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

[Smoothjazz]

I have to say the XF camera comes at a perfect time for me, shooting landscapes with a DF camera currently. I usually shoot with mirror-up, and also tend to bracket exposures. The DF does this, but it requires continuos work in the menus to make it happen. The new camera appears to make these functions far far more simpler, and I anticipate, improve the flow of my work. I have also spent time recently comparing Tech cameras to the Phase cameras, and wondering if vibrations play a role in the final image quality for an 80mp back. The new seismic sensor in this camera will be very helpful in assessing camera movements and image quality. I hope eventually this will translate into some type of image stabilization function. I am compelled enough to already order the XF from the dealer.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Is the 645DF focus really that bad? I have no problems with my old H4D and its single focus point.

As to the price of the XF, the H5x is similarly priced: $7,800.00 with a viewfinder. I suppose PhaseOne believes that is where their real competition is and they chose a similar price point.

Focus: It's not great compared to any 35mm DSLR that's for sure but as a landscape shooter it's fine. The bigger issues in the past were reliability with the backs in the field and dumb film carry over features like linking bracketing & exposure compensation to the same increment - i.e. you couldn't separate them. Also metering is 'meh' but I hardly ever use it anyway.

I'd would say that the XF is far more worthy of it's $8k price tag than the $5/6k DF/DF+ bodies were at their list price. You do seem to be getting a lot more for your money.

(Btw, it's worth watching the XF video interview over at LuLa to really get a better character of the new body. The specs are fine but seeing it really does make a difference. I'll wait to try one ... )

 

[0beone]

My 2c worth. Congratulations to Phase for a NEW body.. We have been waiting for this for quite a number of years now and for me its a welcome addition to the world of photography.
So far as i'm concerned this body will be the workhouse for many, and for many years to come and whilst it could be regarded as expensive think about how long you will have it and amortise its cost then see how 'in-expensive' it really is.
For me, I will place my order tomorrow, for the body and WLF which will replace my beloved Contax. My work is mostly on the Cambo so many of the features are irrelevant but oh how it will improve my workflow over the Contax in the studio. - Mamiya when will we see the Credo firmware update?

Cheers from down under...

 

[Mgreer316]

Like I've written, I fully expect to upgrade even though I will continue to harp on the cost. But whatever. Here's my current quandary. As Obeone mentioned, when can we expect the firmware upgrade for Credo backs to be ready? I want to upgrade my DF body but can't until the firmware is ready as I have to use my camera until then. So, if anybody has any credible information on this please let us know

 

[Ken_R]

Ι Βelieve you aren't well informed Ken... you can't use a P series back on the XF, neither you can use a third party back made for m645 mount... and I doubt you can use IQ3 with H or V bodies... (although I'm not sure...)... it is a closed system (as a platform) for IQ backs only... no multishot, no film, not an ability to retain an older back... all that H5X does offer.

The IQ380 is made in Hasselblad V and H mounts. The IQ250 and IQ260's also. The IQ350 and IQ360 are similar but made for the XF only for now. All of the IQ1xx's are made in Mamiya/Phase, Hasselblad H and V mounts.

All Leaf Credo's will soon work with the XF.

Yes, all Phase P and P+ backs are left out of the system for now and the older Leaf backs, the Mamiya 645ZD and the old Kodak DCS Pro backs. The Hasselblad HxD's were all sold as a back/camera units and the Hasselblad backs were obviously never offered in other mfg mounts.

I mean Phase offers more digital back options for the discontinued Hasselblad V system than Hasselblad. Crazy that you can slap on a state of the art IQ380 back on an old Hassy. Phase could have easily dropped making the newer IQ backs in Hasselblad H and V mounts to make people adopt their camera/lens system but they did not. That is pretty cool.

Haters gonna hate.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Haters gonna hate.

:thumbs: Exactly. No point arguing with the haters/trolls.

It all looks positive to me, and I'm probably going to be one of the late adopters if at all. Looks great and I really want one but I want a 32HR on Alpa more ...

 

[kdphotography]

From what I've seen of threads over at LuLa and here, the loudest critics are those who don't currently shoot with Phase cameras, never had an intention to shoot with a Phase camera, and won't be shooting a Phase camera in the future either.

If it works for you---great. If it doesn't, find something that does.

For those of us that actually use Phase DF bodies (and earlier generations), I think it's safe to say we all look forward to progress, though there is always always always room for improvement. I've always said that there is no free lunch. And so it is with the XF.

My name is already on the list for the new Phase XF. Sure it costs some money, but that's the cost of doing business too. I look forward to enjoying the advancements in AF performance and other perks.

ken

 

[Mgreer316]

Ken, maybe I'm missing something. But in reading through this thread, it seems to me the most critical ones do shoot Phase gear. Also, IMO, all most people seem to be arguing for is value. I'm willing to pay a premium. I already have. However, I don't want to be taken advantage of. I feel that the pricing on this body exceeds "a premium". Especially in light of the fact that it's replacing a faulty body. IMO, others should be grateful there are those willing to be called haters and trolls when they raise a stink when they see something that doesn't seem right. If Phase is sensitive to the needs of their customers then they'll take all of this in.

 

[GrahamWelland]

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.

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.

 

[0beone]

Ken, i'm with you. I suspect that not too many people complain about the latest model vehicle price and just happen to part with the money easily (or make the old model work just a little longer if they cannot afford to upgrade).
The XF body i'm sure will not be the 'Edsel' of camera bodies and is a platform designed to be built upon over several years and generations of backs - a workhorse for serious photographers.
Just as a builder may want the latest truck (ute in Aussie speak) a photographer may want the latest in camera bodies. I have a DF+ that has hardly fired a shot in anger because I really need a WLF and thus still use as my favourite studio camera a Contax. This new XF is a generational change and I for one welcome it as a breath of fresh air.

 

[jerome_m]

Jerome, when I first got my camera, I couldn't believe nothing was wrong with it. I sent it in to the MAC Group for service. I them sent it to Capture Integration for service. But times I was informed it was performing ad designed. After conversations with CI personnel and other users, I finally convinced myself nothing was actually wrong with my camera. But my experience with 35mm SLRs, both film and digital, skewed my expectations. I honestly couldn't believe the medium format community accepted thus level Of focusing. But I then realized that there were a TON of landscape photographers. Their priorities were different than mine. I also realized that many shot MF and didn't rely on AF. On hindsight, I probably should've gone the Hasselblad route with True Focus. But the prospect of using the RZ and the DF won me over. I knew the AF performance of the DF wasn't DSLR level. But I didn't expect it to be as bad as it is. The main problem is the focus point is just too big for pinpoint accuracy. I have to pump the shutter 3 sometimes 4 times to make sure I'm locked on what I want to be locked on. And sometimes that's still not good enough.

That is a bit surprising. I don't think that the focus point is much smaller in H cameras, but it can focus on an eye reliably enough for a portrait.

To clarify the eyesight thing, I wear varifocals. I have to raise and lower and head to find the sweet spot for focused scenes. Even then, I struggle with whether I'm seeing things accurately or not. It's gotten on my nerves so much I'm seriously considering Lasik surgery. So AF is critical to me successfully capturing in focus images.

Lasik surgery will not correct your vision completely if you need varifocals.

How strong is your correction? Do you have astigmatism (does your correction has a figure saying "cyl." or something similar)? If your correction is not too strong and you don't have much astigmatism, you may be better looking in the finder without glasses and using the built-in adjustment. Else, you may want to consider a pair of single focal glasses, they are not very expensive.

 

[malmac]

Well I have a 645DF with and IQ180 back - 95% landscape is the use.

So it is good to see the new XF - yes it has been awhile but now it is a matter of seeing if it is the next new camera in my camera bag.

Maybe, maybe not.

I feel the information on the camera is still a bit thin on the ground so I am in the wait and see group.

Must admit as a Canon user with a substantial number of high quality Canon lenses, I am also looking with interest at the soon to be released 5Dsr - 50 Mp camera - maybe that will come before an XF.

It is a good time to be patient.


Mal

 

[Pradeep]

...............

When I decided to buy into a Phase system, I thought I'd pay a high price to enter, but after that things would be reasonable via upgrades. But I'm discovering I was wrong. I'm more than disappointed by this revelation.

Absolutely the reason why I bailed out. Much happier with the Pentax.

 

[6x6]

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.

 

[jlm]

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. what is also a tough one is bailing out; as many have found, resale of used backs, not to mention the DF, is a difficult proposition, and you regain maybe 30-40% of what you spent only a year ago

 

[T.Dascalos]

The IQ380 is made in Hasselblad V and H mounts. The IQ250 and IQ260's also. The IQ350 and IQ360 are similar but made for the XF only for now. All of the IQ1xx's are made in Mamiya/Phase, Hasselblad H and V mounts.

All Leaf Credo's will soon work with the XF.

Yes, all Phase P and P+ backs are left out of the system for now and the older Leaf backs, the Mamiya 645ZD and the old Kodak DCS Pro backs. The Hasselblad HxD's were all sold as a back/camera units and the Hasselblad backs were obviously never offered in other mfg mounts.

I mean Phase offers more digital back options for the discontinued Hasselblad V system than Hasselblad. Crazy that you can slap on a state of the art IQ380 back on an old Hassy. Phase could have easily dropped making the newer IQ backs in Hasselblad H and V mounts to make people adopt their camera/lens system but they did not. That is pretty cool.

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?

 

[Kolor-Pikker]

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 that this is the inevitable outcome of having to modernize the entire system in one fell swoop, if what Phase wants is a modern camera, as the DF and AFD before that were based on decades-old design that was being kept alive through an artificial heart machine. 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. At some point Phase had to axe film backs too.

As of late some users seem to be jumping ship to Pentax, and I myself bought a 645Z a while ago, still sitting on the fence for what is now the Canon 5DS, glad I didn't wait. With the S007 probably being released soon, I'd wait to see how it performs compared to the 645Z, but it is a good 3x the price... and the lenses are also expensive. If I had a lot more income than I do now, I wouldn't mind owning one too though, every lens is of incredible quality and feels like it's made of a solid chunk of steel.
Pentax already has an amazing 28-45 zoom, and a 45-80 and 80-160 on the horizon, all with stabilization and a constant f/4.5 aperture, so they're going in a different but interesting direction. Leica has leaf shutters though. It all depends on your needs.

 

[6x6]

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.

 

[mjr]

6x6, any reason you can't upgrade your P40+ to an IQ140 which will work on the XF? I'm sure that would be a lot cheaper way of entering the XF system than going straight to a 350, especially if you are happy with the P40+ files, I believe its a better UI but the same sensor, could be wrong though.

Mat

 

[6x6]

@mjr - that could be an option. Although I am essentially getting the same sensor at considerable extra cost (cost assumed).

Its still all cards back on the table instead of a simple body upgrade.