New IQ4 Feature - Frame Averaging

[dougpeterson]

Other than as 'something new' to differentiate the product (beyond simply MP), it does seem rather pointless in the DB itself.

Having used Lujik's original Zero Noise, the technique is far better suited to post (i.e. big screen + cup of coffee + music), so if you're listening P1, just stick it in C1 where it belongs.

I'd estimate that 99% of our clients have never once done frame averaging. Likely because of complexity. If this feature works as-advertised I suspect 20% of our clients will now use frame averaging more than rarely.

I suspect the very small minority who previously did frame averaging manually (in post) will continue to do so manually some or most of the time.

It's pretty rare that any camera introduces a technique that was utterly impossible before. More often a camera take a workflow/technique that was tedious, complicated, or otherwise undesirable, and makes it more practical and enjoyable to use.

But we can have differing opinions on this. Especially because right now we're talking about theory. I'll withhold firm judgement until I can actually play with the feature hands on!

 

[JeRuFo]

Yes, it won't be for everybody. But the problem Phase One has it has to cater to very specific genres of photography that have different needs. If it works easily and consistently I can see it being very helpful for higher volume architectural work, especially if in the future you can also focus stack these.

 

[DB5]

That simply means that your perspective is one of a photographer for whom this technique is not relevant for what/how they shoot. Totally okay.

Much like Electronic Shutter, Focus Stacking, Profoto Air integration, Vibration Delay, Exposure Heat Map, Exposure Calculator... tools that are incredibly useful to a narrow range of users.

Maybe. Either that or it really is just a gimmick.

 

[Wayne Fox]

Maybe I'm wrong but from my perspective it just seems like Phase One is resorting to gimmicks now.

how is this a gimmick? Much like many of the other features, some of us may find this incredibly useful. I for one think it will be a game changer if it functions as well as it sounds like it might in my landscape work. I don’t want to take 8 to 32 shots on a 150mp back, then frame average them in post, especially if this technique creates zero lag between exposures, which in some cases is significantly different than doing it in post.

 

[Abstraction]

Maybe. Either that or it really is just a gimmick.

Once a technology matures, as digital imaging obviously has, any new feature is a gimmick. Before digital technology, digital sensors matured, P1 offered their backs as pure image quality improvement. Very little (if any) thought was given to usability, everything hinged on image quality. In the days of 6mp sensors, a 20 or 30mp back was something else! Now that everyone uses pretty much the same Sony sensor (I think Leica and Canon being the notable exceptions), and now that these sensors are so good that cameras are virtually indistinguishable from one another (the way it was during the film days) in terms of image quality, manufacturers have to resort to gimmicks. Sometimes these gimmicks take the form of frame averaging (essentially trying to address a problem that no longer exists) and sometimes they go all out and gimmick the entire back, as is the case with the Tri-Chromatic.

There's really nothing left to offer in terms of image quality that's relevant. Sure, there may be some minor improvements here and there, but for the most part, the industry has jumped the shark and it's entirely possible that we're going to see consolidation and player reshuffling in the next 5 years. I doubt we'll be seeing P1 after the smoke clears.

 

[DB5]

Once a technology matures, as digital imaging obviously has, any new feature is a gimmick. Before digital technology, digital sensors matured, P1 offered their backs as pure image quality improvement. Very little (if any) thought was given to usability, everything hinged on image quality. In the days of 6mp sensors, a 20 or 30mp back was something else! Now that everyone uses pretty much the same Sony sensor (I think Leica and Canon being the notable exceptions), and now that these sensors are so good that cameras are virtually indistinguishable from one another (the way it was during the film days) in terms of image quality, manufacturers have to resort to gimmicks. Sometimes these gimmicks take the form of frame averaging (essentially trying to address a problem that no longer exists) and sometimes they go all out and gimmick the entire back, as is the case with the Tri-Chromatic.

There's really nothing left to offer in terms of image quality that's relevant. Sure, there may be some minor improvements here and there, but for the most part, the industry has jumped the shark and it's entirely possible that we're going to see consolidation and player reshuffling in the next 5 years. I doubt we'll be seeing P1 after the smoke clears.

IBIS, Mirrorless with EVF and all the other benefits, 100% PDAF, 4K, new lenses, new finders, etc etc etc. Those are all revolutionary upgrades.

All Phase One has some extra pixels, better tech cam camera performance and a sprinkling of marketing gimmicks. Keeping a small niche minority happy is nothing special at all, it's smoke and mirror tactics and represents a company lacking in vision.

 

[Smoothjazz]

Wayne, I agree with you, I think this may be a game changer for landscape photography. There are lots of nay-sayers here, but they have not even seen it in action!
In photographing landscapes, I find that the more focus stacking, merging, or stitching required in post, the less likely a final image will result. If it can be done in camera in a more automatic way, the better for achieving a final print.
At least we should wait to try it out before making any final judgement.

 

[narikin]

All Phase One has some extra pixels, better tech cam camera performance and a sprinkling of marketing gimmicks. Keeping a small niche minority happy is nothing special at all, it's smoke and mirror tactics and represents a company lacking in vision.

Harsh and unfair.

You missed out that it has the best color. Period.
Forget your Sony's Nikon's and Fuji's, (yes all processed in Capture One) Phase's own color leaves all the others in the dust.

That matters in every. single. shot.

 

[med]

That matters in every. single. shot.

Except for the ones on an Apohromatic back

 

[DB5]

Harsh and unfair.

You missed out that it has the best color. Period.
Forget your Sony's Nikon's and Fuji's, (yes all processed in Capture One) Phase's own color leaves all the others in the dust.

That matters in every. single. shot.

I agree with that but it has nothing to do with the point I am making.

 

[hcubell]

Harsh and unfair.

You missed out that it has the best color. Period.
Forget your Sony's Nikon's and Fuji's, (yes all processed in Capture One) Phase's own color leaves all the others in the dust.

That matters in every. single. shot.

It would be interesting to see some representative images of yours that show that exceptional color, but I don’t recall ever seeing any of your images posted here or on a website. Not.one.single.shot.

 

[JeRuFo]

I agree with that but it has nothing to do with the point I am making.

It does. A lot actually. You call all the minor improvements (resolution, frame averaging, color improvements etc) Phase One makes gimmicks while they apparently miss the big points (IBIS, PDAF etc) but the thing is that Phase One has never tried to make a responsive, light weight camera. They make almost no compromise on image quality and at this stage in the game, the improvements do become less pronounced than they did before, but even if it benefits 20% of the users in 2% of their images, it sounds worthwhile for what they are trying to do.
Calling it marketing gimmicks is totally unfair, because they don't headline the feature, you can't even find it on their website in fact. They mention the higher resolution, BSI for less color cast with tech cameras, better dynamic range and color, capture one inside, all very worthwhile upgrades (and for me would be more useful than IBIS or PDAF or having a rangefinder). And they mention the infinity platform, one of the features of which is apparently this. They don't have to make excuses. If you want to buy a camera with the best in resolution, color and dynamic range this has been it and for quite a while still will be.

 

[JeRuFo]

It would be interesting to see some representative images of yours that show that exceptional color, but I don’t recall ever seeing any of your images posted here or on a website. Not.one.single.shot.

That is a little uncalled for.

- You don't have to be a photographer to judge color.
- Nobody uses every camera on the market at the same time.
- Nobody has representative images on the internet to judge color from.
- It's rude.

 

[DB5]

It does. A lot actually. You call all the minor improvements (resolution, frame averaging, color improvements etc) Phase One makes gimmicks while they apparently miss the big points (IBIS, PDAF etc) but the thing is that Phase One has never tried to make a responsive, light weight camera. They make almost no compromise on image quality and at this stage in the game, the improvements do become less pronounced than they did before, but even if it benefits 20% of the users in 2% of their images, it sounds worthwhile for what they are trying to do.
Calling it marketing gimmicks is totally unfair, because they don't headline the feature, you can't even find it on their website in fact. They mention the higher resolution, BSI for less color cast with tech cameras, better dynamic range and color, capture one inside, all very worthwhile upgrades (and for me would be more useful than IBIS or PDAF or having a rangefinder). And they mention the infinity platform, one of the features of which is apparently this. They don't have to make excuses. If you want to buy a camera with the best in resolution, color and dynamic range this has been it and for quite a while still will be.

No, my point was that Phase One have mostly stopped innovating in meaningful ways to most. They have positioned them selves to the point where they are catering and serving an even reduced minority and are resorting to gimmicks like these as headline grabbers. I am not arguing that some have a need for these things, but finding semi useful things for a minority is not what I expect from a company that I have been relying on as tools of my business, at exceptional cost, for two decades. If you consider that is harsh and unfair I don't really care, I'm speaking for my own uses.

Their colour is exceptional, but it always has been the best. I am not disputing that. But the camera system has lost relevance. Focussing even the 100MP backs with a single AF point is at times a frustrating and very slow exercise. It's even worse when you have the Creative Directors and Art Directors getting frustrated at the lack of focus acquisition, That for me is the single biggest flaw in the system and it is at times a real problem on a large budget shoot when you can't even focus reliably and quickly enough to do the job.

I say this as someone who has been buying their backs since early 2000's. I have been their target demographic for two decades and this Fuji is the first time I will likely be switching brands.

All it seems they care about is the Tech Cam, Copy Stand, Aerial market. There is not a single development here in their latest releases that have much relevance to what what I do. Your mileage may vary.

 

[JeRuFo]

I understand that it is not to your liking. It was probably the word gimmick when many would see it as a feature. I don't find it shocking that Phase One is keeping the cameras like they have been in the past. It does seem like they are giving up on the editorial style photographer. The bigger companies will be able to develop faster in that area anyway. Although it has to be said that when I use it on a less technical and planned out assignment I still don't mind the speed of the AF, because I'm still a slow shooter. For landscapes the speed of operation is irrelevant to me, even with LF film I'm way faster than I would ever shoot. But more dynamic range and resolution is always welcome there. I am quite impressed they manage to take gapless captures, that would mean they can possibly also make a multishot type image work in the field.

 

[hcubell]

That is a little uncalled for.

- You don't have to be a photographer to judge color.
- Nobody uses every camera on the market at the same time.
- Nobody has representative images on the internet to judge color from.
- It's rude.

If someone offers up such a provocative, sweeping and condescending opinion, I think it’s quite fair to ask about someone’s experience as a photographer that so that I and others can judge his credibility. I have a Phase IQ 180. I also have a Hasselblad X1D. I have shot extensively with both. I personally think the notion that Phase color leaves the Hasselblad color “in the dust” “every.single.shot” is pure nonsense. The color pipeline from the Hasselblad is beautiful to my eye. Same with the Phase.

 

[GrahamWelland]

The color pipeline from the Hasselblad is beautiful to my eye. Same with the Phase.

And in my experience, also Fuji and Leica too, at least when processing through Capture One. I'll readily admit that I'm biased. Other than the UI, I thought that the colour from even my CV16 was every bit as good from Phocus as C1 files. Different, but beautiful when processed correctly.

Btw, with respect to the IQx 100 trichromatic. There are definitely colour rendering differences but they are subtle IMHO. They did fix the pink/purple bell issue that has always plagued every digital camera I've ever owned.