The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

IQ3 100MP long exposure issue - shadow filled with red color cast

The sun is going down now so I will probably wait until tomorrow to continue with further tests. After the weekend a batch of raw files will be sent to Phase One from both units (this demo unit and my friend's unit) through my dealer to create a support case.

It is sad that the other IQ3 100MP users choose to ignore this issue and refuse to send me raw files showing this issue and some even bash my efforts. Feel free to defend and justify the upgrade.
 
M

mjr

Guest
A quick question, do Phase One say anywhere that the back will do long exposures in aerial mode, zero latency on a tech cam without issue? I thought aerial mode was for aerial shooting where the shutter speed would be fairly short anyway wouldn't it? If they aren't marketing it as capable of doing what you want then I'm not sure how you can say it's a problem. Isn't the camera dealing with a massive amount more data than the 50mp backs? I'm not sure I'd be expecting it to work in the same way at all. Testing is obviously the way to find out but if it doesn't work how you want it to then just use what does? Just asking because I haven't seen anything written to suggest that what you are trying to do falls within it's advertised specs or use.

Mat
 
A quick question, do Phase One say anywhere that the back will do long exposures in aerial mode, zero latency on a tech cam without issue? I thought aerial mode was for aerial shooting where the shutter speed would be fairly short anyway wouldn't it? If they aren't marketing it as capable of doing what you want then I'm not sure how you can say it's a problem. Isn't the camera dealing with a massive amount more data than the 50mp backs? I'm not sure I'd be expecting it to work in the same way at all. Testing is obviously the way to find out but if it doesn't work how you want it to then just use what does? Just asking because I haven't seen anything written to suggest that what you are trying to do falls within it's advertised specs or use.

Mat
This is a good point and it's scary that Phase One may deny to fix it at all as they could always just claim everything is within their specs.

3 years ago I bought into the IQ260 for disappointing long exposure because it has to rely on darkframe NR (normal mode + normal latency). I just wanted to shoot long exposure with flexibility as the 35mm format cameras.

The IQ250 worked greatly like the 35mm format cameras.

Now this is happening again with the IQ3 100MP and it's really frustrating.
 
M

mjr

Guest
I'm not sure I agree that it would be scary if they don't acknowledge a problem if the back is working within specifications, it's just you are asking more of it than it can provide. As you know, previously the 80mp sensors didn't handle long exposures but the 60's did, just because the 100 is cmos, doesn't mean it will work in the same way as a Nikon or a 50mp back, just the sheer volume of data that has to be moved must be a limiting factor to what it can do or the heat it generates? I could see an issue needing to be solved if they say it will do 1hr exposures on an XF with a dark frame and then it doesn't, that would be a deviation from the specs, but asking it to do something that nobody says it can, that will mean simply adjusting your expectations wouldn't it? If the 50 works for what you want to do then seems as though that is the camera you want.

Mat
 

tjv

Active member
Maybe the IQ 100 just isn't the right tool for the job?

EDIT: With such specialised use cases, it's inevitable that some gear will or won't function as needed. It's a bit like my Linhof Techno and Credo 60. I love it and it produces beautiful results in the areas that matter to me, but for someone like you it'd not be up to task. Perhaps for you the IQ1/2/350 is still the best option? It's a shame considering the new back is wonderful and the resolution in particular is a real step up, but maybe that's just the state of play right now?

Of course, Phase may fix the problem in firmware when you've sent them your findings. We'll see...
 
I'm not sure I agree that it would be scary if they don't acknowledge a problem if the back is working within specifications, it's just you are asking more of it than it can provide. As you know, previously the 80mp sensors didn't handle long exposures but the 60's did, just because the 100 is cmos, doesn't mean it will work in the same way as a Nikon or a 50mp back, just the sheer volume of data that has to be moved must be a limiting factor to what it can do or the heat it generates? I could see an issue needing to be solved if they say it will do 1hr exposures on an XF with a dark frame and then it doesn't, that would be a deviation from the specs, but asking it to do something that nobody says it can, that will mean simply adjusting your expectations wouldn't it? If the 50 works for what you want to do then seems as though that is the camera you want.

Mat
Being able to disable darkframe NR is by me considered to be an essential function for a camera in 2016. There have been so many posts asking for this function and complaining about compulsory darkframe NR for medium format cameras. Most experienced filters' pals will not buy into a camera with compulsory darkframe NR. I learnt my lesson after shooting with the IQ260.

Six years ago the Nikon D7000 with Sony IMX071 did such a great job.

Four years ago the Nikon D800E with Sony IMX094 did such a great job.

Two years ago the Phase One IQ250 with Sony IMX161 did such a great job.

One year ago the Sony A7R-II with Sony IMX251 did a poor job.

This year the Phase One IQ3 100MP ...
 
M

mjr

Guest
But you know the 100 has dark frame subtraction, so why are you bothering? It is advertised as having it so it can't be a shock that it doesn't perform as you want without it surely? The fact that other cameras with half or less of the resolution perform better in that one area, doesn't mean the 100 is worth writing off because you have discovered something it doesn't do. I have a 260, I think it's brilliant, I don't personally have a desire to shoot the same style you do so the performance in those extremes doesn't affect me, for my daily use it's excellent.

As others have said, if there is a genuine issue then Phase are the only people who are going to fix it out, going on about it on here is not going to get it sorted out.

Mat
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
....

It is sad that the other IQ3 100MP users choose to ignore this issue and refuse to send me raw files showing this issue and some even bash my efforts. Feel free to defend and justify the upgrade.
Now you're just being silly. :loco:

Your first hasty generalization is your assumption that all IQ3 100MP owners/users use their cameras in these limited situations exactly as you do.

If you have a situation where you wish to use "aerial mode" and I think fair to say, you're not in a situation that you are actually physically in "aerial mode"--maybe this is a pretty limited use application. While I appreciate your desire to do without the "dark frame, Phase One really hasn't offered that option to users, though some have opted for "aerial mode" as a means to avoid it. Maybe in the next firmware update Phase will offer the option of avoiding the dark frame without hiding some attribute of it disguised as "aerial" mode. As much importance as it is to you, disabling the "dark frame" afaik was never marketed by Phase One as a feature set of the IQ3 100MP, other than for actual aerial photography. Further, I think it not too much to simply communicate with the dealer network (which is specifically set up to deal with problems) and the mothership in Denmark, if needed. I really don't think anyone is bashing you, and I think the "refusal to send" you raw files probably is more because few shoot in the limited circumstances that you do, or they simply are too busy during the work week.

No need to "defend" or "justify the upgrade." Everyone I've spoken to that actually owns an IQ 100MP thinks it works really well in professional use for how they use the camera system. Now if it simply doesn't work for you because of the style or type of photography you do, than that's fair enough---the IQ3 100MP might not be the best choice and you should look elsewhere. But I do wish you well with your dealer and Phase One, and hope they come up with a firmware solution or other that allows you to feel comfortable in completing your purchase of the IQ3 100MP. There are lots of features that I may not use on a camera system, but regardless, I'd welcome the ability to shut off the dark frame without experiencing red color cast as you are showing.

Ken
 
M

mjr

Guest
I read post 100, where you state there is a slight red shadow noise when shadows are pushed 100 on a 30 minute shot but not that obvious, is that what your complaint is? If so, contacting Phase and saying there is a slight red shadow noise when I push the shadows 100 will get you a reply of yes, that's normal or no, that's not normal, we can fix that. The results are far worse in aerial mode but as i don't think aerial mode is designed for that then I doubt you will get any joy. What are the results when the image is properly exposed and you don't need to push the shadows to 100? I have seen shots from other owners on this thread that look excellent.

Mat
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
At 30 minutes, the total character of the image changes, much more noise. Sure the file could be down sampled and some of the noise will be lost, but it's a bit striking to the other two frames which are very clean. So that part of the issue sure should sent forward to Phase One, as the testing in post 100 is totally within specs of the 100MP back, which is rated to 1 hour. Extrapolating up, it's safe to say that a 1 hour exposure on the back tested would more than likely be worse and even harder to use.

I have no tech camera currently, as mine is on loan, but I can try with my XF to see over the weekend.

Based on the terrible long noise characteristics of the A7rII, (stuck pixels extremely harsh noise on all long exposures shot with long exposure noise off), the issue with the 100MP very well be heat build up as others have mentioned. The Sony A7rII, has a heat issue period, showing up in both 4K video and long exposures which as far as I know has not been fixed by Sony now in over a year (or close). I quickly returned my A7RII after using at night with a series of 2 minute exposures as the files were just not useable.

Phase did not allow Video on the 100MP, Hasselblad did, so it will be interesting to see just how good the video from the Hasselblad is and if heat build up is an issue for them.

I am also curious what the temp was during your 30 minute test, as the specs on the 100MP are still 69 degree F or less for longer exposures and low humidity, which keeps me from doing anything very long here as temp is 100 degrees and 100% humidity.

Paul C
 
What are the results when the image is properly exposed and you don't need to push the shadows to 100? I have seen shots from other owners on this thread that look excellent.

Mat
Being unable to push shadows to 100 is another way of saying the dynamic range is poor.
 
M

mjr

Guest
Ha, I guess so, at base ISO with normal exposures pushing shadows 100 is perfectly doable, on an underexposed shot at 30 minutes, you're asking a lot. Pushing shadows 100 on any shot in my experience just produces a horrible flat faux hdr file anyway, I am firmly in the camp where shadows are shadows and add much more depth to an image than any benefit from lifting them massively, we all want different things. In my own experiments, a 30 minute shot on the 260 has no difference in noise to a 5 minute shot but then I shoot long exposures generally in pretty cold conditions so that may have an affect.

Mat
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is there some reason that this conversation isn't with Phase?

I once had a problem with my IQ 260. I called the dealer.
In my own experiments, a 30 minute shot on the 260 has no difference in noise to a 5 minute shot but then I shoot long exposures generally in pretty cold conditions so that may have an affect.

Mat
Are you sure you are very experienced with the 30 minute shot on the IQ260? I'll post off-topic issues of the IQ260 long exposure here and see what your dealer can do for you and whether Phase One is willing to fix it for you.

This time please don't complain that I have used aerial mode to disable darkframe NR. Here are the darkframe test shots:

LE_darkframe_IQ250_vs_IQ260_vs_P45plus_en.jpg

Wanna see what it looks like in a real world shot?

64.jpg

You think it's just my unit being faulty? Have a look into the sample image taken by Phase One's CTO (under cold temperature of course):

65.jpg

Still need to see more examples? Take a look into the sample files kindly provided by Digital Transitions:

61.jpg

62.jpg

63.jpg

Now that you have been told a problem with the IQ260. Try to ask your dealer or Phase One to fix it for you :deadhorse:

Or again, ignore it and use it like an IQ160 without long exposure capability.
 
M

mjr

Guest
Of course I'm sure I am experienced, I own it and use it, it's not in my interest to lie about it. My statement is clear, there is no appreciable difference on my back between the shots I take at 5 mins and 30 mins in cold temperatures, it's just a fact, I don't need other examples, I have my own! You are pretty condescending towards others, not everyone has a desire to take shots like you take. I don't judge it against a cmos back, it's not the same technology.

Anyway, back to the subject, you have minimal noise in normal long exposure use as you suggest, ask Phase if it's normal. In extreme use, you are seeing strong red shadows, if that is normal for the back then you have your answer, use a camera that works for you and get on with it!

Mat

I will also add from your above shots that good technique is always better than just relying on pushing an image 4 stops in post and 100 in the shadows, if I was shooting so inappropriately then I am not going to blame the camera, I am going to work on my technique. Pushing a back so far and then saying it's crap when judged against other backs pushed that far is daft, if you can't get good images from any of these backs then the issue isn't the tech.
 
there is no appreciable difference on my back between the shots I take at 5 mins and 30 mins in cold temperatures,

Mat
Are you sure there's no difference? Have you looked into the 4 corners carefully?

Phase One would just say that the sensor temperature had grown out of specification and would refuse to fix the corner issues for you, even with the fact that their own CTO took that sample image in the snow and ice.

I will also add from your above shots that good technique is always better than just relying on pushing an image 4 stops in post and 100 in the shadows,
If you have good techniques to shoot these images posted here I'm willing to learn, really. For those long exposure shots of contrasty scenes I see no way of shooting without a sensor with good dynamic range.

Even if you don't like dynamic range, Phase One has used this term for marketing purposes, as other companies does.
 
M

mjr

Guest
Of course I'm sure, what would possibly be the point of making it up? When I get up to 45 mins or an hour, there are issues with the corners for sure, luckily there are lots of solutions, I have used content aware fill many times and have no issue cropping, it's why I have 60mp, my clients never need images that size so I have the flexibility. Are you talking about the coastline image? Honestly I'm not your market for that sort of thing, I'm sure it's very popular though.

Mat
 
Of course I'm sure, what would possibly be the point of making it up? When I get up to 45 mins or an hour, there are issues with the corners for sure, luckily there are lots of solutions, I have used content aware fill many times and have no issue cropping, it's why I have 60mp, my clients never need images that size so I have the flexibility. Are you talking about the coastline image? Honestly I'm not your market for that sort of thing, I'm sure it's very popular though.

Mat
Well content aware fill is better than cropping it into a crop sensor. Glad that it worked out well for you.
 
M

mjr

Guest
I'm glad you're glad! Ha!

We have different approaches for sure, nothing wrong with that, I use what I have to produce images my clients pay for, I am not precious over any of it, I work with what I have until the point when it doesn't work for me and then I look for something else. I don't need to produce images to show weaknesses in my kit, I'm far more interested in producing images that work.

Anyway, rather than talking about my kit which isn't the 3100, I hope your friend sorts any legitimate issues he has and I hope you get to buy equipment that suits what you do, I don't think it's the 3100 but honestly it doesn't bother me what you shoot with as long as you enjoy it.

Mat
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Void... can you please post your support case number under which your dealer has logged these raws/reports/issues with Phase One? I'd like to check out some of the raws and dialogue.
 
Top