 (on a tech camera) or faster shutter speed and again unless you are in good light the details are just not there.Take it to ISO 200 and any shadow recovery is pretty lack of details the CCD Nust did not get enough light. Believe me I wish it wasn't this way but it's a characteristic of CCD.

This is my perspective after 3 years with either 160 or 260 all on a tech camera. Using a DSLR body may may a difference since you have so much more control of shutter speeds i.e. 1/3 and 1/2 stops and a much more accurate speed on full stops. Not 1/90th when set to 1/60th or 1/350th when set to 1/250th as I tend to see on all my copals.

Obviously others opinions will differ.

Paul
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Pramote, thanks good to know that at least your IQ180 isn't showing tiling with your tech lenses.

I looked the Linhof Technorama 617s up. Wow that's quite a camera, I can understand why you enjoy using it :)

Peter

Peter,

I've used the Rodie 40mm HR and SK 60mm XL with tilt most of the time and experienced no problem with B&W conversion.
The 180 is very good for the Rodie 23mm and 28mm. It's like point-and-shoot.
I still think the 180 will give me top IQ in B&W in years to come especially with the 44" print.
If you're happy with the 160, stick with it. If you can upgrade to 260 for free. Why not? It's no brainer. You'll get long exposure for free! The 260 actually is not as bad as some people make it sounded. The 44" print still comes out pretty good. I am still very happy with it. I think it's still an exceptional back unless you make a living by shooting stars or shooting to the sun. In general, shadow still looks pretty good with good technique.
The hype of IQ250 will disappear in no time, same as the IQ260. Technology is moving too fast. You can't upgrade all the time. I'll better invest in lenses.
Lately, I've been shooting with the Linhof Technorama 617s more and more. It makes me exciting in photography again. I start to be tired of stitching and all kind of technical jargons. Shooting with it remind me of simplicity and enjoyment which brought me to photography from the beginning.

Happy shooting.
Best regards,

Pramote
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Thanks Graham, maybe a dumb question but I suppose the original exposure continue regardless of the nag screen?

Peter

I would agree with Pramote regarding the upgraded sensor - worth it if there is little cost if only because of the long exposure capabilities as it is far superior to the IQ160 in this respect.

Be aware of some of the workflow implications of long exposure mode though. If you're normally shooting at ISO50 and expose for more than 10s the back has a nag screen telling you to use long exposure mode and ISO140. You can't disable this. I understand the intention of it to get you to change modes for the best image quality but if you are deliberately creatively shooting a particular duration such as for cloud movement etc with an ND then changing ISO then requires changing filter strength/aperture etc.
 
Top