Phase One P65+ or Leaf Aptus-II 10R

[Krosavcheg]

My apologies for posting if the differences/similarities between the backs has been discussed, but I only managed to salvage few bits of information in between different thread discussions where both backs are mentioned rather loosely.

The information I am looking for is perhaps more so imaging related though practicality (cooling, menus etc is just as valued).


So few questions that spring to mind are:

• Somebody mentioned that 10R doesn't have microlense design, is it correct?
• Both chips are manufactured by Dalsa and have same 6um pixel pitch design? Would it be possible to find spec sheets for the 10R sensor anywhere?
• Assuming both chips are nearly identical, does readout strategy differ dramatically between Phase and Leaf? Afaik, Kodak and Dalsa CCDs err in red, but PRNU should not be much different? Or should one expect, for instance different shifts in blue/green?
• Does the 10R match P65+ on the 11.9 bits DR and 50ke- FWC? Well...I have no idea about chip differences in
• Does 10R needs awake signal? Afaik, 65+ doesn't.

Of course, 10R adds a bit of a different format as such, so that's the main piece that I have to figure out myself.
I am somewhat of a fan of Eugenio Recuenco and his panoramic shots (including verticals). Well, those might be stitches and composites, but that's a different topic. In past I tended to try and shoot stitches during model sessions with various success.. So perhaps 10R would be a bit of a help?

Going to initially use it on RZ67ProIID and GX680ProIII while I will have to probably save a bit for a technical cam..

Thank you all in advance for taking your time.

PS Not that urgent to reply - I still have few months of saving up..

Best Regards

 

[torger]

Both the P65+ and Aptus-II 10R uses the Dalsa 6um technology (just different size of the chip), and it comes with microlenses. However the microlenses in those sensors are much less "destroying" than the first generation, which started the rumor that they did not actually have microlenses at all, but it's not correct.

I don't know if you can find the 56x36mm spec sheet specifically somewhere, but as the 6um Dalsa tech is the same all over, you can just get the spec for the P65+ chip: FTF9168C 60 MP Color CCD - Product Detail - Teledyne DALSA. I'm not 100% sure though if there's some tiny difference in some aspect, but the base tech is the same for sure.

The spec sheet does not say everything about DR etc, it outlines some limits, but with CCDs the analog design matters a lot too. I don't know how P65+ and Aptus-II 10R compares, but Phase One has typically had a lead when it comes to getting the most DR out of a CCD chip. If there are any differences I expect them to be really small.

I have no information on readout strategy. I expect to see some slight tiling issues from both backs on tech wides, if you're wondering about that.

If you're saving up for a tech cam, it will matter if you will be using Schneider Digitar 28XL and 35XL or Rodenstock wides. The backs are perfectly usable with Digitar wides and some use it, but you will see limitations in movements due to microlenses and crosstalk. Rodenstock wides are a better match for this sensor, but also more expensive of course. If you don't intend to make much movements and can compromise a little with DR then the Digitars will work fine.

 

[Krosavcheg]

Just den mannen jag hoppades att få svar från..
Sorry about that Swedish "inlägg"...

I have read your excellent article on MF backs with tech cams which actually covers most of the issues one can encounter and what to expect.

In that case it probably be better safe than sorry and go for P65+.

Not much for UWA shooting. On 35mm side I rarely go for 21 Distagon anymore and stick with 28mm. 24mm (35mm equiv.) is probably tops for me. The focal length I stay with is 45-50mm with perhaps portraiture in the studio at 125mm.
Having said that, things might change and it's nice to keep all the options open.
I thought crosstalk was apparent with CMOS backs? or is it still an issue with CCD backs? Is it limited to tech cameras mostly?

The information on DR and colour strategies I got from another Swedish gentleman known as Denoir (not sure if you are familiar with him). He explained strategies differing between Canon, Nikon and MF backs (referring to Hasselblad backs). I just wanted to see if there were any significant differences in colour rendition between MF manufacturers. He also mentioned that DR for P65+ has slightly better values than for instance 45+ or H3/H4.

Aside from that I been trying to get accustomed to shooting at f11 and under 30s shutter whenever possible. So far it seems to be easy to get used to..

Just wondering if there are any more unmentioned and obvious for some issues/drawbacks. Like shooting in a high humidity and direct sun, accidentally removing back without powering it down which will require it to be sent to Lower Micronesia for chip reset, kapture group adapter issues, RZ67IID issues...etc...

All knowledge is welcome and equally appreciated!

 

[torger]

Some of the Kodaks, like the KAF-39000 in P45+ and others, had light shields that where specifically designed to stop crosstalk. None of the later sensors have it, not the Dalsa 6um, not the Sony CMOS. However, with a relatively large pixel size in relation to depth, like on the 6um Dalsa, the effects of crosstalk is only seen on the extreme wide angles that you can find in the tech cam genre. The Sony has smaller pixel size so it suffers more, but still AFAIK it can only be seen on tech cam cams.

Concerning color differences it depends on your software. If you make your own custom profiles the Leaf and the Phase One can be made to look virtually exactly the same. As far as I know the color filters on those sensors are identical, and I think they are the same over all 6um Dalsa sensors. It does happen that the formula is changed for an existing sensor though, so I'm not 100% that there is no difference. The IR filter may differ a bit so there may be a tiny difference due to that, but nothing big.

However if you like most don't make your own profiles but instead use what the manufacturer provide you will get quite different color rendition. Personally I don't know exactly how large as I haven't seen an A/B comparison of the same scene, probably there are others on this forum that has done that. The MF manufacturers have quite different strategies in how they render colors, Leaf is much different from Phase and Hasselblad is yet different. Leaf have a few distinctive looks to select from, Phase One is inbetween and Hasselblad is I'd say 95% "neutral", they don't really apply any strong look at all. Hasselblad's Phocus software works fine, but it's like from the stone age. You can process Hassy files in Adobe's products but you won't get the same good results (I know, I have a Hasselblad myself, owned a Leaf before).

Yes the DR in the Dalsa 6um tech is visibly better than on the Kodaks (P45+ etc). The MFD guys are really good at fine-tuning the noise reduction stuff in their raw converters though, so even an old Kodak looks pretty good still when compared to something modern.

Concerning reliability the Leaf Aptus series is a "hot topic". Some have had issues, I'm one of those. You won't ever find an official statement from any official Leaf person or salesman that the Aptus series is less reliable. But my experience and other reports I've read on forums like this indicate that the series have issues with sample variations, that is while many (possibly most) are really reliable, there are a few odd ones that can start behaving strangely if it's a bit warm or cold, and mis-write on the CF card say one out of 400 images or so... that kind of stuff. I got my back exchanged and got a very reliable sample so it's not something that troubles all instances.

The P+ series is quite the opposite, considered one of the most reliable series out there, perhaps even more reliable than the newer IQ series.

Concerning tech cam it can be good to know that the P65+ screen can't be used for focus checking, while the Aptus-II screen, although not great, is good enough to check if you nailed focus or not. The Aptus has a fan, which when used in tech cam mode runs on full speed always, while the P65+ is fan-free. If you don't need to focus on ground glass (Alpa high precision focusing rings etc) the bad P65+ screen may not be much of an issue. I focus on ground glass, and today I think I could use the P65+ because I'm quite confident when it comes to focusing, but when I was a beginner I really appreciated the focus check of the Aptus.

I would check how it is with wakeup vs no wakeup on the P65+ on the tech cam... I don't know how it is. On the Leaf you never need wakeup, that's why the fan is running full speed all the time to cool the sensor which gets warm by being always ready. Possibly the fan-less P65+ would get noise issues when using in no wakeup mode... someone else on this forum probably knows.

I don't know of any strange issues that would require you to send it to Lower Micronesia . Here in Sweden it's surely easier to get service for a Phase One back than a Leaf back, but if everything goes well you should have many trouble-free years ahead. Buying second hand is always a bit of a gamble, but it's mirrored in the price too.

In direct sun you can probably get blooming like on all CCDs, but it's kind of a full daylight thing, and even then quite mild. There won't be blooming in typical sunset pictures with the sun in the frame.

 

[Krosavcheg]

Thank you for the information, Torger!

I am back and forth between Japan and Sweden, so I reckon service shouldn't be much of a trouble (except financially of course). Afaik, Japan is not an MFD country but Sweden will do nicely.

Considering the colour strategy, I am not entirely familiar with MFD profiles and how they apply, but as colour is affected by underlying luma and chroma noise and giving a certain priority to one channel will come at a price of loss in the other.
I need to read a little more technical information on that.

So I suppose I will stay safe with the P65+. Missing the focus check is of course is a bit of a loss, but not significant enough for me in comparison to inaccurate tonal rendition.

Much appreciated!

 

[torger]

Considering the colour strategy, I am not entirely familiar with MFD profiles and how they apply, but as colour is affected by underlying luma and chroma noise and giving a certain priority to one channel will come at a price of loss in the other.
I need to read a little more technical information on that.

So I suppose I will stay safe with the P65+. Missing the focus check is of course is a bit of a loss, but not significant enough for me in comparison to inaccurate tonal rendition.

I think you may worry too much about noise. Most images are well-exposed and the areas which contribute to the global color rendition will have a good signal-to-noise ratio. Sure if we look into how color is rendered in shadows we have pushed a lot in post-processing (with tonemapping etc), then noise will be a significant factor, but for "normal" images and "normal" post-processing noise is not an issue.

While profiles do "rebalance" the channels, cameras with the same color filters on the sensor will not have significantly different balance, otherwise you'd have color casts. A profile with a more saturated look increases noise compared to a less saturated look though (as you need to increase channel separation), but still I don't think it has significant effect in this case.

Try to get hold of some sample raws from the P65+, play around with them a bit and see what you think.

 

[Krosavcheg]

I think you may worry too much about noise. Most images are well-exposed and the areas which contribute to the global color rendition will have a good signal-to-noise ratio. Sure if we look into how color is rendered in shadows we have pushed a lot in post-processing (with tonemapping etc), then noise will be a significant factor, but for "normal" images and "normal" post-processing noise is not an issue.

You are probably right. I am "overengineering" this a tad. Essentially, I am transposing Nikon v Sony CFA strategies on the same sensors onto MFD. Difference perhaps being with CCD way ahead of CMOS on PRNU.
Noise is good, though not of the banding kind, and afaik CCD should not produce huge amounts of that even when lifting 2-3 stops from shadows (tested with Fuji's super ccd on Finepix S5Pro).

While profiles do "rebalance" the channels, cameras with the same color filters on the sensor will not have significantly different balance, otherwise you'd have color casts. A profile with a more saturated look increases noise compared to a less saturated look though (as you need to increase channel separation), but still I don't think it has significant effect in this case.

Try to get hold of some sample raws from the P65+, play around with them a bit and see what you think.

I think guys from DT sent me P65+ and P45+ files some time ago. Will dig them up and test. Of course, nothing beats the own experience of shooting in the regular (for oneself) conditions.

 

[Krosavcheg]

Btw, does anyone know of any issues or the mechanism of operating mirror lockup on RZ67 with digital back? Speaking of exposures greater than 8s and requiring setting T mode on the lens rather than using camera's B mode?

 

[daf]

If your plan is to shoot in field with techcam, being able to shoot tethered to a surface pro is such a real plus...so i You are on budget then i would defenetly consider an iq140.
As you can see on a recent thread...many people don't see/need the difference between 40 and 80mpx��
Then if the plan is stitching, limit will be drive by the lens image circle or the techcam but not much by sensor size.

 

[Krosavcheg]

If your plan is to shoot in field with techcam, being able to shoot tethered to a surface pro is such a real plus...so i You are on budget then i would defenetly consider an iq140.
As you can see on a recent thread...many people don't see/need the difference between 40 and 80mpx��
Then if the plan is stitching, limit will be drive by the lens image circle or the techcam but not much by sensor size.

I am not as much into the MPX race, so perhaps it would be a good idea, but realistically speaking even for a P65+ I am looking at half a year saving of about 70% of my monthly income. I am afraid IQ140 will further cripple my wallet..
Techcam will appear at a later stage - RZ67 will have to suffice for a start.
Aside from that, it would be nice to have a 1:1 sensor, especially being on a 6x7..

Can't P65+ be used with a slab?

 

[heyyrobert]

For whatever it's worth, the screen and focus check on my IQ140 is killer compared to the P series. Now, I honestly think the screen is overhyped as a while since it's nothing compared to an iPhone screen, but it's very nice.

I got my IQ140 back for 6500 from Adorama with a short but useful warranty (which to them means refund if it breaks, from experience).

P65's are in the 8-10k range from what I see, but I made the call to go IQ140 after I shot with it. So useful in the field.

Unless you're shooting all tethered. Then it's irrelevant.

 

[daf]

I am not as much into the MPX race, so perhaps it would be a good idea, but realistically speaking even for a P65+ I am looking at half a year saving of about 70% of my monthly income. I am afraid IQ140 will further cripple my wallet..
Techcam will appear at a later stage - RZ67 will have to suffice for a start.
Aside from that, it would be nice to have a 1:1 sensor, especially being on a 6x7..

Can't P65+ be used with a slab?

From my own experience : Even focusing a 33mpx leaf on the RZ was quite tricky, i've tried few time for portrait and gave up...so imagine a p65��
If you go techcam there is some very good focus accuracy option: alpa hpf ring(can be fit on cambo to) or arcs rmd ...those option with a disto is very accurate...
Ok there is a screen on the back of th aptus, good enough to check focus..but so so slow.
in all case, I think that surface pro tethering is a real real plus...and 40mpx dead on will always be better than 60 out of focus..
Well I'm sure there is a lot of people who are able to focus manually an iq180 with the viewfinder of the RZ...but you should definitely try the full solution before buying

 

[daf]

Or just buy any backs with an af body

 

[Steve Hendrix]

You might like the RZ - with a P65+/Aptus-II 10 - I have still quite a few clients using RZ/DB.

However, most of them already owned the RZ and already had an affection for the camera and particularly the lenses. Which I think is an important criteria for the viability of shooting digital on an RZ camera or similar. They already liked using the RZ camera itself, the waist level finder in particular, and appreciated the rendering of the lenses.

As far as focusing, it is not impossible, it can be challenging, your shooting style might dictate how well this comes off (wide open or stopped down), not to mention your preference for area specific focus points.

It's an inexpensive system to get started with, but then so is an AFD. In fact many of my RZ clients use both platforms (RZ and 645AFD/DF) since they interchange so easily and compliment each other well.


Steve Hendrix
CI

 

[Krosavcheg]

You might like the RZ - with a P65+/Aptus-II 10 - I have still quite a few clients using RZ/DB.

However, most of them already owned the RZ and already had an affection for the camera and particularly the lenses. Which I think is an important criteria for the viability of shooting digital on an RZ camera or similar. They already liked using the RZ camera itself, the waist level finder in particular, and appreciated the rendering of the lenses.

As far as focusing, it is not impossible, it can be challenging, your shooting style might dictate how well this comes off (wide open or stopped down), not to mention your preference for area specific focus points.

It's an inexpensive system to get started with, but then so is an AFD. In fact many of my RZ clients use both platforms (RZ and 645AFD/DF) since they interchange so easily and compliment each other well.


Steve Hendrix
CI

Steve

That's very much the reason I am looking into the back for the RZ67 - I have been shooting film with it for some time now and love WLF and lenses to bits (2nd hand are dead cheap here in Japan). Last trip to Stockholm seen my 5Dm3 hardly leave the bag with 90% of shots done with RZ67.
The only drawback perhaps is need for a ladder if I raise camera to my eye level as it is hard to peak through WLF..
There is a little annoyance with floating element lenses and I can not understand the idiocy behind the T/N switch on the lenses during exposures over 8s..

One of the reasons I am looking into technical camera is weight and size. I can barely take the camera and 1 extra lens at best abroad, not to mention lugging it around for 8hrs. I have amassed quite a lot of equipment in past years and I'd rather have a flexible solution with perhaps GX680 in the studio and RZ67 on location (for now).

My style is more relaxed nowadays and I tend to take my time to compose - not much of a reportage style of photography. Even with model shots I am more and more taking my time to compose and set a pose/look rather than "pray and spray" from a variety of angles.

 

[Krosavcheg]

Or just buy any backs with an af body

Hoarding like a boss?..

 

[Krosavcheg]

From my own experience : Even focusing a 33mpx leaf on the RZ was quite tricky, i've tried few time for portrait and gave up...so imagine a p65��
If you go techcam there is some very good focus accuracy option: alpa hpf ring(can be fit on cambo to) or arcs rmd ...those option with a disto is very accurate...
Ok there is a screen on the back of th aptus, good enough to check focus..but so so slow.
in all case, I think that surface pro tethering is a real real plus...and 40mpx dead on will always be better than 60 out of focus..
Well I'm sure there is a lot of people who are able to focus manually an iq180 with the viewfinder of the RZ...but you should definitely try the full solution before buying

I think I am missing something here. I don't find it particularly challenging to focus with RZ67 while shooting film...
Does this focusing issue mean that you have to focus back separately? I.e focus camera first, then focus back? Or camera focus doesn't really matter?

 

[torger]

I think I am missing something here. I don't find it particularly challenging to focus with RZ67 while shooting film...
Does this focusing issue mean that you have to focus back separately? I.e focus camera first, then focus back? Or camera focus doesn't really matter?

Focusing becomes trickier with digital because you can pixel peep, and then you get lots of angst when you can see where the focus actually sits. With film there's lots of focusing "errors" but as we don't pixel peep as much it's not as much noted.

You don't need to focus the back separately. But if you have a screen that you can pixel peep and actually see how sharp it is (not possible on the P65+, but possible on the Aptus) you can develop a habit to first focus the camera the normal way, shoot, and then check if it was good on the back's screen, and retry if it wasn't. This isn't very enjoyable. If you can't live with the focus errors that will be there when you pixel peep, you should get an AF-capable camera.

It should be noted that while you can pixel peep successfully on the Aptus, it's not as good as a real computer screen where you will be able to differ even finer between tack sharp and almost tack sharp. On the P65+ you can only see if it's totally off, it's not possible to differ between tack sharp and slightly off as both alternatives are rendered soft. It's actually not the screen as such that is the problem, but how the back demosaics the file. Almost all older backs have very soft demosaicers in the back and don't apply any sharpening so everything looks soft regardless how it actually is.

 

[Krosavcheg]

Torger, thank you for the information.
Well, in that case an IQ back with a focus mask is a solution. So either that or a portable computer/tablet to shoot tethered to...which adds to the inconvenience of it all.

Makes me wonder how people took all those P65+ images we see in various threads, considering it being a rather useless item.

I think I will stick to film.

Cheers!

 

[torger]

Torger, thank you for the information.
Well, in that case an IQ back with a focus mask is a solution. So either that or a portable computer/tablet to shoot tethered to...which adds to the inconvenience of it all.

Makes me wonder how people took all those P65+ images we see in various threads, considering it being a rather useless item.

I think I will stick to film.

Cheers!

I'm not sure if my irony came through, focusing does not become trickier for real of course. A digital back will not be more out of focus than a film back, it's just that when you open a digital image you have better ability to actually zoom in to 100% and see exactly where the focus sits.

How much a difference that makes in a print I don't actually know as I haven't made prints from film. Some may say that as digital renders sharper than film, you will still in a print have a need to have more precise focus with digital than film. I don't know if that is true though. There's probably others on this forum that has experience from that.

Personally I use a 20x loupe on the ground glass on my tech cam, and I never shoot wider than f/11. That way I get pixel peep safe results. Focusing accurately wide open with an RZ without loupe is too hard for me, film or not... but some folks have unreal precision in their manual focusing.