Phase One XT: The First Modern Field Camera (and X-Shutter and new firmware)

[dougpeterson]

Gerald,

You seem to be replying to things I haven’t said. Perhaps you are reading “FPS” as meaning “the Alpa FPS Camera” rather than “focal plane shutter”.

I was replying to a question about why the XT was designed to use the X-Shutter (which is a leaf shutter) rather than a focal plane shutter (FPS). I listed disadvantages of using an FPS including that if the XT used a FPS that this wouldn’t have enabled aperture control of the attached lens like the X-Shutter provides.

In other words, the X-Shutter turns a Rodenstock lens into an electronically controllable lens, which an FPS would not. A Sinar/Rodenstock eShutter accomplishes the same thing, but since it doesn’t integrate into the back it requires a separate controller, a cable, and a power source (aka battery) and no metadata other than approximate shutter speed makes it to the back/raw). The XT’s use of the X-shutter in each lens greatly simplifies that.

Given the rather mean-spirited nature of your posts, and the consistency with which you are misreading what I write, I won’t be replying to your posts further.

 

[gerald.d]

Gerald,

You seem to be replying to things I haven’t said. Perhaps you are reading “FPS” as meaning “the Alpa FPS Camera” rather than “focal plane shutter”.

On the contrary. That is exactly what you were referring to.

FPS:
- flash sync: 1/125
- vibration: considerable
- aperture control: manual
- lens metadata: none
- durability: ~100,000
- flange distance: uses up several mm
- Alpas implementation also added considerable size, weight, an extra cable and an extra battery, though P1 might have been able to improve on that

Additionally, earlier in the thread when narikin highlighted some of the aspects of the FPS you stated -

A lot of this is either factually inaccurate...

And that was in response to points being raised specifically about the ALPA FPS camera, and not focal plane shutter systems in general.

I asked you to list what was factually inaccurate, and there was silence.

By all means accuse me of being “mean spirited” in my replies and using that as an excuse not to address your FUD, but I am simply highlighting that you are consistently and, seemingly willfully, being flexible with the facts here.

 

[dougpeterson]

O for the love...

The line where I specifically refer to “Alpa’s implementation” refers to just that, while the others that don’t, don’t.

I have to assume at this point you are purposefully trying to misinterpret my post.

If anyone else found the post confusing or misleading please let me know and I’ll gladly amend it.

 

[dchew]

Doug,
It is interesting that your HPF ring has dot positions for hyperfocal distance @ f/11 and f/16. Do you know what CoC was used for determining those points? I assume not the traditional DoF values.

As most know, I am a big fan of Anders’ Lumariver DoF app. One of the reasons is how flexible it is in setting DoF boundary. It even switches from airy disk to pixel pitch as your f-stop changes. And that change is right in that f/11 range (for the IQ4 150 3.76um pitch).

Dave

 

[gerald.d]

O for the love...

The line where I specifically refer to “Alpa’s implementation” refers to just that, while the others that don’t, don’t.

I have to assume at this point you are purposefully trying to misinterpret my post.

If anyone else found the post confusing or misleading please let me know and I’ll gladly amend it.

Yes. “ALPA’s implementation ALSO ADDED...”

You are unequivocally stating that in addition to the general points you listed above - specifically including “considerable vibration” and “manual aperture control” - there are more “issues” with the ALPA to consider.

You can condescendingly attempt to evade the points I am raising with comments such as “oh for the love of...” as much as you want. I’m not going anywhere whilst you maintain these flat-out lies.

There is no other interpretation of what you wrote other than that the ALPA FPS shutter has considerable vibration issues and that the FPS camera is not able to electronically control aperture.

And STILL you ignore the request to detail the factual inaccuracies in narikin’s earlier post.

 

[dougpeterson]

If anyone else feels my phrasing was unclear or misleading I’m glad to take suggestions on making it more clear.

 

[algrove]

If anyone else feels my phrasing was unclear or misleading I’m glad to take suggestions on making it more clear.

ignore

 

[dougpeterson]

Doug,
It is interesting that your HPF ring has dot positions for hyperfocal distance @ f/11 and f/16. Do you know what CoC was used for determining those points? I assume not the traditional DoF values.

As most know, I am a big fan of Anders’ Lumariver DoF app. One of the reasons is how flexible it is in setting DoF boundary. It even switches from airy disk to pixel pitch as your f-stop changes. And that change is right in that f/11 range (for the IQ4 150 3.76um pitch).

Dave

Our DOF dots are calculated from the practical evaluation of raw file testing. We will share those raw files so you can decide if you agree with our assessment before purchasing the rings.

This allows us to take into account the full chain, including debayering, normal sharpening, and diffraction correction.

There is no “one true hyperfocal point” on a lens for a given aperture; it is a question of your level of scrutiny. Our mantra will be “scrutinized but not silly”; that is, a level of infinity sharpness we think will please our normally-demanding clients.

 

[dougpeterson]

Well why did you thank Gerd for his post on the "MF+printing large" thread that he thinks the XT's focus stacking is "much better" than the auto focus stacking feature on the Fuji 100? Does the XT auto focus stack?

Pardon, but I believe he was making a comparison to the XF which has excellent focus stacking capabilities.

The XT has no focus stacking automation whatsoever.

 

[gerald.d]

If anyone else feels my phrasing was unclear or misleading I’m glad to take suggestions on making it more clear.

Doug.

I invite you again to detail the lenses of which the ALPA FPS can electronically control the apertures.

Or state there are none.

I also invite you to detail the lenses of which the ALPA FPS can control the leaf shutters.

Or state there are none.

I also invite you to back up your claim that the ALPA FPS shutter has *considerable* vibration issues.

Or state it doesn’t.

In addition, I also invite you to post examples of posts prior to the release of the XT where you have stated that the FPS shutter in ANY Phase One camera has *considerable* vibration issues.

Or, alternatively, don’t.

I *for the third time* invite you to provide the specific examples from narikin’s earlier post highlighting aspects of the ALPA FPS that you believe are factual inaccuracies.

Or state that you stand by your earlier claim, and I will go through the post phrase by phrase to validate.

By means refuse to address any of these questions and play to the crowd.

I don’t expect you to address any of them.

I do expect you to continue with the ad hominems, but it would be a breath of fresh air, not to mention far more productive, if you didn’t.

 

[darr]

If anyone else feels my phrasing was unclear or misleading I’m glad to take suggestions on making it more clear.

You DO imply there are “considerable vibration” and “manual aperture control” and more "issues" with the ALPA to consider.
As an ALPA owner, I want to learn more about why you share this technical data and ALPA does not.

You sometimes come off snarky Doug. Calling my comment about not easily being able to tryout MFD gear prior to purchase, "strange" is an example. And yes we know DT will rent out some gear prior to purchase, but that applies to a small margin of MFD shooters that can afford to do that or are interested in the gear DT offers, but you already knew that and yet you decided to make a negative comment.

Why try to act like the smartest guy in the classroom among photographers that use the gear on a regular basis? You should be learning from the participants in this forum as well.

Why not just answer Gerald's and Narkin's questions and be done with it?

 

[gerald.d]

I’ve decided that I will work on a separate post that will specifically address the pros and cons of the XT vs the ALPA FPS.

There are specific - and considerable - advantages that each system brings to the table.

Doug’s continued and deliberate obfuscation regarding the ALPA FPS has been going on for years now, and as someone who owned one for a long period of time, and has deep understanding of its capabilities, I find that absolutely maddening.

I have no skin in this game. I no longer own an FPS (although there are many occasions that I wish I did), and am also completely objective in recognizing the (admittedly few, but that would be significant to some) benefits the XT brings to the table.

Neither does my income rely on pushing one solution over another.

I am - to the point of being obsessive about it - totally objective when it comes to comparison of different options.

I am also, very deliberately, extremely precise in my wording. I take great care in making sure that what I say is what I mean. And that there can be no possibility of misinterpretation.

I’ll create a new thread sometime next week that will forensically address every “issue” Doug has laid against ALPA - a brand the company he works for does not represent - including the “factually incorrect” claim made against points about the ALPA FPS addressed earlier in this thread.

Until then, I’m bowing out. The XT is an exciting and capable camera. And regardless of what FUD continues to be thrown about in this thread regarding ALPA, I won’t address it here.

Kind regards,


Gerald.

 

[dougpeterson]

Since I can't edit this post (too much time has passed) in situ I provide a revised version here.

The post I was replying to:

I don’t know why PhaseOne hasn’t chosen for incorporating a focal plane shutter in their XT, like the Alpa FPS. Then anyone would be able to use lenses without leaf shutters, or use existing lenses through bypassing the mechanical leaf shutter.

I presume PhaseOne must have thought about that as well, taking the install base of current optics and rework activities to an electronic leaf shutter into consideration.

Any Alpa FPS owners out here understanding why a focal plane shutter would not be a good idea?

My reply revised for clarity...

While a nice dose of cynicism never hurts, you CAN “just use Cambo lenses” on the XT and adding a focal plane shutter to the XT would have only provided up to 1/125 shutter speed with flash sync and wouldn’t have provided lens model-serial metadata or aperture control and aperture metadata.

It’s the lens that needs to be smart to achieve complete simplicity and integration.

— reposting from LL...

If a P1 focal plane shutter (FPS) was used in the XT:
- flash sync: 1/125
- vibration: more than a LS; potentially problematic depending on shutter speed, tripod, head, resolution, and scrutiny
- aperture control: manual, as the XT electronic integration and aperture control are via the X-Shutter unit
- lens metadata: none
- durability: ~100,000
- flange distance: uses up several mm

Because P1 used the X-shutter (Leaf shutter) in the XT:
- flash sync: 1/1000
- vibration: negligible
- aperture control: automatic
- lens metadata: automatic
- durability: 1,000,000
- flange distance: no impact

I don’t have exact weight specs but between the mechanism itself and the impact on the housing/chassis a LS is going to be considerably lighter until you get to a several lens kit. The power draw of a leaf shutter is also considerably less than a FPS since it’s moving a much much smaller mass.

Two advantages of a focal plane shutter (FPS) would have been:
- reduced cost when the kit has several lenses. It’s not that Phase One doesn’t care about cost, but they are a company that prioritizes quality and flexibility much higher than cost.
- faster max shutter speed (1/4000) albeit without flash sync. This is mostly (though not entirely) covered by sensor-based ES that has come available since the FPS was developed.

 

[dougpeterson]

I invite you again to detail the lenses of which the ALPA FPS can electronically control the apertures.
I also invite you to detail the lenses of which the ALPA FPS can control the leaf shutters.

The Alpa FPS provides for electronic control of, and use of leaf shutter, of a variety of lens makes/models. I see you'll be starting a thread which would be a great place to make a comprehensive list, as if I manage to forget a single one from the list I'm quite sure you'll claim it's some unforgivable attack on the brand.

I responded to a post asking why P1 didn't use a focal plane shutter in the XT. Adding a focal plane shutter to the XT would not have assisted in providing electronic aperture control or leaf shutter control, while adding the X-shutter did.

I also invite you to back up your claim that the ALPA FPS shutter has *considerable* vibration issues.

Again, my post was about the proposed use of a focal plane shutter in the XT as compared to the X-shutter. Focal plane shutters cause more vibration than leaf shutters or sensor-based shutters.

I do, in retrospect, absolutely regret the use of the word "considerable" because "considerable" is use-specific. That is, whether the focal plane shutter in a given camera (XF, Alpa, Sony, Canon, Contax or otherwise) is "considerable" depends on the shutter speed, lens, resolution, tripod, head, and scrutiny. For some/many/most users it might be totally negligible.

As stated earlier... "That's the feedback I'd echo from our XF users as well as the testing I did with the Arca Swiss FPS unit (which use the same shutter as the Alpa FPS); the vibration created is only problematic in narrow ranges of use cases. For many (probably most) users it may never once be a problem or only occasionally a minor annoyance. For still others it may be a significant limitation."

In addition, I also invite you to post examples of posts prior to the release of the XT where you have stated that the FPS shutter in ANY Phase One camera has *considerable* vibration issues.

I've noted that focal plane shutters cause vibration on a variety of occasions, including on the DF, DF+, and XF.

https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=42846.msg373607#msg373607
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=100849.msg826445#msg826445
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...53-phase-one-schneider-28mm-f4-5-ls-lens.html
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...tal-backs/54570-sk-40-80mm-sample-images.html
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...body-iq3-backs-35ls-120ls-c1-8-3-website.html
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...12-please-talk-me-out-mamiya-300-4-5-apo.html[/QUOTE]
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...backs/38097-negatives-witha-digital-back.html

 

[dougpeterson]

You DO imply there are “considerable vibration” and “manual aperture control” and more "issues" with the ALPA to consider.
As an ALPA owner, I want to learn more about why you share this technical data and ALPA does not.

You sometimes come off snarky Doug. Calling my comment about not easily being able to tryout MFD gear prior to purchase, "strange" is an example. And yes we know DT will rent out some gear prior to purchase, but that applies to a small margin of MFD shooters that can afford to do that or are interested in the gear DT offers, but you already knew that and yet you decided to make a negative comment.

Why try to act like the smartest guy in the classroom among photographers that use the gear on a regular basis? You should be learning from the participants in this forum as well.

Why not just answer Gerald's and Narkin's questions and be done with it?

I find this post to be hurtful and personally insulting. I wish we knew each other better as I don't think it's true of me at all. In fact it's quite clear I'm not that smart at all as I continue to make myself available on a forum where I'm routinely personally insulted.

However, I take, at face value, your feedback that you also interpreted my post the way Gerald did, so have revised it above.

Re the other thread: The OP was asking about a P45; DT can ship a P45 for evaluation before purchase. I'm sorry you found the word "strange" offensive; it was not intended to be.

Why not just answer Gerald's and Narkin's questions and be done with it?

I hesitate to engage with Gerald at all because he:
- personally insulted my integrity
- called me a liar
- is acting boorishly and rudely

That said, I'm trying my best to listen to the message rather than pay attention to the way it's delivered. I really thought my post was quite clearly discussing the technical merits of using an X-Shutter rather than focal plane shutter (FPS) in the XT. However, both you and he don't agree, and continue to think it was misleading after I've clarified in posts since. Therefore, I've re-posted the information with what I think are sufficient clarifications. If you find that one unclear as well please let me know.

 

[gerald.d]

Bless.

 

[MGrayson]

Forgive my jumping in, and for referring to you (Doug) in the third person.

Before I met Doug, I thought, as many of you do, that he pushed his gear too aggressively and was over-confident in his opinions.

Then I met him on a workshop, I found him an enthusiastic camera-geek who was intensely interested in helping people understand their gear so that they can get the best results possible. I was shocked (pleasantly). Since then, I see his posts through the person that I came to know. I guarantee that if you contact him with a desire to get to know any aspect of equipment that is not easily available to you, he will work on finding a way for you to learn about it.

Ok, back to the XT...

Matt

 

[dougpeterson]

Forgive my jumping in, and for referring to you (Doug) in the third person.

Before I met Doug, I thought, as many of you do, that he pushed his gear too aggressively and was over-confident in his opinions.

Then I met him on a workshop, I found him an enthusiastic camera-geek who was intensely interested in helping people understand their gear so that they can get the best results possible. I was shocked (pleasantly). Since then, I see his posts through the person that I came to know. I guarantee that if you contact him with a desire to get to know any aspect of equipment that is not easily available to you, he will work on finding a way for you to learn about it.

Ok, back to the XT...

Matt

That's exceptionally kind of you to say. thank you.

I'll never claim to have the highest social intelligence; I can be quite nerdy sometimes, and a bit intense as well. Add to that the difficulty of communicating via words (especially via an internet forum) and my unquestionable bias (which I wear on my sleeve and have never hesitated to acknowledge). That Darr finds me so unpleasant means I've failed worse at that than I thought. It's something I'll need to ruminate on moving forward.

 

[Shashin]

I've noted that focal plane shutters cause vibration on a variety of occasions, including on the DF, DF+, and XF.

https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=42846.msg373607#msg373607
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=100849.msg826445#msg826445
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...53-phase-one-schneider-28mm-f4-5-ls-lens.html
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...tal-backs/54570-sk-40-80mm-sample-images.html
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...body-iq3-backs-35ls-120ls-c1-8-3-website.html
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...12-please-talk-me-out-mamiya-300-4-5-apo.html

https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium...backs/38097-negatives-witha-digital-back.html[/QUOTE]

I just went through your links. Many of them are not really discussing the problems of shutter vibration at all. And if they do, they are passing comments. As Darr noted, you are dealing with experienced photographers. I get your company is built on the idea of "absolute quality" and you need that with your price model. But marketing and actual applications are not the same. You have made valuable contributions at GetDPI, but, as noted above, you tend to mitigate the positive nature of those contributions by push strange ideas that are not accurate and are condescending in the face of other experience with products you are critical of.

Yes, it is easy to sell to larger organizations with boatloads of money and no real knowledge of the photographic process or a buyer that just wants to spend too much on your products and can justify it because the institution does not know better. Naturally, your clients want the "best," but probably don't know what that actually signifies. The photographers here need to solve practical problems and can get the same results for less. And that is what we do here. We help each other to solve problems, not simply point people to the most costly equipment because of some magical technology (although to be fair, it is Dantes forum so we are on a continuum).

I guess what I don't get is your response to the obvious frustration with your comments. Perhaps it is just misunderstanding. But as a representative of a company, your default position is to double down rather than to try to clear up the misunderstanding. This is one reason I don't use dealers. Every time I had a problem with something I bought, the dealer that was so nice during the purchase, suddenly changes and forgets all about the support that was offered. And when I was in charge in institutional purchases (item budgets approaching the million mark), dealer behavior was very much noted and sales were lost to those that did not measure up.

 

[Shashin]

Forgive my jumping in, and for referring to you (Doug) in the third person.

Before I met Doug, I thought, as many of you do, that he pushed his gear too aggressively and was over-confident in his opinions.

Then I met him on a workshop, I found him an enthusiastic camera-geek who was intensely interested in helping people understand their gear so that they can get the best results possible. I was shocked (pleasantly). Since then, I see his posts through the person that I came to know. I guarantee that if you contact him with a desire to get to know any aspect of equipment that is not easily available to you, he will work on finding a way for you to learn about it.

Ok, back to the XT...

Matt

I have no doubt about Doug's sincerity or passion. I just think his frame works against him.