Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

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

    IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    https://captureintegration.com/phase...amera-testing/

    No mention of these tests here yet? I haven't got time to look at the results right now, but what do others think?
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,926
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Impressive to me. Needing 9.0.3 however to get anything from the files, i.e. LCC.

    But a ton of files to look at per each lens.

    Paul C

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Looking forward to hearing how the 60xl tests compare between backs, particularly the IQ360.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    Looking forward to hearing how the 60xl tests compare between backs, particularly the IQ360.
    Haven't looked at the files, but a pretty impressive post.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Now that is what I call a test !
    Thanks to CI for testing and making these files freely available so everyone can form an opinion themselves.
    If CI could indicate the apertures and the focus points used for each lens, that would be even better.

    I downloaded the extreme shift+fall case files for each lens and most look really good to me. If I could afford an IQ3-100, I'd be buying one now.
    Based on what I see, personally I'd be buying 32HR, 40HR, 60XL and 90HR lenses. Rest are not bad but not wowing me too much.
    Surprizingly 120XL extreme corner look the weakest to me, given that it has such a large image circle and is a 120mm (tele) lens.
    Conversely 90HR extreme corners look the best to me.

    Thanks again !
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    To CI:

    SAWEEET!!!

    Thank you...Jag
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    This test and the files are extremely helpful. Thank you very much CI.

    Dave
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Miami FL USA
    Posts
    53
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Thanks CI. Much appreciate your thorough and real world testing of the new IQ3-100. Looking forward to the Capture One 9.0.3 update to fully explore the Raws.

    The blog post is honest and from the heart. Photographers at all levels want to capture great images. Often that requires forgetting about the camera once it's set and believing that when you press the shutter the image that caught your eye will be rendered on film or digital like you wanted it to be.

    Your passion and tenacity in giving us the data to see for ourselves what the technology is capable of doing is reassuring.

    Choosing to have a career in photography or even taking advantage of a long weekend to catch a flight or pack up the car to drive, in search of a landscape spot you would like explore is not easy. Having confidence in your camera kit won't make the hike any shorter or the slope a bit more gentler, but will give you a wonderful smile when you know "you got the shot"
    Jeffery Salter
    www.jefferysalter.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    I personally very much appreciate the involvement and sharing of knowledge from our dealer friends, be it CI, DT, Rod Klukas with Arca or Stephan with HCAM and his Hartblei offerings, Yair with Leaf, plus also Sunchai for his innovative work. (Apologies if I've missed others from the vendors - I for one appreciate you being here)
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Englewood, CO
    Posts
    2,489
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1248

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    "A picture is worth a thousand words".
    So far, this is the most useful and humble thread about the IQ3-100.
    Thanks very much CI (as always)!

    Pramote
    Zenfolio | Pramote Laoprasert Photography
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Any chance someone would care to comment on the performance difference between backs with the 60xl? Hanging out to know as I can't get on my computer for another day! Don't leave me hanging!

  12. #12
    Senior Member Pemihan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,114
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Kudos to CI for doing the test and making the RAW's available for everyone to download. I look forward to play with them.

    I would really like to see the same test shot outdoors with a blue sky as issues like tiling and micro lens ripples etc. are predominantly visible in the sky.
    Peter
    My website
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    I'm downloading files now.
    One thing I wonder though is if this sensor performs better on lateral shifts than rise and fall when the back is in landscape orientation, just as the older 50mpx Sony sensor does. I noticed when I tested the 50c that it there was a drastic difference in performace depending on the orientation of the back. This test might be less of a stress test than I originally though, although it'll be interesting to compare the performance relative to the other backs. I understand the time constraints at play, but it would have been good to see more comparison shots made with the different backs using more lenses.
    Looking forward to seeing them for myself and am preparing the tissues for fear my eyes will start bleeding when I open C1.
    Last edited by tjv; 10th January 2016 at 02:27.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    I'm downloading files now.
    One thing I wonder though is if this sensor performs better on lateral shifts than rise and fall when the back is in landscape orientation, just as the older 50mpx Sony sensor does. I noticed when I tested the 50c that it there was a drastic difference in performace depending on the orientation of the back. This test might be less of a stress test than I originally though, although it'll be interesting to compare the performance relative to the other backs. I understand the time constraints at play, but it would have been good to see more comparison shots made with the different backs using more lenses.
    Looking forward to seeing them for myself and am preparing the tissues for fear my eyes will start bleeding when I open C1.
    I've posted some analysis over at Lula.

    The IQ3100 sensor has the exact same behavior as the IQ250 in terms of crosstalk pattern, so it's better at lateral shifts in landscape orientation just as before. As I don't have any side by side testing in same light condition I can't say for sure if the IQ3100 has less crosstalk than the IQ250, but comparing with Doug's library test it seems like they are on a similar level. In any case the IQ260 is much more robust (except possibly for the tiling issue).

    You will make good images, but once you leave center frames it's about shoehorning a sensor into a use case it was not designed for. One have to make a very difficult almost painful judgment, how much will you compromise tonality and/or shift range in exchange for the delightful CMOS feature set? The CMOS feature set is just so much better than CCD so I think many will push themselves to making compromises they otherwise wouldn't do.

    A problem with the CI test files is that they are underexposed so they become very noisy, and the shooting location is not good concerning evaluating color and detail, that is it's harder to spot issues. Doug's library test which he made for the IQ250 was much easier to draw conclusions from.

    As noted above, plain sky shots are valuable too for testing.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    In lack of clear sky you can try put an LCC shot through some extreme processing. I find a horizontal tile line, and some sort of vertical ripple but the 4.5 stop underexposed LCC shot with an additional 4 stop of vignetting is taxing even for Sony, a less noise image would be more easily analyzed.

    When I put the same extreme processing settings on an IQ260 shot the tiles are very obvious. I find it highly unlikely that the IQ3100 tile line would be problematic in any normal photography, it's very very weak.

    The vertical ripple is more worrying though, could be causing issues in a nice plain sky shot. It's something the LCC algorithm will need to be turbo-charged for probably. Maybe has already been done in C1 9.0.3?

  16. #16
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    To a certain degree I'm pleased to see the shadow recovery images as it matches my approach to shooting with the IQ150. TBH the dynamic range of that sensor is pretty unbelievable anyways and if the IQ3 100 is the same or better then it is truly the solution that I think most people have been looking for.

    I took a look at all of the files. Looking forward to C1 Pro 9.03 so that I can try out the LCCs properly.

    A high key image converted to B&W and stretched in post processing to check for tiling would be a useful test example.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"

  17. #17
    Senior Member Dave Gallagher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,205
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    First let me say hello to everyone here. At one time in life I was a very active member when I had more free time. With a growing business, you are forced to do less of what you love and more management, accounting, expansion strategies, etc. Add to this, 3 teenagers and a wife who says she isn't "high maintenance" but we all know better....... : )

    Since Steve has not commented on these images and we have a trade show (Imaging USA) beginning today in Atlanta, I thought that I should step in and explain a few things.

    1) We decided to shoot a location with extreme contrast. We wanted daylight and continuous internal light. We wanted to show an image that was not perfect, as most of our shooting situations are not as controlled as the tests that I have seen from multiple sources. This location gave us the severe situation where I would really need to lean on the Dynamic Range of the camera capturing it.

    2) We pushed the system and captured outside of the image circle on many of the shift and fall images. These images are NOT the perfect shooting scenario. I would not push it this far if I wanted to create the most perfect image for reproduction. But this is what we wanted to do. You get "perfect" images form the manufacturer. You get images from other sources that you really can't make judgements due to tight control of any result where they system might fail. These images show you what is under the hood. These images show you what this system can and can't do.

    3) The one area I would have changed in hindsight: As the sun dropped in the day, we did not adjust the exposure accordingly. Some of the later shots are under-exposed more than I would have preferred. We will change this on the next test.

    I am not a scientist nor claim to be. I don't claim to be the "smartest man in the room" nor want anyone to think that. CI is a straight and honest company trying to give our customers the most unbiased knowledge and information that you can get in the marketplace. With that said, have fun with the images. I do not agree that you can't make proper deductions from this test. In fact, I think that you can get more real world info from this test instead.

    And let me finish with my appreciation of this forum, its members, and our esteemed moderators. My lack of posts do not represent how I feel about this incredible source of information and group of individuals.

    Dave Gallagher
    CEO, Capture Integration
    Thanks 10 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 10 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    To a certain degree I'm pleased to see the shadow recovery images as it matches my approach to shooting with the IQ150. TBH the dynamic range of that sensor is pretty unbelievable anyways and if the IQ3 100 is the same or better then it is truly the solution that I think most people have been looking for.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Gallagher View Post
    1) We decided to shoot a location with extreme contrast. We wanted daylight and continuous internal light. We wanted to show an image that was not perfect, as most of our shooting situations are not as controlled as the tests that I have seen from multiple sources. This location gave us the severe situation where I would really need to lean on the Dynamic Range of the camera capturing it.
    I believe shadow recovery (dynamic range) is one of the selling point of this Sony CMOS sensor. A really great sensor! (And thanks to CI and Dave for the tests as well as sharing the RAW files!)

    I assume that this was shot at the same aperture right?

    Edit: by more fine calculations, in your tests the IQ3100 was 0.58 stops brighter than the IQ280 (where you used the same shutter speed), and in my tests the IQ3100 was 0.41 stops darker than the IQ380 (where I doubled the shutter speed of the IQ3100). Considering the changing light conditions I think these are within reasonable margin.

    As a side note, I also noticed some additional degree of chromatic aberration on the IQ3100 (same as observed in my tests). Perhaps this can be fixed by a future Capture One.

    Name:  56.JPG
Views: 709
Size:  416.8 KB
    Last edited by voidshatter; 10th January 2016 at 05:59.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Thanks again CI. Any comparisons of the two CCD backs with 32HR or 40HR?

    Just need to wait now for 9.0.3!

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    I think there maybe something wrong with the 120XL images. Anyone else seeing this?

  21. #21
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    I think there maybe something wrong with the 120XL images. Anyone else seeing this?
    I didn't download those cuz I didn't expect any issues. I will take a look. For some reason I am having difficulty white balancing th 380-60xl file. It keeps a bit of extra red in the file. If I click on the same spot vs the 3100 file, say the color checker, the results are like 167/160/160. The 3100 file goes dead neutral like it should.
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com

  22. #22
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    I think there maybe something wrong with the 120XL images. Anyone else seeing this?
    the 120MM Shift 18.eip file opens fine for me. It is dark and a bit front focused (ladder 2/3 from the bottom looks like the focus point).

    But other than that it is fine.

    Dave

    Edit: Not front focused, but either not aligned or de-centered. The books on the left are sharp but not on the right. I don't have this lens so maybe it just isn't sharp on the edges? I doubt it...

    Edit2: Downloaded the hero shot (120MM Hero.eip). Sharp in the center, not so much on either side. Weird; I would not have expected that from this lens. Again the ladder looks sharp so must be field curvature...?
    Last edited by dchew; 10th January 2016 at 10:50.
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    I think there maybe something wrong with the 120XL images. Anyone else seeing this?
    Just for sanity check I measured the LCC for crosstalk (as I've done in with many others) and it's as expected 0% over the whole surface. The image itself though is suspiciously defocused on the right side, so much that I don't think it's a focusing issue but rather some problem with the lens used.

  24. #24
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    The image itself though is suspiciously defocused on the right side, so much that I don't think it's a focusing issue but rather some problem with the lens used.
    Anders, see my second edit above. the front of the ladder looks sharp to me, and I assume that is several inches in front of the books. Would you agree that is field curvature?

    Dave
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    I think this particular lens may be decentered, the right side is quite bad on the 18mm shot and a little less so on the hero shot.

    I have a copy of this lens and it is sharp across the frame, even a 30mm shift looks letter than the 18 here.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Your observations are very correct..... that lens (for $5100) is decentered or worse just completely out of wack. I just purchased a new one in Copal 0 for my Actus and immediately sent it back to Schneider for alignment - which they are very good at. I don't have it back yet but it sure better be better than it was before I sent it in for adjustment - so far they have never disappointed me..... after all it cost me ($2100.00) delivered to my front door. Sure is a lot better then the Alpa premium but still a small chunk of money.

    Victor

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by dchew View Post
    Anders, see my second edit above. the front of the ladder looks sharp to me, and I assume that is several inches in front of the books. Would you agree that is field curvature?

    Dave
    Dave.... you could be correct in that it 'could' be curvature. But, boy..... that would be a fair amount of curvature!! I don't have any lens in my 35mm or tech camera arsenal that would be that bad under the same circumstances. It would have been better to see an equal shift left and right and then, for sure, it could be established whether or not the lens has curvature or is out of alignment. A lens that is out of alignment also has something sharp somewhere..... just not where it should be.

    Victor

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    My thoughts after staring at these for a few hours...I have all of these lenses and am quite familiar with their performance on an IQ180.

    The colors are quite different between the CCD backs and the IQ3 100MP, but will wait until 9.0.3 is out. Shadow recovery is pretty awesome!

    I did not use LCC, but used the lens profiles for the Rodie lenses and played with sharpness/light falloff.

    23HR - Looks very good. Good enough that I'd want to compare between a CCD back with this lens to see if there is anything substantial.

    32HR - So far this is my biggest disappointment. It is my favourite lens of all time and does not appear to fair too well with the new back. A shift of 10mm looks far worse than an 18mm on the 40HR. Will wait for 9.0.3 for final conclusions, but this could be a deal breaker.

    40HR - simply beautiful, just awesome! Wish the 32HR could perform this well.

    60XL - Hmmm....There are IQ280 samples to compare against so this was quite interesting. There is definitely some kind of purple/magenta cast going on in the IQ3/100. This is without LCC on both files. Sharpness/smearing in the extreme shifts looks about the same. If the LCC can clean up the colour issues, I think this lens will be just fine. As far as resolution, I'm not seeing any huge advantage for the 100MP back, noise and shadow detail are a different story.

    90HR - Just awesome! Same feeling as 40HR. I am assuming this is the 90HRSW.

    120XL - Samples look like the lens is decentered. This is an incredible lens, and something has to be off here. Also, assuming the is the 120XL ASPH.

    Appreciate hearing about what others are seeing.

    Also want to thank CI again, looking at the files again, I can appreciate all the work that went into this. Also would be curious at to which lenses used the CF (23,32,40,60).
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #29
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Steve Hendrix posted over at Lula that no center filters were used in the tests.

    Dave
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  30. #30
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Hi,

    Keep in mind that this was sensor test and not a lens test. Yes, it seems that the 120XL underperforms compared to the others.

    Anyway this was a very good demo of the capabilities of that sensor. Would someone give me 50k$, I would know how to spend it.

    Best regards
    Erik

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    My thoughts after staring at these for a few hours...I have all of these lenses and am quite familiar with their performance on an IQ180.

    The colors are quite different between the CCD backs and the IQ3 100MP, but will wait until 9.0.3 is out. Shadow recovery is pretty awesome!

    I did not use LCC, but used the lens profiles for the Rodie lenses and played with sharpness/light falloff.

    23HR - Looks very good. Good enough that I'd want to compare between a CCD back with this lens to see if there is anything substantial.

    32HR - So far this is my biggest disappointment. It is my favourite lens of all time and does not appear to fair too well with the new back. A shift of 10mm looks far worse than an 18mm on the 40HR. Will wait for 9.0.3 for final conclusions, but this could be a deal breaker.

    40HR - simply beautiful, just awesome! Wish the 32HR could perform this well.

    60XL - Hmmm....There are IQ280 samples to compare against so this was quite interesting. There is definitely some kind of purple/magenta cast going on in the IQ3/100. This is without LCC on both files. Sharpness/smearing in the extreme shifts looks about the same. If the LCC can clean up the colour issues, I think this lens will be just fine. As far as resolution, I'm not seeing any huge advantage for the 100MP back, noise and shadow detail are a different story.

    90HR - Just awesome! Same feeling as 40HR. I am assuming this is the 90HRSW.

    120XL - Samples look like the lens is decentered. This is an incredible lens, and something has to be off here. Also, assuming the is the 120XL ASPH.

    Appreciate hearing about what others are seeing.

    Also want to thank CI again, looking at the files again, I can appreciate all the work that went into this. Also would be curious at to which lenses used the CF (23,32,40,60).

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    Hi,

    Keep in mind that this was sensor test and not a lens test. Yes, it seems that the 120XL underperforms compared to the others.

    Anyway this was a very good demo of the capabilities of that sensor. Would someone give me 50k$, I would know how to spend it.

    Best regards
    Erik
    Fair enough, but for me, the question to be answered is what level of performance/useability can the end-to-end system of lens, camera, back, and software deliver. Specifically, will replacing an IQ180 with an IQ3 100 in this "system" be worthwhile. I still don't know the answer, but lens performance and the impact of a particular sensor on lens performance is a key part of this I would think.

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    Specifically, will replacing an IQ180 with an IQ3 100 in this "system" be worthwhile. I still don't know the answer, but lens performance and the impact of a particular sensor on lens performance is a key part of this I would think.
    I have the Leaf/Credo 50 and the IQ180 and the Leaf has transformed my shooting experience. The live view alone is worth the upgrade - but then, I use live view a lot. The overall color between the two sensors is slightly different...... there will always be those that won't accept anything different from their beloved CCD sensor and that is fine but I always felt that the CCD delivered a slightly too warm image for my tastes. I was always cooling down my images. The CMOS levels that out a little more so its a benefit for me. I was also able to shift my 35XL a full 15mm with the CMOS back..... I was limited to about 6mm on the CCD. My hopes are that the 100MP will give me a clean 8mm of movement..... if I get that I'm more than satisfied. All of my other lenses should be just fine. I worked out a deal with Dave at C1 that made sense to me. I was able to use my Leaf and recoup almost what I paid for it. So..... I'm into this at a price level that is far different than just upgrading from my IQ180.

    Victor

  33. #33
    Member AreBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Highlands, Scotland
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Victor,

    Is there any advantage to retaining the IQ180 when you will soon own an IQ3 100MP?

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by vjbelle View Post
    I have the Leaf/Credo 50 and the IQ180 and the Leaf has transformed my shooting experience. The live view alone is worth the upgrade - but then, I use live view a lot. The overall color between the two sensors is slightly different...... there will always be those that won't accept anything different from their beloved CCD sensor and that is fine but I always felt that the CCD delivered a slightly too warm image for my tastes. I was always cooling down my images. The CMOS levels that out a little more so its a benefit for me. I was also able to shift my 35XL a full 15mm with the CMOS back..... I was limited to about 6mm on the CCD. My hopes are that the 100MP will give me a clean 8mm of movement..... if I get that I'm more than satisfied. All of my other lenses should be just fine. I worked out a deal with Dave at C1 that made sense to me. I was able to use my Leaf and recoup almost what I paid for it. So..... I'm into this at a price level that is far different than just upgrading from my IQ180.

    Victor
    Thanks Victor. I recall when you got the Credo 50 and were quite impressed by it, around the same time Guy was teasing us with his samples! The new back does look good, and LV, HDMI streaming, and DR/Noise performance will all make life so much easier. I'm "OK" with the cost as well. The big if for me is whether or not the output will be at or above the IQ180. The CI tests, with the exception of the 32HR are pointing that way. We will be able to confirm once 9.0.3 is out. One other area, is the saturation. As you say, the IQ CCD backs are a little warm. But I find the new back quite different from both the CCD backs and the 50MP CMOS backs. I had to crank up saturation quite a bit on the IQ280 samples to get the reds to match what what was in the 100MP samples. Again, we'll see with proper LCC application what these look like.

    Again, the bottom line for me would be the end result. We all went down this crazy tech cam route for that, and convenience was secondary. So not sure that changes, sure the workflow would be nicer, but only if the files with tech lenses are as good or better.

  35. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Phase One likes warm colors, their profiles are deliberately designed that way. If you make a custom profile it doesn't have to have the warm look if you don't want to.

    Both the Dalsa and Sony sensor color responses are very neutral for "normal range" colors and can be made to look extremely similar if you desire. I haven't checked myself but I've heard that Hasselblad has a different approach than Phase One, they try to make their cameras look the same regardless of sensor, and that is achieved through profile design. While Phase One seems to deliberately make the backs look a little different so it's easier to differentiate the products.

    The white balance presets on the camera has some effect too of course, while you can it's a bit of a mess mess to equalize those so what the manufacturer have decided those to be has an effect for us often using the camera fixed at daylight preset.

    To take control over color you need to design your own profiles though which is not an easy task if you want to fine-tune them to the level of what Phase One does with their digital backs. If you don't you get what the manufacturer provides and then the color is what it is. But in principle it's much more tunable than it may seem.

    I have myself changed my workflow to always use my own designed profiles. While there are sensor differences they're very much evened out. It takes some confidence to do it though, to imagine that you can design as good profile yourself as the "Image Quality Professor" locked in since decades somewhere in Phase One's basement. I'm not sure I make as good job in terms of the craft, but I do know I make a job that suits my taste better and it's really a lot about taste. It's not a single scale good-to-bad color, it's much about what look you prefer.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ3100 tech cam test by Capture Integration

    Quote Originally Posted by AreBee View Post
    Victor,

    Is there any advantage to retaining the IQ180 when you will soon own an IQ3 100MP?
    Not for me...... the IQ180 has been a great back but once I got my hands on the Leaf/Credo 50 I knew I would be saying goodbye to the 180 as soon as a FF sensor came out. I've switched to full time use of my Actus which also has revolutionized the way I shoot. It really does require a CMOS back for focus as opposed to the other aids available with my Alpa. Pluses I enjoy about the Actus are the ability to shift and rise at the same time. Also I can tilt/swing any lens and...... with the longer rail I have eliminated the close focus constraints that are prevalent with the Alpa Helicals.

    Victor
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •