Phase One IQ4 - Feature Update 1

[trond]

Dear Doug,

Is it correct to assume that the shortest gapless shutter speed is equal to the readout time of the sensor, 0.7 seconds or so?

Thus to get a completely smooth and gapless exposure of 1000 frames, would mean a shutter speed longer than 0.7s, for a total capture time of 700 seconds?

Best regards

Trond

 

[Paul2660]

The trick for me would be to see what a 1/125 to say 10 second exposed frame would look like.

Paul C

 

[dougpeterson]

The trick for me would be to see what a 1/125 to say 10 second exposed frame would look like.

The lighthouse-on-cliff raws you've been looking at in our article are 1/125 at 30 seconds of exposure.

I can't wait to see your experiments with this new tool. For scenes where the subject motion of a long exposure is acceptable (or a positive) I expect you'll love it. I don't expect it will work for you in situations where you're trying to stop motion of leaves etc (as I know is important to you in many cases), other than as a way to grab another frame that you could composite (i.e. layer in photoshop and paint in) with a single fast-shutter frame.

 

[dougpeterson]

Is it correct to assume that the shortest gapless shutter speed is equal to the readout time of the sensor, 0.7 seconds or so?

Thus to get a completely smooth and gapless exposure of 1000 frames, would mean a shutter speed longer than 0.7s, for a total capture time of 700 seconds?

Shortest gapless capture is currently 1/4th of a second on the IQ4 150mp and the max number of frames is 3440* frames. But both numbers are subject to change before the release of the final firmware.

*An improvement from earlier in the thread when the number was 1000 (which was accurate at that time)

 

[dougpeterson]

In terms of wear and tear, there is no more wear and tear than a standard ES capture. On a tech camera this is zero wear and tear and on an XF the only wear and tear is opening the shutter and raising the mirror that happen when you are starting a sequence. In neither case with the duration of the frame averaging cause wear and tear.

That said, I’ve not checked how they record this in terms of shot count on the back. I strongly suspect they record it as one shot, since that’s what it is just about any way you think about it. But I will check tomorrow.

I've confirmed that a capture using Frame Averaging is counted as one capture as regards the Shot Count displayed in the menu of the back.

 

[JimKasson]

So there is basically no actuation with an Electronic shutter it's a misnomer. When you take the picture you freeze the latest capture of the shutter but it is not actually doing anything different than live view.

When you do live you with your back it is essentially doing 1/60th actuations repeatedly until you chose to stop live view or take the picture.

I don't think there's a material difference in reliability, but what the camera does with the sensor in live view and when it takes a photograph are actually quite different. In live view, a subset of the sensor's pixels are read out at whatever precision provides an acceptable live view image, which is usually much less than the ACDs are capable of. This allows fast digitization. When you take a picture, every pixel in the image is read out at high precision -- in the case of the IQ4, as high as 16 bits. That takes a lot longer than 1/60 second, because there are more pixels to be digitized and because, when ramp ADCs are operated at higher precision they are generally slower.

Jim

 

[Boinger]

I don't think there's a material difference in reliability, but what the camera does with the sensor in live view and when it takes a photograph are actually quite different. In live view, a subset of the sensor's pixels are read out at whatever precision provides an acceptable live view image, which is usually much less than the ACDs are capable of. This allows fast digitization. When you take a picture, every pixel in the image is read out at high precision -- in the case of the IQ4, as high as 16 bits. That takes a lot longer than 1/60 second, because there are more pixels to be digitized and because, when ramp ADCs are operated at higher precision they are generally slower.

Jim

I understand that, I was just simplifying the explanation to explain that there is no wear and tear on the back by doing this process. The concept of actuations doesn't really apply to digital backs in the traditional sense that's all I was trying to explain.

 

[etrump]

Jim, Is it safe to assume at 14 bit file format the read would be faster and require less battery power for live view and capture?

Ed

I don't think there's a material difference in reliability, but what the camera does with the sensor in live view and when it takes a photograph are actually quite different. In live view, a subset of the sensor's pixels are read out at whatever precision provides an acceptable live view image, which is usually much less than the ACDs are capable of. This allows fast digitization. When you take a picture, every pixel in the image is read out at high precision -- in the case of the IQ4, as high as 16 bits. That takes a lot longer than 1/60 second, because there are more pixels to be digitized and because, when ramp ADCs are operated at higher precision they are generally slower.

Jim

 

[etrump]

It seems this would be a very useful tool in circumstances like waterfalls and other outdoor scenes. Capture the frame averaged shot then snap a few exposures for the foliage and blend them to give you great shadow detail for most of the image and paint out any movement you don’t like.

I don't expect it will work for you in situations where you're trying to stop motion of leaves etc (as I know is important to you in many cases), other than as a way to grab another frame that you could composite (i.e. layer in photoshop and paint in) with a single fast-shutter frame.

 

[dougpeterson]

It seems this would be a very useful tool in circumstances like waterfalls and other outdoor scenes. Capture the frame averaged shot then snap a few exposures for the foliage and blend them to give you great shadow detail for most of the image and paint out any movement you don’t like.

Indeed. Most of the downsides are, intuitively, the same as with any long exposure. Compositing/masking with a single exposure should be a powerful way to ameliorate them.

Looking forward to seeing what you do with this new tool.

 

[Paul2660]

Still a lot to figure out. Just looked at several images taken with considerable motion due to both people and wind.

City street scene where the people moving are much larger than the ones in the first posted seascape example.

The people most times creating enough of a blur/strange color waves that they will be hard to blend out. The wind motion is even worse. Tree limbs moving against solid buildings, no way to really "blend back" even if you had a single with 1/500.

Strange that a 1/2000 at 6400 shows as much blur as a 1/30 at ISO 50. The files are very clean, basically noiseless, and cleaner than what I have seen from a long exposure ND 10 etc on the 3100 (not tried anything on the IQ4). But the blend back on these examples would be next to impossible both due to the huge blur of the trees and the fact that a 1/500 single even at ISO50 would probably have more noise.

Also I can now see a sunrise, sunset with sun in picture would be a very difficult issue also, again due to movement of the sun over the time.

I did not have my head totally around this, but do now.

In my state, use of a hard ND 6 to 10 on most scenes would be next to impossible again due to the fact that there is almost always wind.

For someone shooting interiors, or buildings without trees in front of them, amazing tool.

Paul C

 

[dougpeterson]

Still a lot to figure out. Just looked at several images taken with considerable motion due to both people and wind.

City street scene where the people moving are much larger than the ones in the first posted seascape example.

The people most times creating enough of a blur/strange color waves that they will be hard to blend out. The wind motion is even worse. Tree limbs moving against solid buildings, no way to really "blend back" even if you had a single with 1/500.

Strange that a 1/2000 at 6400 shows as much blur as a 1/30 at ISO 50. The files are very clean, basically noiseless, and cleaner than what I have seen from a long exposure ND 10 etc on the 3100 (not tried anything on the IQ4). But the blend back on these examples would be next to impossible both due to the huge blur of the trees and the fact that a 1/500 single even at ISO50 would probably have more noise.

Also I can now see a sunrise, sunset with sun in picture would be a very difficult issue also, again due to movement of the sun over the time.

I did not have my head totally around this, but do now.

In my state, use of a hard ND 6 to 10 on most scenes would be next to impossible again due to the fact that there is almost always wind.

For someone shooting interiors, or buildings without trees in front of them, amazing tool.

Paul C

Indeed! It's basically a long exposure, and will work well, or not, in the same sorts of situations as a standard long exposure: when the subject is motionless, or when subject motion is desirable.

I'd also think many will end up using it closer to the gapless shutter speeds than most of the sample images so far. I can't think of many places where "staccato" rendering of moving subject matter would be more desirable than smooth rendering.

Looking forward to seeing your own testing and results! I think I said it earlier, but given what I know about your work and your desire to freeze moving subject matter, I suspect it won't be useful in such situations.

 

[JimKasson]

Jim, Is it safe to assume at 14 bit file format the read would be faster and require less battery power for live view and capture?

Ed

Readout will be faster. I don't think live view is affected by file format. I doubt if the capture differences would be material. I don't have an IQ4 to test with.

Jim

 

[JimKasson]

I can't think of many places where "staccato" rendering of moving subject matter would be more desirable than smooth rendering.

I like your choice of words:

https://www.kasson.com/gallery/staccato/



Jim

 

[MGrayson]

I can't think of many places where "staccato" rendering of moving subject matter would be more desirable than smooth rendering.

Now you've done it!



Matt

I like your choice of words:

https://www.kasson.com/gallery/staccato/

...

Jim

Wonderful images!

 

[Shashin]

You can get similar effects with variable object speed during expose.

 

[erlingmm]

Must be fantastic at New York Central Station, with about 20 shots one might rid of all the people there ;-)

 

[dougpeterson]

Must be fantastic at New York Central Station, with about 20 shots one might rid of all the people there ;-)

I did the whole tripod-permit thing and shot there once. Not my favorite location personally.

 

[dougpeterson]

We should have a couple new raws to share today. Our team was out happily shooting away this weekend!

 

[Paul2660]

When will P1 release this firmware for the common photographer? It would be nice to have portrait orientation working after 7 months.

Paul C