Phase One IQ4 series. Much more than resolution.

[Pemihan]

Please PM me the name of the person in support that answered your case, as I'm fairly certain they gave you incorrect information. I'll of course double check my records as well in the meantime.

PM sent.

I just found the support case I mentioned earlier. I was informed me that the TG1 filter used today is made of Scott BG50 and in fact NOT the same as the older TG1 filters used for the scan backs.

I'm not entirely sure BG50 is the IR filter glass used for the color CMOS backs but it might be. It would be interesting to know.

Peter

 

[vjbelle]

That is not correct. This is not how IR filters work. Maybe you're thinking of the Bayer filter (the RGB pattern)?

OK..... you have jolted me back to reality.

Thanks much......

Victor

 

[dougpeterson]

PM sent.

I just found the support case I mentioned earlier. I was informed me that the TG1 filter used today is made of Scott BG50 and in fact NOT the same as the older TG1 filters used for the scan backs.

I'm not entirely sure BG50 is the IR filter glass used for the color CMOS backs but it might be. It would be interesting to know.

After double checking...

The current IR block filter on the P1 Price list is a reasonable stand-in for the sensor filter in most general purpose photography, but for exact color reproduction in color critical situations you should consult with your dealer on options for an exact replacement.

We (DT) have done this for several clients in scientific imaging situations.
https://dtdch.com/dt-rcam-multispectral-camera/
https://dtdch.com/multispectral-imaging-duke-university/

 

[ejpeiker]

Clear or standard IR-cut.

You would then select the IR-pass wavelength you want as a filter in front of the lens. I suggest the Wine Camera Country Filter Holder. We can provide significant guidance here, from our in-house experience with IR Phase One.

What wavelength is the "standard" IR cut?

 

[dougpeterson]

What wavelength is the "standard" IR cut?

At the end of visible of course .

IR Cut filters are often described with a single wavelength as marketing short hand but, of course, have a variety of characteristics including the center of attenuation, steepness, thickness, and their response in other parts of the uncut spectrum.

The specific glass used on each back model is under NDA so I cannot post it on a public forum. But we have his information and use it, along with other experience, as needed for our clients.

 

[ejpeiker]

At the end of visible of course .

IR Cut filters are often described with a single wavelength as marketing short hand but, of course, have a variety of characteristics including the center of attenuation, steepness, thickness, and their response in other parts of the uncut spectrum.

The specific glass used on each back model is under NDA so I cannot post it on a public forum. But we have his information and use it, along with other experience, as needed for our clients.

Yes I understand all of that very well. So I'm assuming the knee is in the 700-720nm range. By the way I am one of your clients

 

[drunkenspyder]

Got to check out the new IQ4 150 today at Bear Images. Very nice. Love the platform and its connectivity, shooting speed is impressive, and color is sublime. I am spoiled by the Trichro, but this is another step forward.

 

[jng]

Got to check out the new IQ4 150 today at Bear Images. Very nice. Love the platform and its connectivity, shooting speed is impressive, and color is sublime. I am spoiled by the Trichro, but this is another step forward.

Not sure whether I'm glad or sad to hear this. I purposely stayed away from the lair today, to avoid the temptation. I suppose resistance may be futile after all... :banghead::banghead:

John

 

[kdphotography]

Is there a new horse ranch in your future? :ROTFL:

My new place will have a guest house if you need a place to duck and cover for a bit. Take some time off and show me what your new IQ4 can do... :thumbup:

 

[jng]

With the recent expansion of the equine herd, we may as well buy a bloody ranch. In the meantime, I'll need to up my budget for carrots. :banghead:

Thanks for the offer of your new guest house as a hideout. I just offered two fellow Pigs safe shelter as well. This could be the photographer's version of a shell game where the spouses won't know which friend is harboring which fugitive! :ROTFL:

John

Is there a new horse ranch in your future? :ROTFL:

My new place will have a guest house if you need a place to duck and cover for a bit. Take some time off and show me what your new IQ4 can do... :thumbup:

 

[GrahamWelland]

Well there’s good news and bad news regarding the IQ4 150.

The bad news, it would seem to be outstanding regarding its imaging performance.

The good news, it’s still in Alpha release state and requires dedicated XF body and other limitations to work at the moment. In software dev terms that means it’s not feature complete and is still being developed (vs beta where typically things are complete but you’re ironing out the bugs with early adopter beta testers).

Why is that good news? It buys time for folks to budget and plan their spousal explanations for the inevitable purchase in a few months time. :ROTFL::thumbs:

 

[drunkenspyder]

Yesterday felt more than alpha, maybe a step or two short of beta (one hard reboot, multiple connection changes, repeated shooting at different settings, live view wired and wireless, thorough menus, etc.), the distinction mattering perhaps less than the realization that resistance might be futile.

Well there’s good news and bad news regarding the IQ4 150.

The bad news, it would seem to be outstanding regarding its imaging performance.

The good news, it’s still in Alpha release state and requires dedicated XF body and other limitations to work at the moment. In software dev terms that means it’s not feature complete and is still being developed (vs beta where typically things are complete but you’re ironing out the bugs with early adopter beta testers).

Why is that good news? It buys time for folks to budget and plan their spousal explanations for the inevitable purchase in a few months time. :ROTFL::thumbs:

 

[Smoothjazz]

Graham,
I am kind of relieved that it is still in Alpha, as they are going to let me use an IQ3 100 back in the meantime (I have an IQ 180). My hope is that I like the IQ100 so much that I don’t feel the need for the 150. At least I will have a few months to think about it.

 

[f8orbust]

This is an example of a question which would require extensive effort to make a perfect theoretical model of the math to predict the results...

By the sounds of it Fuji have put in the effort and decided that the GFX-100 will benefit from IBIS. I'm sure one day someone will do a comparison, but I'll stick my neck on the block now and say that in less than absolutely optimal conditions, the images off the Fuji will be more detailed than those off the IQ4-150.

I've already seen smaller sensors with similar size pixels to these MFD backs benefit dramatically from IBIS in comparison to ones without, so it's a no-brainer that the technology would benefit bigger, heavier cameras. However, since I can see no way to easily implement that technology in a DB, I understand the motivation to deride the idea.

And I've just read that C1 will support Fuji MF files - wow.

 

[Christopher]

I don’t see it that dramatic. IBIS is great for sure as is the IS in the Fuji 120 lens. It’s one of the best features for me. However, I never had any problems getting perfect sharp images from my XF IQ3100 combination. It’s just important to use the right shutter speed. The same goes for the new 150Mp version.

 

[f8orbust]

I guess in some ways it's a moot point since if a user's images look acceptably sharp and are adequate for their intended purpose, that's all that matters.

Still, if I paid for 150MP, I'd want to know that I was getting 150MP of real data consistently. IBIS ain't a magic bullet, but it does raise the odds of achieving that in certain situations. More so than leaning against a tree. End of the day, I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

 

[dougpeterson]

I don’t see it that dramatic. IBIS is great for sure as is the IS in the Fuji 120 lens. It’s one of the best features for me. However, I never had any problems getting perfect sharp images from my XF IQ3100 combination. It’s just important to use the right shutter speed. The same goes for the new 150Mp version.

I find the myth that you can't hand hold Medium Format to be propagated mostly by those who don't shoot medium format.

We just posted a test of the IQ4 150mp at 1/60th with a Schneider 45LS BR. This is slower than the "right shutter speed" that we'd recommend.

 

[dougpeterson]

I've already seen smaller sensors with similar size pixels to these MFD backs benefit dramatically from IBIS in comparison to ones without, so it's a no-brainer that the technology would benefit bigger, heavier cameras.

The physics are the opposite. The larger/heavier the camera the less you need IBIS to keep the camera stable. Weight is a form of "inertial dampening". Moreover, the larger/heavier the sensor the less an IBIS system can stabilize it.

That's not to say IBIS wouldn't be a welcome addition to any camera. It is!

 

[DB5]

No IBIS, no PDAF, no EVF, one single central focus point????

Nahhhh. I can't even think of going back there now.

 

[JeRuFo]

IBIS is great and would definitely be a big selling point for me with the smaller cameras, but I wouldn't necessarily want it in a digital back. That would give me doubts about the longevity of the back, seeing how the sensor isn't burried deep down somewhere, like in a GFX or X1d. Maybe a portrait lens with IS would be nice, but probably not practical either, with the large mass of the lens and body combo. But I wouldn't need it anyway, I almost always shoot from a tripod for landscapes and in the studio I usually work with flash anyway. Handheld shooting with natural light I usually do with smaller cameras.