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!

Phase One IQ4 series. Much more than resolution.

kdphotography

Well-known member
Big trucks are more aligned with compensating elsewhere.

Sports cars are more aligned firmly with mid-life crisis or success

New MFDBs are more aligned with: "The photographer is what creates the image. I'm happy with the equipment I have. Oooh, look! Shiny!" :loco::D

Dante really doesn't care. He just wants you to be happy. ;)
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Congratulations, Bill! I'm sure your new IQ4 150 will help you continue to create great images and many smiles along the way.

I'm going to sit tight for awhile, secure my new home and settle in for a bit. Wait for some reports from Graham Welland :ROTFL: and than make a decision.

ken
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Congratulations, Bill! I'm sure your new IQ4 150 will help you continue to create great images and many smiles along the way.

I'm going to sit tight for awhile, secure my new home and settle in for a bit. Wait for some reports from Graham Welland :ROTFL: and than make a decision.

ken
All I can say is that if I never have to remember to shoot/record another LCC I’ll be a happy camper.

As for you Ken, you’re doomed by Dante’s call on you for the best imaging engine. It’s that simple, and as a man of relative leisure now you should understand that life becomes a long slow boring relentless time if you’re not happy with your toys :thumbs:

And Bill & Wayne - congratulations and I totally understand. A friend of mine just upgraded both IQ3100 & IQ3100 achromatic backs. Fortunately I can’t cover my Amex account at that painful level so I have to live vicariously through him and others.

Full disclosure: I’m normally NOT the early adopter for this stuff. I like to think of myself as being more ‘fiscal conservative’ in this regards. I can live with slightly sloppy seconds :grin: However, it doesn’t stop me from testing these tools and being an enabler for others - right Ken & Don?? :thumbup:
 

f8orbust

Active member
"...should be quite significant." IS QUITE SIGNIFICANT. :toocool:

The 151-megapixel BSI sensor on the Rodenstock 23mm is on the LEFT. The 101-megapixel (non-trichromatic) FSI sensor on the Rodenstock 23mm is on the RIGHT.

View attachment 136002
That is a dramatic improvement, right enough.

Would love to see some shifted images, particularly with S/K wides (28/35/43) - that'll be the acid test for me.

Also, I wonder how rigid the shooting conditions need to be to extract all those 150MP. Low ISO, lots of light, fast shutter speed, and large (diffraction avoiding) aperture - all rigidly bolted to a tripod / studio stand ?

Anything else and my guess is that the theoretical MP count will soon start to drop - e.g. a movement of just 0.004mm during exposure and you're already at a maximum of 75MP of real data.

These crazy high resolution backs really deserve some form of IB(ack)IS methinks.

Jim
 
Last edited:

narikin

New member
These crazy high resolution backs really deserve some form of IB(ack)IS methinks.

Jim
Apparently the upcoming Fuji GFX-100 has it, which could be a ground breaker.

Phase must be breathing a huge sigh of relief that the 100mp Fuji seems not to be arriving till next year*. Spring even, I heard, which means the Danes can make off with all our money in the meantime! If the rumors are true - 100mp, BSI, IBIS, EVF, great lenses - it will seriously affect Phase's sales. I for one will be getting it...


* but there is Hasselblad. The other shoe might drop sooner.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I wonder how rigid the shooting conditions need to be to extract all those 150MP. Low ISO, lots of light, fast shutter speed, and large (diffraction avoiding) aperture - all rigidly bolted to a tripod / studio stand ?

Anything else and my guess is that the theoretical MP count will soon start to drop - e.g. a movement of just 8/100mm during exposure and you're already at a maximum of 75MP of real data.

These crazy high resolution backs really deserve some form of IB(ack)IS methinks.
I think it's pretty easy to overstate the effects of diffraction/movement for these new backs.

150mp backs have 25% more pixels in the vertical direction. On paper* that means you need a quarter stop faster shutter speed to hand hold, as compared to 100mp. Given that the IQ4 150mp spec is for another stop worth of ISO (which we will be testing in practice via ISO ramps) compared to the IQ3 100mp (max ISO of 25,600 rather than ISO 12,800) it should actually be hand holdable in more circumstances than the 100mp.

Even compared to a 36 megapixel small format camera the pixel size implies only a one stop difference in minimum shutter speed for a given lens. Because of the larger mirror and focal plane shutter you might need one stop beyond that for a total of two. Two stops can be quite significant, but it's also not debilitating. Will you use the IQ4 150mp hand held with a long lens in twilight (as is possible with some micro 4/3rds cameras with 5-axis IBIS and low pixel counts)? No; at least not with perfectly sharp pixels at 100%. Will it likely be excellent for a very large range of hand held applications? Yes.

Diffraction wise these pixels are ~3.8 microns. We will do the aperture sweep testing we've always done when we receive our first prototype, but I strongly suspect f/8 will be the sweet spot, and f/11 with diffraction correction will look very good in print.

Moreover in both cases (diffraction and hand held speed) if you use the same rules of thumb as a 100mp back you won't get less detail; you just won't get as much additional detail. It's like owning two cars, one of which is faster on the straightaways, but both of which have to decelerate to roughly the same speed on a sharp corner; the faster car is never slower, but sometimes it's advantage is muted by circumstance.

Also, remember that IBIS and OIS only address camera movement. They don't address subject movement. Obviously in some circumstances it's quite nice (aesthetically) to have a slightly or very unsharp subject because that subject is moving. But when you want the subject to be sharp and the subject is moving IBIS/OIS does nothing to help that. I have many images from my Fuji XH-1 with surprisingly decent overall frame sharpness (due to it's very good IBIS) at surprisingly slow hand held shutter speeds, but with a subject where their face is ghosted between a smile and not, or a soft face because they were (only slightly) moving their head.

Finally, I have (personally) many medium format images that I treasure despite not being perfectly pixel-sharp at 100% review. Some images really benefit from extreme resolution (e.g. landscapes with textured subject matter throughout the composition). With others, it's really not that important or can even be detrimental. I own Fuji X cameras/lenses and still choose to use Phase One in a lot circumstances that others would pull out the Fuji, even when I know it will be challenging to get perfectly sharp images (at 100%), because I love the color, the lens look, the color, the tonality, the color, and the type/look of the grain/noise of Phase One. Did I mention the color? Torturing the car metaphor above, it's nice to drive in a luxury convertible on the way to Key West, even though the speed limit is (if I remember from years ago) 45mph most of the way. Cars and cameras often get talked about by their headline features (resolution and max speed) but the experience of using either is far deeper than one spec.

*We will be conducting practical tests in the coming weeks, not just assuming the math bears out in practice.
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
Nice short essay, Doug! I agree with all you say, which means, of course, that you are right!

Like most of us on this forum, I own a number of cameras. (My most-used back-up is a Sony A7R3) The reason I choose to use the Phase wherever I possibly can is for the reasons you enunciate with one addition - and that is DR. In my work I find the IQ3-100 has at least 3/4 stop extra latitude, even over the Sony.

And I just love the files for their natural color, their tonality....but now I'm repeating you...

Cheers,
Bill
 

narikin

New member
Also, remember that IBIS and OIS only address camera movement. They don't address subject movement. Obviously in some circumstances it's quite nice (aesthetically) to have a slightly or very unsharp subject because that subject is moving. But when you want the subject to be sharp and the subject is moving IBIS/OIS does nothing to help that. I have many images from my Fuji XH-1 with surprisingly decent overall frame sharpness (due to it's very good IBIS) at surprisingly slow hand held shutter speeds, but with a subject where their face is ghosted between a smile and not, or a soft face because they were (only slightly) moving their head.
Yes, I too agree with most of this, it's why they'll be getting another ~$22k of my money for the upgrade. There is simply nothing to compare to the final image quality - not just DR, but really its color and tonality. Phase hits it out the park on that.

BUT my one disagreement is with the above quoted section. That seems more like the first pre-emptive shot across the bows for the upcoming 100mp Fuji, which rumor has it, has IBIS. It will be a great addition to MF digital, and Fuji, as you yourself admit, have possibly the best IBIS tech out there. Ok, it doesn't fix moving subjects, but it doesn't in 35mm either, and nobody is saying it's pointless for that! If anything, it will be *more* effective in MF than FF 35, as any movements are exaggerated with the bigger lens throw. Bring it on, I say. If Phase can't get that tech, then... sorry, but I'm moving on!
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Yes, I too agree with most of this, it's why they'll be getting another ~$22k of my money for the upgrade. There is simply nothing to compare to the final image quality - not just DR, but really its color and tonality. Phase hits it out the park on that.

BUT my one disagreement is with the above quoted section. That seems more like the first pre-emptive shot across the bows for the upcoming 100mp Fuji, which rumor has it, has IBIS. It will be a great addition to MF digital, and Fuji, as you yourself admit, have possibly the best IBIS tech out there. Ok, it doesn't fix moving subjects, but it doesn't in 35mm either, and nobody is saying it's pointless for that!
Just to be clear, I'm not saying IBIS isn't useful or desirable. It is useful. I have IBIS on my Fuji XH-1 and enjoy having it there. If Fuji adds it to their medium format system it will be a positive for that system to be considered alongside the other positives and negatives of that system.

I'm only pointing out that it doesn't solve all low light / slow shutter speed issues (e.g. subject motion). Like nearly any feature or spec it has it's uses and advantages, but is not a cure-all.

It's loosely equivalent to, for example, saying a system has two more stops of ISO performance. That's neither negligible nor a miracle. In some cases it will be of zero help (when you already had enough light for the desired shot, or when you still don't have enough light for the desired shot) and in some cases will be of great help (when you were one or two stops shy of having enough light).

Of course now we're discussing the hypothetical benefits of a rumored feature of a rumored camera, and I generally dislike doing that.
 
Last edited:
Top