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!

H6d-100c or xf iq3100 for camera and tech cam use?

Are you not aware of the fact that if you shift past 5mm on any current Phase One CMOS back, you will see a faint banding, more like streaking? Or are you not aware if Hasselblad is aware of this issue and has addressed it something that Phase one has not done.


Paul C
Sorry for the maybe ignorant questions, but I still try to understand technical cameras and the problems with CMOS backs:

Are this banding issues the reason that Phase One in their A-Series only offers the Alpa TC-12 with no Shift and Tilt functionality?
And what is the point of the A-series if it has no shift or tilt function?
 

Jamgolf

Member
Jim

The points I listed were to state why "I" decided in favor of IQ3 100 - they apply to ME.

I did not want to in-line your in-lined comments, so...
External Battery: Having a battery contraption dangling from a camera while you stand in a stream or other precarious location is not an advantage for me. It is decidedly a disadvantage. Also in my experience, even in cold weather the battery life in IQ3 100 is very good.
RAW Converter: Sounds like you prefer Phocus but for me the clear choice is Capture One.
Lens Profiles: The point I was making is that lens profiles exist in C1 - not that such and such lens needs it or not.
5 Year Warranty: Regardless of history, today P1 offers a 5 year warranty which is 3 years more than HB.
Dealer Support: Differences are clear. I can email/call and get an answer/help almost immediately. Buying even from a reputable retailer like B&H - I don't think I'll get the same type of response. B&H has great return policy but they are not focused on Hasselblad alone. I value this, someone else may not value it as much as I do. But this difference is real.
P1 Upgrade Pricing: Everyone can get their own pricing terms, I am not going to share mine. P1 trade-in terms are far better than what the H trade-in program would offer for a cross over. Its worth it to get a quote. You might find that the real $$ gap is smaller than what it appears at first.
Opportunity Cost: The wait times are not 4-5 months. The deliveries have picked up and wait times have decreased.
Known Entity: I sense a dual standard here. If Phase One dealers did not provide the test files, data and the level of transparency they would be getting killed on the forums. Heck they still get criticized even after providing those services. The H team is providing squat and is getting a huge pass. I hope H team appreciates it. I am simply not willing to buy a product at this price point without looking at the files and without any scrutiny.
Digital Back Alone: Personally I do not want to buy a product and sell the unwanted pieces. Its a hassle. It also normally means a $$ loss.

Again - what I expressed was my thought process which lead me to my purchase decision.
Obviously everyone will form one's own informed decision based on things that are meaningful individually.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:

Christopher

Active member
Question:

Is there a difference between the CCD and CMOS banding ? I mean it's not new. The IQ180 had it when shifting. However, as much as I remember it cleans up really good when using the LCC with the "wide angle" option.
 

f8orbust

Active member
The points I listed were to state why "I" decided in favor of IQ3 100 - they apply to ME...
If you’d made those points in a thread entitled, ‘Why I bought an IQ3100’ I wouldn’t have commented. But you didn’t.

This was (and still is) a thread about deciding between two systems, and your post - naturally - read as an argument in favor of one. Seems only fair - given the nature of the thread - to offer a balancing opinion in order to help the OP decide. I didn’t need to use your post, but since you made a number of great points it seemed like a useful framework.

J'ai terminé mon plaidoyer.

Jim
 

Jamgolf

Member
If you’d made those points in a thread entitled, ‘Why I bought an IQ3100’ I wouldn’t have commented. But you didn’t.

This was (and still is) a thread about deciding between two systems, and your post - naturally - read as an argument in favor of one. Seems only fair - given the nature of the thread - to offer a balancing opinion in order to help the OP decide. I didn’t need to use your post, but since you made a number of great points it seemed like a useful framework.

J'ai terminé mon plaidoyer.

Jim

OK - no worries. Balanced opinions are good.
Although right before my points I said "Some of the reasons I pulled the trigger for IQ3 100"
That kinda sounds very similar to your proposed thread title "Why I bought an IQ3100" :)
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Question:

Is there a difference between the CCD and CMOS banding ? I mean it's not new. The IQ180 had it when shifting. However, as much as I remember it cleans up really good when using the LCC with the "wide angle" option.

The banding you've seen on the IQ180 is more straight vertical bands, which, as you state, do correct well with LCC (and "wide angle lens" options checked. The CMOS backs exhibit more of a "drizzly", random sort of banding, and up to this point, this does not completely correct in some cases with LCC. Obviously it would be easier to write an algorithmic fix for a predictable, fixed, straight vertical band than a random, drizzly band. As a result, a solution hasn't yet been implemented in Capture One to fully remedy this anomaly, but I am hopeful that we'll see one.


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Sorry for the maybe ignorant questions, but I still try to understand technical cameras and the problems with CMOS backs:

Are this banding issues the reason that Phase One in their A-Series only offers the Alpa TC-12 with no Shift and Tilt functionality?
And what is the point of the A-series if it has no shift or tilt function?

The point of the A-Series is that even with no tilt or shift, lenses can exhibit color cast, and the A-Series has an embedded LCC profile that can be utilized in camera to account for this, rather than creating an LCC to account for it later. There's some merit there, but keep in mind that creating an LCC also gives you the potential to easily correct for dust on the IR Filter in Capture One, while the embedded LCC does not.

I imagine, (only imagine!), that there is the possibility in the future the embedded LCC concept could be expanded, and shift models might be incorporated.

But for now, other than the cosmetic branding and the pre-selected "kits", if you don't care about the embedded LCC for a non shifting Alpa camera, you have the other option of purchasing an Alpa TC Camera (or an Alpa shifting model) with whatever accessories or items you choose around the camera itself without purchasing an A-Series kit (through an Alpa dealer).


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Boinger

Active member
Got my h6d today.

Testing out the camera, the user interface and controls seem great very simple to use.

One thing I was surprised at is how much more noisy the files are compared to my 645z files. I could use 6400 in the 645z without even thinking. It does not seem to be the case on the h6d. I will have to run it through phocus to see more results.
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Got my h6d today.

Testing out the camera, the user interface and controls seem great very simple to use.

One thing I was surprised at is how much more noisy the files are compared to my 645z files. I could use 6400 in the 645z without even thinking. It does not seem to be the case on the h6d. I will have to run it through phocus to see more results.

With the same noise reduction settings? How do they compare with noise reduction turned off?


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Boinger

Active member
Yes I had suspected that initially and went and turned offrom all NR on the pentax. The h6d doesn't seem to have a setting for NR.

The pentax is still miles ahead imo.

I haven't had a chance to put it onto a computer yet as my power company has decided to black out my neighborhood just waiting for it to come back on.
 

Christopher

Active member
Isn't really surprising. I'm on the road and can't check for it. However, I always did not get what Pentax did with the 50 chip as it has less noise then either the hassi or phase version.
 

tjv

Active member
But you haven't opened in Phocus?

Yes I had suspected that initially and went and turned offrom all NR on the pentax. The h6d doesn't seem to have a setting for NR.

The pentax is still miles ahead imo.

I haven't had a chance to put it onto a computer yet as my power company has decided to black out my neighborhood just waiting for it to come back on.
 

Boinger

Active member
But you haven't opened in Phocus?
So I just had a chance to view both in lightroom and compare on my computer. After disabling NR on the 645z and matching both exposure equally I would say the pentax still has a very slight edge.

But really the noise just looks different from one and the other.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
I don't know how the 645z works, but on a DSLR (any brand), the noise reduction in camera only applies to in camera jpgs. Thus a raw file should not be affected by in camera settings. (I understand that long exposure noise reduction does have some in camera effects, but it sounds like you are not talking about that).

From 645z raw I have been sent and the tons of reviews, I would agree that Pentax definitely has the best high ISO out of the 50Mp Chip from Sony, which has always surprised me as it would seem that Phase could get closer. Pentax even take the chip to 12000K as I recall.

Back to the OP, with your H6D, are you using the 50MP or 100MP back?

Thanks
Paul C
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Yes I had suspected that initially and went and turned offrom all NR on the pentax. The h6d doesn't seem to have a setting for NR.

The pentax is still miles ahead imo.

I haven't had a chance to put it onto a computer yet as my power company has decided to black out my neighborhood just waiting for it to come back on.

If you haven't imported the files into your computer and viewed them in raw processing software with the noise reduction tools zeroed, then I think the findings are very premature. I'm not questioning which should be the winner, I'm only questioning that a winner is presumed from only looking at the files in the capture device before raw processing on your computer.

Interested to see how they compare a bit further downstream!


Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Boinger

Active member
I don't know how the 645z works, but on a DSLR (any brand), the noise reduction in camera only applies to in camera jpgs. Thus a raw file should not be affected by in camera settings. (I understand that long exposure noise reduction does have some in camera effects, but it sounds like you are not talking about that).

From 645z raw I have been sent and the tons of reviews, I would agree that Pentax definitely has the best high ISO out of the 50Mp Chip from Sony, which has always surprised me as it would seem that Phase could get closer. Pentax even take the chip to 12000K as I recall.

Back to the OP, with your H6D, are you using the 50MP or 100MP back?

Thanks
Paul C
Hi Paul,

I just received the h6d-50c I have the 100c on order just waiting for it. Will trade up to the 100c when it is available so they are letting people have the 50c now.

If you haven't imported the files into your computer and viewed them in raw processing software with the noise reduction tools zeroed, then I think the findings are very premature. I'm not questioning which should be the winner, I'm only questioning that a winner is presumed from only looking at the files in the capture device before raw processing on your computer.

Interested to see how they compare a bit further downstream!


Steve Hendrix/CI
Hi Steve,

I had done some analysis last night the noise is similar in quantity but the look is just different. (I was able to get them on to my computer after the power was restored)

I would still say the pentax has a slight edge imo. But not as much as I had initially thought.

It was a bit concerning for me as I used to use the pentax like a DSLR hand held when needed. But I am a bit at ease now.
 

torger

Active member
Comparing in Lightroom or most other raw converters too is a bit treacherous, as 1) disabling noise reduction might not actually mean that all noise reduction is disabled and 2) exposure = 0 may mean different things between cameras depending on headroom differences etc. I'm a bit rusty on Lightroom/DNG so I can't go into specifics now, but I would be careful before coming to conclusions.

To make really fair comparisons about camera hardware capability you should use a tool like RawDigger, and to make fair end result comparisons you should use the native converters for both, and to make a relevant comparison you should use your intended workflow for both :)

I would not be surprised though if the Pentax 645z has a very slight edge. Although hardware design outside the sensor matters a lot less now with CMOS than it did with CCDs, I guess heat from surrounding electronics etc can still make image noise vary between manufacturers despite the same Sony CMOS being used. Hasselblad is good at many things, but that does not include being market leading in low noise hardware, at least not in the CCD days.
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Hi Paul,

I just received the h6d-50c I have the 100c on order just waiting for it. Will trade up to the 100c when it is available so they are letting people have the 50c now.



Hi Steve,

I had done some analysis last night the noise is similar in quantity but the look is just different. (I was able to get them on to my computer after the power was restored)

I would still say the pentax has a slight edge imo. But not as much as I had initially thought.

It was a bit concerning for me as I used to use the pentax like a DSLR hand held when needed. But I am a bit at ease now.

Good to know - thanks for the follow up.



Steve Hendrix/CI
 

Boinger

Active member
Comparing in Lightroom or most other raw converters too is a bit treacherous, as 1) disabling noise reduction might not actually mean that all noise reduction is disabled and 2) exposure = 0 may mean different things between cameras depending on headroom differences etc. I'm a bit rusty on Lightroom/DNG so I can't go into specifics now, but I would be careful before coming to conclusions.

To make really fair comparisons about camera hardware capability you should use a tool like RawDigger, and to make fair end result comparisons you should use the native converters for both, and to make a relevant comparison you should use your intended workflow for both :)

I would not be surprised though if the Pentax 645z has a very slight edge. Although hardware design outside the sensor matters a lot less now with CMOS than it did with CCDs, I guess heat from surrounding electronics etc can still make image noise vary between manufacturers despite the same Sony CMOS being used. Hasselblad is good at many things, but that does not include being market leading in low noise hardware, at least not in the CCD days.
Hi Torger,

Firstly I would just like to say GREAT article on the linhof techno I read the whole thing and it really informed me a lot about tech cams and getting into tech cams. I actually use your article as a reference for a lot of questions I have.

Interesting you made me look at the 2 files in rawdigger. In rawdigger the H6D-50c has the edge over the pentax 645z the H6d file looks significantly cleaner in rawdigger.
 
Top