Site Sponsors
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 201 to 250 of 333

Thread: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

  1. #201
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by 6x6 View Post
    Let me provide a use case, which will be a common scenario:

    Background

    I own a P40+ and 645DF. The back is fantastic. The body is poor. I upgraded the battery, and that solved many issues. However the focus capability is poor at best and I often have to turn off/on the body/back to get things working again. It can be unbelievably frustrating. In a landscape scenario I can imagine that this would not be too bad. However if you work with people, things can go south very very quickly.

    (...)

    I've been pushed into looking at the competition, by a business decision of Phase One. Crazy. I am now getting quotes for a Hasselblad H5D-50c and a Leica S (type 007).
    I understand that you are using your particular case as an example to discuss Phase upgrade policies and sending out the message that -maybe- they should reconsider their lock-out of P-series users.

    But if you can't upgrade your camera to the new XF, I don't quite understand the choice of H5D-50c or Leica S. Since you are happy with the P40+, wouldn't it be simpler and more economical to:
    -get a 645DF+ while they are still available or
    -keep your P40+, have the mount changed to H mount and get a H4x or H5x? (you'll still need to change your lenses, though)

    There is another catch: if you want to use Capture One, then you must use a Phase back. Phase One is locking all other medium format backs from their software.

    Last but not least, if you are not using Capture One, consider changing everything and only need a x1.3, 40 mpix back (as your P40+), there are plenty of really cheap options on the used market with that sensor. You could even get a Pentax 645D (same sensor...) and get pocket change for your present system. Or an H4D-40 for a little more if you need a central shutter.

  2. #202
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    North Sweden
    Posts
    1,401
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    I was in your position a few years back 6x6 with a Phase back, I hated the DF and used the Phase on an Alpa for a while but I wanted more flexibility and decided that I would buy something that worked right at that time rather than wait for the mythical body upgrade that had been rumoured even back then.

    My thoughts are and were that the P+ body I had was designed and introduced probably 10 years ago, sensors may have been updated and changed but the architecture of the back didn't until the IQ series, I can see that building the IQ to be backward compatible to work on the DF was always going to be more reasonable than expecting a very old back design to work on future technology, obviously there is way more to a back and body working together than the way it mounts together.

    My personal opinion is that it's not such a great shock that the P series won't work, I doubt very much it's a group of guys at Phase HQ sitting there saying "screw them" it's just it's a different piece of kit that works in a different way. I think it would be worth pricing out a IQ140 or something similar, I bet the upgrade from your P40+ won't be so painful although I can appreciate that having to consider it is a pain. I would also be happy personally to get 5 years out of any photographic equipment, even at 20k and it still having a trade in value but that's a personal thing.

    I hope you get something together that works for you.

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

  3. #203
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Kolor-Pikker View Post
    The older backs were not meant to work with a digital camera so to speak, up until now back and camera were two separate entities that simply told each other when a shot was being taken.
    What's wrong with that? Why MF cameras of which traditionaly the strong point was modularity and simplicity have to be turned to "larger image area DSLRs"? I don't remember anybody wanting his Hasselblad V to function as an EOS 650 or a Nikon F-801 back in the film days... Actually I doubt a Hasselblad V would be as successful as it was, if it did function like a high-tech 35mm film camera of the same days...
    Additionally I believe that the MFDB market is smaller today than it was back at 2004/5 (when the first self contained 36/37x48/49 large sensors appeared) exactly because of the simplicity of the system... add to that the fact that backs where much more expensive in analogy a decade past than they are today and one may conclude that the majority of photographers want photography to be done ergonomically by the "old fashion" way....

  4. #204
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    in my experience with Phase, if you want to stay current, expect it to cost at least $10,000 per year on top of your initial investment. Think of it as a subscription plan. ....
    Quotes like these are far and few in between. Dante needs an anchored thread where we can archive them. "Think of it as a subscription plan"---this is a gem.

    ken

  5. #205
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    462
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Dascalos View Post
    What's wrong with that?
    I wouldn't say there's anything wrong, just that there is only so much you can do by keeping the back and camera isolated from each other. Ideally Phase should have offered both backs and also integrated cameras for those who have no intention of using tech cams. As for backup bodies, it was only a justification for modularity because you could easily expect a Phase body to break, but I expect my 645Z to survive a nuclear war.

    I also wouldn't say that the IQ/XF is simple by any means, it just has all of its features nested under a touch interface, so that you don't need a million buttons. Having used the 645Z for a while now I don't mind having physical switches for a lot of the settings though. Color me surprised if any modern high-end camera lacks a fundamental feature for the sake of simplicity.

  6. #206
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    The P/P+ were not "locked out".

    The communications protocol on the XF is entirely new. In other words the XF speaks an entirely new language. For the sake of conversation let's call the AFD/AFD2/AF/DF/DF+ language "Aramaic" and the language of the XF "Vorlon". (these are not the real names but they are easier for conversation).

    New backs on older bodies
    The IQ/IQ2 backs already speak Aramaic, so the effort it took to keep Aramaic in the IQ3 was reasonable. Therefore the IQ3 continues to work on the DF and DF+.

    Old backs on newer bodies
    The P+ was built on the P platform which was developed in 2004. It was built when Aramaic was one of the main camera languages (the others being the Hassy H and the Contax). To get a P+ to work on an XF you'd need either the XF to learn Aramaic or the P+ to learn Vorlon.

    In a way that the metaphor doesn't quite convey, the "language" of the system is the foundation of the camera itself. To support the P+ on the XF the dev team at Phase One would have done the project twice, and then would have had to maintain both branches indefinitely. I'm sure there would be some redundancy, but there would also be inefficiencies since it's very hard for them to make changes in the P+ firmware at this point, so any snags would have to be fixed on the body side, not the back side.

    For third party companies to make their legacy/current/future backs compatible with the XF they would also need to teach it Vorlon. Given the position Sinar is in right now I do not suspect they will. Given Hasselblad's focus on their own H platform I do not suspect they will either.

    P1 continues to make backs for the Hassy V, Hassy H, Mamiya DF/DF+ and new XF platforms. The IQ380 has a new sensor which makes it fundamentally different than the IQ280 regardless of platform. Therefore it is available on the H and V. The IQ360 and IQ350 are identical to their predecessors except for the circuitry required for power-sharing with an XF. So it would be disingenuous to slap an IQ3 tag on the 50mp and 60mp when used on an H or V platform.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  7. #207
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by 6x6 View Post
    I normally lurk in the background on this forum, but the release of the XF and accompanying conversation has driven me to add my opinion to this thread.

    Let me provide a use case, which will be a common scenario:

    Background

    I own a P40+ and 645DF. The back is fantastic. The body is poor. I upgraded the battery, and that solved many issues. However the focus capability is poor at best and I often have to turn off/on the body/back to get things working again. It can be unbelievably frustrating. In a landscape scenario I can imagine that this would not be too bad. However if you work with people, things can go south very very quickly.

    I have made an overall investment of 20,000.

    I have waited patiently for a new body since 2010. I am perfectly happy with the P40+.

    Upgrade

    I am now in a situation where I cannot upgrade just the 645DF and Phase are retiring the DF+. I have been waiting for several years having invested in what I thought was a MODULAR camera system.

    So ok, lets consider upgrading the body and back. I contacted a dealer and have been told the price to upgrade to an IQ350 / XF is 20,000 (ex taxes).

    Twenty. Thousand. Pounds

    In US$ thats more than $30,000 (ex taxes). And that is only if I trade in my perfectly good P40+ / poor 645DF.

    I am put in this situation because Phase have cut off an upgrade for the P/P+ owners. I must be amongst many hundreds of photogs who have spent some time considering this, and have only one conclusion. That this is a deliberate business tactic by Phase One and not a technological issue. I mean come on. Get real Phase One. We can read between the lines on this one. Show us the technical reason that you cannot make the body / P/P+ backs work.

    Conclusions

    This is where Phase One are making a mistake. I, amongst many hundreds of P/P+ users, now know where we stand. To stay on the Phase One roadmap, long term, will cost at least 20k. I've been pushed into looking at the competition, by a business decision of Phase One. Crazy. I am now getting quotes for a Hasselblad H5D-50c and a Leica S (type 007). Remember. If I could buy a Phase One XF for my P40+, I would do it, immediately. However Phase One have made this not possible.

    I'm now in a position where changing platform is back on the agenda. It really is. I cannot for the life of me work out why they would do this.

    Feedback

    So if any dealers / Phase One employees are reading:

    1. Not allowing P/P+ owners to upgrade their bodies is creating a scenario where the competition comes back into play.
    2. To avoid an equivalent Hasselblad "closed platform" PR disaster, you guys need to fully explain why the P/P+ backs won't work.
    3. You should have made the XF work with P/P+ backs, but with very limited functionality. People would get that. They would buy the body and work with it. Phase would keep people invested in their system and those people would eventually be driven to upgrade. However at a pace that didn't ostracise them.

    Disclaimer

    I am not a "hater" or "troll". I am someone who is working logically through the outcomes of the Phase One XF announcement. I am describing a real life scenario that I'm sure is common amongst the photog community.
    I think a used IQ140 and New XF camera is gonna cost you much less than 20k and that is not counting what you can get for your P40+ and DF.

  8. #208
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by 6x6 View Post
    I am not a "hater" or "troll". I am someone who is working logically through the outcomes of the Phase One XF announcement. I am describing a real life scenario that I'm sure is common amongst the photog community.
    Quote Originally Posted by 6x6 View Post
    I guess what I am saying is that through the release of their XF body, Phase One have created a scenario where a host of their users (P/P+ owners) now have to reconsider their backs too. This raises the possibility of some of these people moving to the competition during this process.

    I think you're being very fair. It's possible that you're being bundled together with other posters.

    All you're saying is that if the XF had been built with support for the P+ language that it would have been an easy choice for you to buy it. But since it is not supported your choices are inherently more expensive and therefore you should also look at the competitive options.

    I hope that you find an option that works well for you within your budget. Hopefully (for us) it is a Team P1 kit.

    The IQ140 may share a sensor with the P40+ but it is a huge upgrade in many other ways. As would be an IQ160 or IQ150. All should be less than the IQ350 upgrade you cited.

    Let us know how your search and evaluation goes, especially as regards comparisons to competitive systems.

    Best wishes, and I hope P1 is able to keep you as a customer at the end of this process.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  9. #209
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Dascalos View Post
    I think you understand different what I'm saying Ken... Every photographer would like compatibility with everything... Now we can't have that with lenses (if one uses mamiya for instance he can't use a Contax lens) as mounts differ, but traditionally, from the film days one could use whatever film he would like on his body... this lasted with MFDBs too until Hasselblad decided to "close" the H system, but they always offered a body (H2F, H4X, now H5X) that was open to all other backs as a base platform... That was true for Phase one too up until recently and now changes.... One that uses third party back, or sometimes uses film or uses multishot "true colour" backs, he can't use the XF as a platform... So the only alternative (if he wants new) is to buy an H5X...

    Now, because Hasselblad has financial problems, one may be affraid to invest on Hasselblad... So there is a "pressure" (done on purpose) from Phase One as for one to change his back too... It would be too easy for them as to retain P backs compatibility, but if they would, it would also allow older backs from Sinar & hasselblad/imacon CF to work on XF... So what they do (or plan to achieve), is 1. To put "pressure" in the market for people to change their older backs (epecially those people that use discontinued camera platforms... even Mamyia AFD) for a modern P1 back and 2. To "trap" IQ3 back users (much like Hasselblad did in the past) as to use an XF body... Now, that is what I call "closing the system" and IMO, as it happened with Hasselblad, it is a very risky thing to do because photographers (usually) want their freedom and it can turn completely to the opposite direction...

    I am using Contax myself and 2 MFDBs (both multishot)... and although I have 3 bodies in perfect working order (and another listed for sale), it is reasonable to look for an alive system as a platform (both my backs have interchangeable mounting plates), I can't just change platform to ΧF though, because if I do I will also have to change the backs for phase one which is out of the question since I can't decrease the quality or detail that multishot provides.... Our point of view is different... see?
    Dude which multi-shot backs are you talking about? Sinar multishot backs? They don't even have a rear lcd. The long discontinued Imacon multi-shot backs? I am sure there are very few left out there in service. (not counting the newer Hasselblad multi-shot backs because they were not made in other than H mount).

    You are making all this noise because incompatibility with one of those backs? Really?

    It's 2015...

    Guess you got really mad when firewire 800 came out and you could no longer use the FW400 cables...well there are adapters

  10. #210
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    New backs on older bodies
    The IQ/IQ2 backs already speak Aramaic, so the effort it took to keep Aramaic in the IQ3 was reasonable. Therefore the IQ3 continues to work on the DF and DF+.
    @dougpeterson - to continue your analogy how come the IQ1 can already speak Vorlon? When they were released in 2011. The IQ1 backs would need a software / firmware update to work with the XF body (maybe this is the case, I don't know). If they don't need an update, then it must just be electrical signals.

    Something is not quite right here. Sorry. It's probably me! However something doesn't add up.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #211
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by mesposito View Post
    The XF looks excellent, so I'm very excited seeing the next generation, and they've obviously done some great work, especially for a small team.

    [...]

    Still, for me neither the DF nor DF+ were helpful or intuitive tools, so it's hard to be positive about throwing an additional $8000 at this. In other words, it's tempting to just forget it. As I do Landscape Photography I've been using the Cambo with the IQ260 and just leaving the DF+ and Phase lenses at home. The XF makes me want to give it another shot, thus my dilemma.
    The only way to decide if this is a good direction is to put your hands on one and evaluate the pros/cons yourself. To some extent digital back image quality can be evaluated remotely (e.g. via raw files and making prints) but evaluating this new body (ergonomics, autofocus speed/precision, user interface, build quality) really need to be evaluated "in hand". That's why we planned XF Launch Events in LA, NYC, Houston, Dallas, Boston, Philly, Chicago, D.C., San Fran, Miami, Denver, Birmingham. We hope to see you at the one in Dallas, and I hope you'll share your experience from this event on the forum.

    Either way, you're about to get several new, and IMO, very useful features for the IQ260 via free firmware update.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  12. #212
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by 6x6 View Post
    @dougpeterson - to continue your analogy how come the IQ1 and IQ2 backs speak both Aramaic and Vorlon? How come you can put a 2011 IQ1 back on the XF, before Vorlon was even created.

    Something is not quite right here. Sorry.
    You can physically mount an IQ1 on an XF today, but without a firmware update they do not talk and you cannot take a picture.

    A firmware update for the IQ2/IQ1 will come first. Betas are currently in testing. A firmware update for the credo will come a bit later.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  13. #213
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Continuing with the language metaphor...

    My Phase One backs don't have to talk to the cameras I use them on at all.

    IQ250, IQ180, P45+ Achromatic.

    All work perfectly fine with my ALPA's and my CAPCam.

    Why can the XF not offer a "dumb back" mode where there is no communication between the camera and the back whatsoever? Just connect a sync cable between the camera and the back.

    Et voila. Problem solved.

    In fact. Question...

    Does the XF fire its shutter without a back connected?
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #214
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    You can physically mount them, but without the firmware update they do not talk and you cannot take a picture.
    Thank you for clearing that up for me. I haven't been following the technical side of things. However my point still stands about the P/P+ owners. I do think forcing them to upgrade the back to get hold of the XF is a mistake. It will cause photog's to evaluate the whole system. Some will stay, but Phase One will loose customers because of it. Unfortunate, but a real possibility. Imagine a P65+ owner who has maybe 3-4 years of use out of their back. They have to upgrade their back, when they have no need / desire to do so. It's unnecessary cost in an already tight margin market.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #215
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    Does the XF fire its shutter without a back connected?
    It does not.

    To work well in an SLR environment you need to provide a wakeup signal. Otherwise you'd need to use Zero Latency in which case shooting speed, time-to-screen, ISO performance, and battery life all drop considerably. Not a good solution for most applications that the XF is designed for.

    To provide a wakeup signal you need proper two-way communication on camera readiness, back readiness, dark frame timing, shutter movement, intended shutter speed etc. See previous post about communication.

    I don't expect to be around the forums much the next few days as we're prepping for our NYC XF Event. Hope to see some of you there.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  16. #216
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Kolor-Pikker View Post
    I wouldn't say there's anything wrong, just that there is only so much you can do by keeping the back and camera isolated from each other. Ideally Phase should have offered both backs and also integrated cameras for those who have no intention of using tech cams. As for backup bodies, it was only a justification for modularity because you could easily expect a Phase body to break, but I expect my 645Z to survive a nuclear war.

    I also wouldn't say that the IQ/XF is simple by any means, it just has all of its features nested under a touch interface, so that you don't need a million buttons. Having used the 645Z for a while now I don't mind having physical switches for a lot of the settings though. Color me surprised if any modern high-end camera lacks a fundamental feature for the sake of simplicity.
    IMO, if Contax 645 was still around and if only its AF accuracy/speed & battery life had been upgraded, it would be by far the most popular camera among MF users... and its a 22 years old design... The success/popularity of Leica S also proves that the vast majority of hi-end users are not attracted by "advanced specification" similar to DSLRs...
    I believe that if there was a vote among MF users on the matter, most would say that more complex or more specified than Contax or Leica is too much...

    I also believe that the camera/back integration peel, is an invention of the makers (starting with Hasselblad H3) that never convinced photographers... Lets not forget that Hassy changed owners 7 times because of the low acceptance of the H-system. (the reason why I also believe that the XF/IQ3 project will not be appreciated by many photographers).....

  17. #217
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    It does not.

    To work well in an SLR environment you need to provide a wakeup signal. Otherwise you'd need to use Zero Latency in which case shooting speed, time-to-screen, ISO performance, and battery life all drop considerably. Not a good solution for most applications that the XF is designed for.

    To provide a wakeup signal you need proper two-way communication on camera readiness, back readiness, dark frame timing, shutter movement, intended shutter speed etc. See previous post about communication.

    I don't expect to be around the forums much the next few days as we're prepping for our NYC XF Event. Hope to see some of you there.
    ALPA make a perfectly decent wake up cable - I believe you actually sell it with the A-series, no? This isn't rocket science.

    People buying these things are not stupid. They would totally understand that some camera functionality would not be available when shooting in dumb-back mode.

    Even a zero latency approach would - I am sure - be perfectly acceptable to those who want to use their P+ backs on the XF. It's better than locking them out completely.

    XF: Do you speak Vorlon?
    Back: Hmpfheydnh
    XF [to self]: Hmm. Oh well. No problem. I'll switch to deaf and dumb back mode.

    (With regards an "SLR environment", my backs also work just fine on my Fuji GX680. Again. No direct communication available between camera and back required).

    This is not a technology problem.

    This is a corporate decision made for marketing purposes. Pure and simple. This camera has been in development for years. There really is no excuse for dumping customers with legacy backs who been eagerly awaiting this new camera.

    Shame I won't be able to use my Achromatic+ on the XF - it would have been great. Imagine how cool it would have been to have an automatic IR focus adjustment option on the XF? Focus normally using your eyes, then when taking the shot, automatically adjust focus to account for the fact you're shooting IR.

    (And no - I won't consider downgrading my Achromatic+ to a 260 Achromatic.)
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #218
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken_R View Post
    Dude which multi-shot backs are you talking about? Sinar multishot backs? They don't even have a rear lcd. The long discontinued Imacon multi-shot backs? I am sure there are very few left out there in service. (not counting the newer Hasselblad multi-shot backs because they were not made in other than H mount).

    You are making all this noise because incompatibility with one of those backs? Really?

    It's 2015...

    Guess you got really mad when firewire 800 came out and you could no longer use the FW400 cables...well there are adapters
    Dude, I use a Hasselblad CF-39MS (4X only) and a Sinarback 54H FW (4x or 16x)... Both will make any single shot back pale on a still... Some of us choose the Sun when it comes to night and day difference...

  19. #219
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    I guess we'd all love it for Phase One to come along and say listen folks, our previous DF/DF+ bodies had some flaws and didn't integrate well with your digital backs. I'll tell you what, we'll let you exchange your IQ1/IQ2 series backs and DF/DF+ cameras for the new cameras for, oh say, free or maybe $500 or $1k or $3k. Wouldn't that be nice.
    Don't go to the extremes Graham. I'm not talking about upgrading for $5. I'm also restricting my issue to upgrading of the camera body, not the backs. The DF is flawed. It simply does not work right for many people. The XF is essentially a fix for the DF IMO. Therefore, it's pricing and upgrade path should reflect that. IOW, from my perspective the XF is a special case due to the issues with the DF. And yes, many a company have given special provision to their clients when those clients have suffered through the use of inferior product.


    Well, it isn't going to happen. Not only that but I challenge anyone to come up with any other commercial situation where this type of situation has come up? It doesn't happen.

    I don't mean to sound like an apologist for Phase One but as someone in the commercial field generally I can tell you that organizations just don't give away new hardware technology for free. Anyone who says that they do are just paying for it in another way such as through paid maintenance/support programmes.
    Also, I have to add, we're dealing with a luxury/premium brand. A get things from Cadillac, Jaguar, etc. that I don't get from Chevrolet. IOW, the expectations are MUCH higher when you're shelling out much more money. Nobody expects Phase to give stuff away. But I do expect them to recognize when their product hasn't performed to a level that it's priced at and to rectify the situation as soon as they can with reasonable solutions. IMO, it's unreasonable to charge your current users an additional $6k to get a workable camera body so they can reliably use the extremely expensive back they invested in. That's all I'm saying. Value your current customers more than that. Keep the body at $8k for new customers, but allow the current DF users a significant credit to upgrade as recognition of the DF ills.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #220
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Windows 8 did not really cut it for most, here comes Windows 10 as a free upgrade for those users....so it does happen. Not suggesting that P1 should be handing out free cameras, but I agree that there should be some accounting for having a dud for so long.

    http://www.howtogeek.com/218880/wind...-need-to-know/

    Also, based on what has been written here, it sounds like the P+ backs have a physical limitation on the connecting hardware. Surely, this could have been addressed with some kind of adapter, after all P1 has been doing this for all manufacturer's backs for eons.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  21. #221
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Dascalos View Post
    Dude, I use a Hasselblad CF-39MS (4X only) and a Sinarback 54H FW (4x or 16x)... Both will make any single shot back pale on a still... Some of us choose the Sun when it comes to night and day difference...
    So you are griping that you want to use an old Hasselblad Back (or the Sinar) on the latest PhaseOne camera? Guess that back was the last one to use the Imacon era iAdapters to use the back on several platforms right? After that no Hasselblad back would mount on any other brand SLR.

    I agreee that Multi-shot backs do produce stunning image quality in the studio under controlled light. But their use is basically limited to that since they require near perfect camera support, absolute subject stillness and consistent light from shot to shot. This is a scenario where I much rather use a tech camera with movements though. Of course they can be used single shot (at least the Hasselblad) out and about but that is not their reason for being.

    At any rate. Hasselblad makes (AFAIK) the only one multi-shot MF digital solution nowadays that is practical to also use single shot on an slr.

    But there is a lot of good about the new XF camera system. Focusing on a few tiny bit of the negatives is typical of forums (specially the other forum) but your case is even more specific.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #222
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken_R View Post
    So you are griping that you want to use an old Hasselblad Back (or the Sinar) on the latest PhaseOne camera? Guess that back was the last one to use the Imacon era iAdapters to use the back on several platforms right? After that no Hasselblad back would mount on any other brand SLR.

    I agreee that Multi-shot backs do produce stunning image quality in the studio under controlled light. But their use is basically limited to that since they require near perfect camera support, absolute subject stillness and consistent light from shot to shot. This is a scenario where I much rather use a tech camera with movements though. Of course they can be used single shot (at least the Hasselblad) out and about but that is not their reason for being.

    At any rate. Hasselblad makes (AFAIK) the only one multi-shot MF digital solution nowadays that is practical to also use single shot on an slr.

    But there is a lot of good about the new XF camera system. Focusing on a few tiny bit of the negatives is typical of forums (specially the other forum) but your case is even more specific.
    I don't see what you are talking about.... My backs works perfectly well on all my Contax and my Fuji GX680 as they do on all tech cameras (especially with Sinar P3) and the H5X...
    I rarely use them in the studio... I mostly use them on museums or galleries and often for wall paintings in Ancient Byzantine monasteries... In fact Phamyia bodies are the only ones that they don't work on... but again my backs don't need an "one shot" to other than phamiya...

    What you want me to do? Quit my job and start shooting landscapes or portraiture as to reduce my income to only a fraction (or even less) than what I make now? I could do that with my Nikons... In fact I do (with my Nikons and rarely with the CF-39MS on Contax) when I'm out for fan.... Pros don't buy toys for serious work.

    By the way, as far as focusing is concerned.... have you ever used the 54H in LV through the Sinar capture CS6 with LC shutter on P3? Let alone Sinar's -miles ahead- method of dead accurate colour calibration (which even takes into account sensor temperature) and the ability to export a ready Fogra 27 or 39 file rather than doing a crappy conversion of the RGB TIFF file in PS...

    Now, back to the subject, this looks a very serious body.... Isn't it a pity they loose customers by not letting it accessible to other than IQ or Credo backs? I find the policy very selfish and narrow minded...
    Last edited by T.Dascalos; 8th June 2015 at 13:56. Reason: adding an important statement.

  23. #223
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    If your backs work perfectly well on your current cameras, why are you carrying on here? Isn't this more like LuLa material?
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #224
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    If your backs work perfectly well on your current cameras, why are you carrying on here? Isn't this more like LuLa material?
    Because I'm looking for a new platform.... the Contax is now 10 years after production... If Contax was in production I wouldn't care.

  25. #225
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    Hi Phil -

    But at the end of the day, as far as I'm concerned they are just shifting boxes. That's all I need them for. Why - if I want Phase One products - should I have to pay additional margins to support a business model that provides no benefit to me whatsoever?

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.

    Because your experience is not the only one and does not define the experience of every Phase One user.

    The additional margins are not as great as you imagine, and dealers would only retain a percentage of those margins as the support (and sales) resources would need to be expanded at the manufacturer level.


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller

  26. #226
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Dascalos View Post
    Because I'm looking for a new platform.... the Contax is now 10 years after production... If Contax was in production I wouldn't care.
    If you have an old MFDB from Hasselblad---shouldn't your angst instead be first directed at Hassleblad?

    I knew many years ago that the Contax would be a dead end when they folded. Any many photographers that shot the Contax realized this and bought extra bodies in anticipation of, well, what I think you're fretting over now---an aging body with numbered days...

    But I think that angst is kinda misdirected to think that the latest camera body, presumably (and understandably so) chock full of tech and new electronics, should be expected to work with your old MFDB. Oh, and reliably so....

    That's what great about tech cameras. You just need the right adapter plate and a one-shot cable.

  27. #227
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    The P/P+ were not "locked out".

    To support the P+ on the XF the dev team at Phase One would have done the project twice, and then would have had to maintain both branches indefinitely. I'm sure there would be some redundancy, but there would also be inefficiencies since it's very hard for them to make changes in the P+ firmware at this point, so any snags would have to be fixed on the body side, not the back side.
    For sure not everything is easy, but I think that especially owners of P65+ who have invested in (price from 15000usd to 36500usd in last 2,5 years), already paid to PhaseOne for that work/project and they should be able to use those backs with new body. I don't think that forcing them by Phase One to upgrade to the new backs (with any additional cost) when they have no need, is a right thing.

    not everything that pays off is worth it and not everything that is worth it pays off..

    https://captureintegration.com/pre-o...er-promotions/

    https://captureintegration.com/phase...it-promotions/

    https://captureintegration.com/refur...ems-available/

  28. #228
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Doug,

    You know more about this than I do, but something doesn't seem right to me. Since the IQ1, IQ2, IQ3, Credo, P, P+, Aptus, etc. backs all work on the DF, then all of the mounting and contacts have got to be the same/similar. The IQ1 and Credo will be upgraded with new firmware to work with the XF. From what I can tell there's a relatively small set of functionality that will be unique to the IQ3. But otherwise, everything else will function with the non-IQ3 backs. Cool.

    Here's what I don't understand. For many, all they want is a basic functioning, reliable camera body. All they want is to be able to set the shooting mode and have reliable AF/ They don't need all the bells and whistles. It seems to me that to make the pre IQ1 backs compatible with the XF for basic functionality really shouldn't be that difficult. When it comes to tracking seismic activity, correcting for gravitational pull, predicting the future, etc., many don't need all of that. I can see where making ancient backs compatible with these new features would be extremely difficult. But I don't think owners of older backs expect to have access to all the new fangled stuff. IOW, the level of communications would seem to be extremely low for this level of functionality. Just having the camera trigger and older back shouldn't be that hard when all the connections are compatible. I'd be surprised if one knowledgeable engineer couldn't get basic functionality between the XF and older backs in a matter of an hour or so. Leave it up to the customers to determine whether or not basic functionality is worth the upgrade price. At least they'll have an avenue to what looks to be a reliable Phase body to work with their backs. This should be done, in fact I believe it's incumbent to be done specifically and especially because modularity is promoted as an advantage. Part of the purchase decision is made based on the notion that one is buying into an upgradable modular system. You cannot in good conscious promote the idea of a modular system, then abandon the customer advantages of the system when it becomes inconvenient.
    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    The P/P+ were not "locked out".

    The communications protocol on the XF is entirely new. In other words the XF speaks an entirely new language. For the sake of conversation let's call the AFD/AFD2/AF/DF/DF+ language "Aramaic" and the language of the XF "Vorlon". (these are not the real names but they are easier for conversation).

    New backs on older bodies
    The IQ/IQ2 backs already speak Aramaic, so the effort it took to keep Aramaic in the IQ3 was reasonable. Therefore the IQ3 continues to work on the DF and DF+.

    Old backs on newer bodies
    The P+ was built on the P platform which was developed in 2004. It was built when Aramaic was one of the main camera languages (the others being the Hassy H and the Contax). To get a P+ to work on an XF you'd need either the XF to learn Aramaic or the P+ to learn Vorlon.

    In a way that the metaphor doesn't quite convey, the "language" of the system is the foundation of the camera itself. To support the P+ on the XF the dev team at Phase One would have done the project twice, and then would have had to maintain both branches indefinitely. I'm sure there would be some redundancy, but there would also be inefficiencies since it's very hard for them to make changes in the P+ firmware at this point, so any snags would have to be fixed on the body side, not the back side.

    For third party companies to make their legacy/current/future backs compatible with the XF they would also need to teach it Vorlon. Given the position Sinar is in right now I do not suspect they will. Given Hasselblad's focus on their own H platform I do not suspect they will either.

    P1 continues to make backs for the Hassy V, Hassy H, Mamiya DF/DF+ and new XF platforms. The IQ380 has a new sensor which makes it fundamentally different than the IQ280 regardless of platform. Therefore it is available on the H and V. The IQ360 and IQ350 are identical to their predecessors except for the circuitry required for power-sharing with an XF. So it would be disingenuous to slap an IQ3 tag on the 50mp and 60mp when used on an H or V platform.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #229
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Geez, there's so much in these threads.

    XF compatibility - of course it is intentional and with purpose. That's in question?

    Phase One prefers that you upgrade your P+ digital back that you purchased anywhere from 4-5 to 8-11 years ago. You bet they do.

    Faced with the choice of creating XF compatibility for a digital back platform that was created over 10 years ago (which, despite what has been suggested, is not as simple as just telling Valdemar Gregersen over in the corner to write a few lines of code to enable the "dummy" mode), and supporting these 4 - 11 year old digital backs for use with the XF camera (probably well more difficult than supporting an IQ3, or even an IQ1), it is not surprising that Phase One opted for this path.

    I find it unfortunate that the variety of digital backs have had so many varying performance features that has hampered a smooth progress forward with newer models (prime example being P45+ amazing long exposure performance and lens shift facilitation - where is that today?). This has hampered the ability in some cases for users to effectively upgrade their models. A P40+ to IQ140 upgrade isn't much of stretch, but there is no downside to this upgrade path as their might be coming from P45+ to IQ160, etc.

    And from a dollar standpoint, yes, if someone owns an Aptus-II 12 and wants to go to the XF, upgrading to a Credo 80 is also not so inexpensive.

    But these are modern realities - in most cases - when it comes to "digital". The majority of the tendrils that reached far back in terms of product compatibility are a hamper today, and for the most part are gone. Many companies in the digital age accept this without even questioning it, and for products far more recent than a 6 year old P65+.

    I'm not saying this is right, I'm not saying this is how things should be, I'm not saying anyone doesn't have the right to feel, well, screwed. Or at best, unappreciated. But it generally is - I think - the way things are. With many modern, digital product manufacturers.

    The difficult part to me is that a P65+ is one of the most recent P+ models (P40+ came out about a year later), and even 3 years ago as Wag shows, there was a substantial cost. Could Phase One have created compatibility for P40+/P65+ as a fairness gesture? Perhaps - but where do you draw the line, it is P+, so is P20+ a P+. If for P65+, why not for P20+? It is the same chassis, 98% the same technology, communication protocols. It's not an easy decision in either case - but extending backwards is definitely against how optimal digital development works today. If someone has a P30+ and is feeling put out, I understand, but .... it's a P30+. A P65+ feels like more of problem to me because it could be a somewhat recent purchase, and a not inexpensive one. My hope is that at some point, Phase One can produce a very affordable IQ upgrade path for at least P40+/P65+ owners (P40+ I don't think is that hard).


    As far as the Open/Closed argument is concerned, I always felt it was a mistake by Phase One to emphasize their "openness", which was a veiled dart at Hasselblad. I thought "modularity" was a much stronger and truer talking point for a Phase One product, and a more accurate description, with regard to open/closed platforms. But really, you are going back to 2006, with the launch of the H3D series, before the notion of open or closed crossed anyone's minds. At that time, there appeared to be a lot more relevant options for medium format digital backs and also cameras, even though both Contax and Bronica had exited just in the previous year.

    But today, the idea of open and closed systems feels ridiculous to me (and sort of did then). Who makes digital backs today? Phase One (Leaf), Hasselblad, Sinar. Who makes medium format cameras that accept digital backs? Phase One (Mamiya) and Hasselblad. If someone owns a Sinar digital back and wants so badly to capture from a medium format camera, then (no dis-respect to Sinar), why doesn't Sinar then make one? Does Hasselblad not make a camera that will accept an Imacon multi-shot digital back? They do!

    Then what is the big deal? What I am hearing is that many users want the remaining medium format camera companies to allow digital backs made from other medium format companies to work with their camera. Maybe that will happen, but first and foremost, the manufacturer needs to answer the questions, what is the cost? what do I have to gain? And then frame those general questions more specifically to what their focused product roadmap, vision, whatever you want to call it, is for the future.


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    Thanks 3 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 7 Member(s) liked this post

  30. #230
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Thank you Steve, finally a well reasoned post. At the end of the day, it was a business decision based on positioning in the market wrt to competitors. Hiding this behind bandwidth of existing interfaces etc. was hurting my head.

    Let's call it what it is and move on. Again, hats off to you.

  31. #231
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    "Let's call it what it is and move on."

    What're the odds? This is the internet; we don't move on.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #232
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    105
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    Phase One prefers that you upgrade your P+ digital back that you purchased anywhere from 4-5 to 8-11 years ago. You bet they do.
    Not to split hairs, but wasn't Phase still selling factory refurbished P+ backs as recently as March?

    Caveat emptor.
    J R
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #233
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    If you have an old MFDB from Hasselblad---shouldn't your angst instead be first directed at Hassleblad?

    I knew many years ago that the Contax would be a dead end when they folded. Any many photographers that shot the Contax realized this and bought extra bodies in anticipation of, well, what I think you're fretting over now---an aging body with numbered days...

    But I think that angst is kinda misdirected to think that the latest camera body, presumably (and understandably so) chock full of tech and new electronics, should be expected to work with your old MFDB. Oh, and reliably so....

    That's what great about tech cameras. You just need the right adapter plate and a one-shot cable.
    No... because in my job you don't need leaf shutter and Contax 120mm Apo f4 is among the sharpest and the most color neutral lenses ever made... So is some versions of the P1 120mm lens... Hasselblad 120 is excellent... but not right up there... besides, Hasselblad lenses are heavier and less well build than the Contax... to many electronics that affect reliability in them too...

  34. #234
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by JRBERNSTEIN View Post
    Not to split hairs, but wasn't Phase still selling factory refurbished P+ backs as recently as March?

    Caveat emptor.
    They still do...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #235
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    Geez, there's so much in these threads.
    Of course there is Steve! First, I love you guys. I buy my stuff from Rob. But I've given him an earful at times. Why? BECAUSE I AM SPENDING TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS! I'm going to make an assumption here that could be very wrong. But I'm assuming the dealers in these forums aren't buying this stuff with their own money. I'm also going to assume that said dealers aren't earning their living via photography. IOW, this is HIGHLY emotional for those of us that are spending our money and earning our living by using this gear. For those for whom this is just an expensive indulgence, you might not understand our angst either. My point is your perspective on this issue is going to be directly proportional to whether this gear is used as a tool in your livelihood.

    That being said, I agree with everything you wrote Steve. But the horse has left the barn. When we are deciding what to do, all of the medium format advantage get promoted. So we buy into it. Then when the rubber meets the road and it's upgrade time, the "logical" reasons as to why this or that isn't happening come out. THOSE SHOULD'VE BEEN STATED WHEN PEOPLE WERE DECIDING WHAT TO DO BEFORE THEY PUT DOWN THEIR MONEY. Don't sell me on advantages that won't come to fruition. That's what my problem is. And I'm not even affected as my Credo will be compatible. But in those few minutes before I knew it was going to be compatible, I was starting to feel the anger boil up as I bought the Credo specifically while waiting for a rumored new camera body. Therefore, I feel for those that bought into a system believing they'd have the opportunity to upgrade, then don't.

    When other people's investments tank, "Oh well, thems the breaks". But when it's ours we have a very different perspective.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #236
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Mgreer316 View Post
    Of course there is Steve! First, I love you guys. I buy my stuff from Rob. But I've given him an earful at times. Why? BECAUSE I AM SPENDING TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS! I'm going to make an assumption here that could be very wrong. But I'm assuming the dealers in these forums aren't buying this stuff with their own money. I'm also going to assume that said dealers aren't earning their living via photography. IOW, this is HIGHLY emotional for those of us that are spending our money and earning our living by using this gear. For those for whom this is just an expensive indulgence, you might not understand our angst either. My point is your perspective on this issue is going to be directly proportional to whether this gear is used as a tool in your livelihood.

    That being said, I agree with everything you wrote Steve. But the horse has left the barn. When we are deciding what to do, all of the medium format advantage get promoted. So we buy into it. Then when the rubber meets the road and it's upgrade time, the "logical" reasons as to why this or that isn't happening come out. THOSE SHOULD'VE BEEN STATED WHEN PEOPLE WERE DECIDING WHAT TO DO BEFORE THEY PUT DOWN THEIR MONEY. Don't sell me on advantages that won't come to fruition. That's what my problem is. And I'm not even affected as my Credo will be compatible. But in those few minutes before I knew it was going to be compatible, I was starting to feel the anger boil up as I bought the Credo specifically while waiting for a rumored new camera body. Therefore, I feel for those that bought into a system believing they'd have the opportunity to upgrade, then don't.

    When other people's investments tank, "Oh well, thems the breaks". But when it's ours we have a very different perspective.

    Mike, you're right, it isn't our money. We will never have the same degree of emotional attachment to the investment or depreciation of that currency. We come as close as we can, and we do have a responsibility toward stewardship of those funds (some feel this more than others). On the few occasions someone has contacted me and said - "Steve I want to buy the latest, expensive so and so", straight off the bat, it feels like I'm Spiderman, and my Spidey sense is tingling. Like - well I can't just say ok, lets' get your payment information. My mind begins prompting for questions - "Well, ok, but how would you use this?" What are you using now? How is it going to improve what you're doing now, and is this cost worth it to you?" NEVER JUST TAKE THE ORDER.

    These thoughts happen, these conversations happen, and we try and boil it down to rationals for this move forward, and sometimes I find I am fighting someone's emotional imperative that the rational doesn't matter to them, at least on a certain level. They just want it. They've sold themselves. And sometimes I un-sell them. You're probably wondering - how hard do I try? Well, sometimes, pretty hard if it really feels like a borderline scenario to me.

    I hear what you're saying. And nothing should ever be promised to someone that doesn't come to fruition, if the person selling it knows it won't, doubts it will, or just plain doesn't know. And if they don't know - then the manufacturers have put everyone in a bad position. In our case, we can only tell you what we know (which in some cases is not a lot). If the Leaf Credo had not been compatible with the XF, the outcry would have included ours. This is not without precedent - when Leaf was acquired by Phase One the support migration from Leaf backs was handled clumsily, with some serial numbers being excluded, some Capture One compatibility and features excluded, etc. Our voice was heard as part of the push to correct this (which it was).

    So your point that this is your money, not ours, is heard loud and clear. But I can promise you we do not take this lightly.

    **Oh, almost forgot - when I said "Geez, there's so much in these threads", I didn't mean "so much .... complaining, etc.". I meant so much content, so many opinions, so many different topics and subjects. A juicy thread, full of strong feelings.


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #237
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Well, if you buy the XF you get a nice Pelican style case that comes with a laptop display shade so you can also then get the ultimate SPro 3 experience and an armored case to go with it
    They include a sherpa to haul it around?

    Seriously,one big reason I moved to a tech camera was to lighten the pack. It already takes me longer to setup than I like, so I don't see myself doing any tethering and adding weight with a surface pro or even an iPad, so unless it could be tethered to an iPhone 6 wirelessly without need of an intermediary computer I'll stick with the poor but usable back's live view.
    wayne
    My gallery
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #238
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    Mike, you're right, it isn't our money. We will never have the same degree of emotional attachment to the investment or depreciation of that currency. We come as close as we can, and we do have a responsibility toward stewardship of those funds (some feel this more than others). On the few occasions someone has contacted me and said - "Steve I want to buy the latest, expensive so and so", straight off the bat, it feels like I'm Spiderman, and my Spidey sense is tingling. Like - well I can't just say ok, lets' get your payment information. My mind begins prompting for questions - "Well, ok, but how would you use this?" What are you using now? How is it going to improve what you're doing now, and is this cost worth it to you?" NEVER JUST TAKE THE ORDER.

    These thoughts happen, these conversations happen, and we try and boil it down to rationals for this move forward, and sometimes I find I am fighting someone's emotional imperative that the rational doesn't matter to them, at least on a certain level. They just want it. They've sold themselves. And sometimes I un-sell them. You're probably wondering - how hard do I try? Well, sometimes, pretty hard if it really feels like a borderline scenario to me.

    I hear what you're saying. And nothing should ever be promised to someone that doesn't come to fruition, if the person selling it knows it won't, doubts it will, or just plain doesn't know. And if they don't know - then the manufacturers have put everyone in a bad position. In our case, we can only tell you what we know (which in some cases is not a lot). If the Leaf Credo had not been compatible with the XF, the outcry would have included ours. This is not without precedent - when Leaf was acquired by Phase One the support migration from Leaf backs was handled clumsily, with some serial numbers being excluded, some Capture One compatibility and features excluded, etc. Our voice was heard as part of the push to correct this (which it was).

    So your point that this is your money, not ours, is heard loud and clear. But I can promise you we do not take this lightly.

    **Oh, almost forgot - when I said "Geez, there's so much in these threads", I didn't mean "so much .... complaining, etc.". I meant so much content, so many opinions, so many different topics and subjects. A juicy thread, full of strong feelings.


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Speaking for one who just went through this process with Steve, I believe he speaks sincerely. I'm excited to get my new IQ380, as well as the new XF body (even though I don't shoot the phase gear much anymore, when I do I think the new body will be terrific.)
    wayne
    My gallery

  39. #239
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    I would agree with this, but not in this instance.

    I understand people want their products to be compatible for enough time to make their investment worthwhile, however being irate because a 10 year old electronic product isn't compatible with one that was just released last week is unreasonable to me. How long do you expect these products to be supported by newer technology?

    The P-series was supported through the Mamiya AFD-1-2-3, Phase DF, and DF+ until now. And we're talking about a product in the XF that does 0 to improve the actual quality of the P-series DB, it just makes working easier.

    The people who should have a legitimate reason to be upset are those who bought a P-series DB within the last few months with the expectation of upgrading to the new body, and voiced that to their dealer, and got no warning from their dealer about the XF. Then I would be upset.

    If you're not one of those people and you think your work is going to improve that much with an XF body, then sell the P-series and buy a used IQ1 for a couple of grand extra and you can buy your XF with no worries.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mgreer316 View Post
    That being said, I agree with everything you wrote Steve. But the horse has left the barn. When we are deciding what to do, all of the medium format advantage get promoted. So we buy into it. Then when the rubber meets the road and it's upgrade time, the "logical" reasons as to why this or that isn't happening come out. THOSE SHOULD'VE BEEN STATED WHEN PEOPLE WERE DECIDING WHAT TO DO BEFORE THEY PUT DOWN THEIR MONEY. Don't sell me on advantages that won't come to fruition. That's what my problem is. And I'm not even affected as my Credo will be compatible. But in those few minutes before I knew it was going to be compatible, I was starting to feel the anger boil up as I bought the Credo specifically while waiting for a rumored new camera body. Therefore, I feel for those that bought into a system believing they'd have the opportunity to upgrade, then don't.

    When other people's investments tank, "Oh well, thems the breaks". But when it's ours we have a very different perspective.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #240
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    And we're talking about a product in the XF that does 0 to improve the actual quality of the P-series DB, it just makes working easier.
    We'll have to wait and see. IF the AF performance of the XF is predictable and reliable, then I'll have to strongly disagree with you. For ME, the value of the XF is boiled down to the auto focus performance. If the performance is merely in the range of average, then it improves the usefulness of ALL backs currently being shot with the DF. If the usefulness improves, the quality improves because you end up with more usable images.

  41. #241
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Hi Steve, I'd love to meet you, Rob, and more of your team one day. You guys have taken care of me and I appreciate it. I probably mistakenly was commenting to you when I really wanted others in this thread to hear. Critical comments should not automatically be assumed to be from complainers, whiners, trolls, haters, etc. There are some really important issues here that need to be understood and aired. I don't expect 10 year old technology to be supported UNLESS prior to my purchase of said technology the point is made about modularity and upgradability. IOW, I'm being sold an expectation as well as a product. Then we hem you take into account the price of the product, unfulfilled expectations can inspire anger. And I don't think that anger is unwarranted. I know wg n I entered this market I had no idea what's the rules were. Meaning, did technology cycles follow the same time lines? Obviously not. But how long were these cycles? With older used product still going for a decent amount I had no idea how long the technology shelf life was for MFD gear. So it's not unreasonable for a P series back owner to believe a new body would be available to them.

    Putting that aside, I am still simmering about the cost of the XF. It has NOTHING to do with the XF and EVERYTHING to do with the DF. Again, speaking specifically about the AF performance, it feels like Phase is requiring us to pay for adequate performance of a capability that should be foundational with any $200 AF camera. Let alone a $6k DF.

  42. #242
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Mgreer316 View Post
    We'll have to wait and see. IF the AF performance of the XF is predictable and reliable, then I'll have to strongly disagree with you. For ME, the value of the XF is boiled down to the auto focus performance. If the performance is merely in the range of average, then it improves the usefulness of ALL backs currently being shot with the DF. If the usefulness improves, the quality improves because you end up with more usable images.
    I agree that's the biggest feature, but hit rate and IQ are two different things. For the price of the XF it'd better be a heck of a lot more than merely average. It would be a big disappointment if it's not at least as good or better than Hasselblads true focus.

    But simmering about what you feel is inadequate performance? The engineers that work for Phase know a heck of a lot more than you or I about implementing AF on their body's. You think they spent 5 years in development gathering at a table in meetings and saying to themselves, "Guys I'm tired, forget about making money on the XF, let's just half-*** the AF on this one and make it look really pretty with a huge price tag. So even though nobody will buy it and we'll go broke, at least the few that we sell will be for huge margins!"

    In 15 years of R&D from engineers at all the major manufacturers, not a single one of them have developed DSLR like AF performance. I'm willing to bet there's a reason for this, and it's not because they would rather go golfing than work.

    Is the price way too high? Yeah probably, but if the product sucks and nobody buys it the market will take care of itself and soon enough we'll see them at auction for a price we like.
    Last edited by rhern213; 8th June 2015 at 21:27.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #243
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Hello T.
    Actually my post was not about cars which seems you love too but about the fact that nothing is forever and that human beings change their mind on a daily basis.
    BTW, I always read your posts with interest.
    Eduardo


    Quote Originally Posted by T.Dascalos View Post
    Hi Eduardo... Enzo did say that once, and even decided to paint all the cars "Maranello red wine" for a couple of years if I remember well back in late 70s or very early 80s.... but again there are some differences with the subject we are discussing here...
    1. There is no Enzo with P1... 2. It is a camera offered in one color only... 3. It never had 12 cylinders in tradition... 4. It was never an Alfa Romeo once upon the time.... 5. It comes from a company that made no cameras up until recently... I'm sure you understand the humor behind all this...

  44. #244
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    I think you're being very fair. It's possible that you're being bundled together with other posters.

    All you're saying is that if the XF had been built with support for the P+ language that it would have been an easy choice for you to buy it. But since it is not supported your choices are inherently more expensive and therefore you should also look at the competitive options.
    This is exactly what I am saying. I'm not unreasonably angry / upset / pi**ed off. I am being objective. I'm saying, having spoken with other photogs using P+ backs, that we have been pushed into a re-evaluation of the system. A re-evaluation that leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

    I'll be the first to admit that I'm probably not a dealers best friend when it comes to upgrades. I'll only upgrade when I feel that there is something offering a tangible benefit to me. I'm happy with the P40+ sensor. I'm not happy with the DF. It gets in the way. So if a new camera comes out offering real life benefits to me, I would liked to have purchased. It offers a tangible benefit to my working life. A WLF will help during portrait work; the improved focus will give me greater confidence; and it looks like a more robust product. Upgrading to an IQ140 would not. Its the same sensor. I appreciate there is a list of improvements, but having been through them, there is nothing I can't simply live without. It results in the same end product.

    I'm being pushed into a back upgrade, when I simply want a camera one.

    It is important to feedback these things to Phase One (a company I respect and have used for 10 years).

    Thats all. No more, no less.

  45. #245
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    XF compatibility - of course it is intentional and with purpose. That's in question?

    Phase One prefers that you upgrade your P+ digital back that you purchased anywhere from 4-5 to 8-11 years ago. You bet they do.
    Thank you for clearing that up for me. It is a business decision on Phase's part. I respect that, as they are running a business that I hope remains profitable.

    However remember this is the first time in Phase's history (that I can remember) that a deliberate cut off has been implemented. Don't underestimate the depth of feeling in response. The wealthy amateur / larger studio / rental houses will absorb these costs. The photogs with a primary P+ back, a backup P/P+ and 2x camera bodies is now a little stranded.

  46. #246
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    I know some well informed people have said it's not a simple matter to accomidate the P+ backs for use on the XF. To that I ask, well, what on earth is the "open system" rhetoric about then? Surely it's a standard and well proven interface? Heck, they own the patents and you can even use a P+ back on an H4/5X Hasselblad body and it works fine (exepting of course some features Hasselblad save for when using their own backs with an H body). I honestly don't think it's too much to ask that the that generation of legacy back be supported in a basic sense by the new body. There must be a ton of photographers who use P+ backs as backups to IQ backs?

    I don't have a horse in this race except that I'm planning on buying into a system later this year. I guess in that regard my opinion isn't overly troubling to anyone involved. Take it with a grain of salt, I guess.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #247
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Of course it would be very easy to make a P back work... Even the different language claimed elsewhere isn't a problem... the main control chip could have two or three different communication "languages" built in, that could be user selectable and applied.

    Obviously there are two different approaches on this release... One from owners of the IQ & Credo backs that think of it as a platform that could take the most out of their backs and another from people that see a very well designed "black box" that has interchangeable finders some 18 years after Mamiya last offered that option, is very well built and offers all they need and more... but no compatibility with their choices of imaging surface...

    It is logical for the later to feel that they are left out on purpose and even feel a bit betrayed... "closed system" practices are not compatible with traditional MF values and the sooner makers will understand that, the better for them... Hasselblad seems to have payed the penalty of their choices the hard way, isn't that a good example for the rest of makers?

  48. #248
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    "traditional MF values" sounds like a contradiction to me; and that awareness should be the first commandment.
    fun aside, "traditional MF" used to mean you put your A-12 back only on your 500C, or your Rollei back on your 6008, or you swapped out entire cameras, (rollieflex), etc. there was no such thing as cross platform.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #249
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    There is always the ALPA FPS. You can just about use any lens with any back out there.

    Hasselblad seems to be doing fine.

    P/P+ guys I feel your pain. But I am using a lowly Hasselblad H1 with my IQ160 with great results. So there are great options still out there and there will be for a while.

    Keep in mind the XF is new so I wouldn't rule out P/P+ compatibility just yet. But Phase has been known to protect their product line by not supporting other MF products ( like the fact that C1pro does not process 645Z files ) but doing that to their own seems a bit harsh.

    There is a small core of forum trolls / frequent posters (mostly on the other forums) that LOVE to bash on Phase and want to see them in the dirt unless Phase does things their way (which is never!). The chief complaint is Price / Cost, next would low light / long. exp. / dynamic range (CCD) and compatibility. All they do is pi$$ off some good people out of the forums and also keep Steve (CI) and Doug (DT) quite busy. It has been going on for years.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #250
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Phase One News: XF Body, IQ3 backs, 35LS, 120LS, C1 8.3, Website

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    "traditional MF values" sounds like a contradiction to me; and that awareness should be the first commandment.
    fun aside, "traditional MF" used to mean you put your A-12 back only on your 500C, or your Rollei back on your 6008, or you swapped out entire cameras, (rollieflex), etc. there was no such thing as cross platform.
    Hi, "traditional" IMO goes to freedom of choice of the type of imaging area as it was with film and is with competition (H5X)... and even was with now discontinued cameras... (HY-6/600X, m-AFD, Contax, H-V, GX-680... etc.)

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
  •