Jamgolf
Member
When the IQ3-100 was announced, as a then Credo 60 owner I knew I would definitely upgrade. The question was "when" (not "if") I would upgrade. Features such as drammatically better live view , the ability to bump up the ISO from 50 to 200 (even 400) and better battery life were very meaningful and practical. This meant no need for a surface pro to judge focus and carrying fewer spare batteries on a hike. And later on when Phase One added the awesome Electronic Shutter (which happened after I upgraded) IQ3-100 simply became a far better tool compared to any prior Phase One digital backs opening options on the telephoto end of the lens spectrum and almost eliminating the need for carrying/using the one-shot sync cable.
Ever since the announcement of IQ4-150, as a card carrying member of Dante's club, naturally I have been very intrigued by some characteristics of this new tool but somehow I don't feel the unstoppable urge to upgrade. While my heart says "do it" my mind is not convinced and the question is "why?". Usually new things are decidedly better than prior models, but I am struggling to make the case here.
As a tech camera user, to me, IQ4-150 is better than IQ3-100 in the following meaningful ways:
On the flip side, I feel IQ3-100 is better than IQ4-150 in the following ways:
So, the IQ4-150 is actually better for a technical camera use. When I think about IQ4-150 advantages individually, I feel they are "nice to have":
This is my current mindset and thought process on this matter.
Would be nice to hear from those who have already upgraded or made the decision to upgrade share their thoughts.
Cheers!
Ever since the announcement of IQ4-150, as a card carrying member of Dante's club, naturally I have been very intrigued by some characteristics of this new tool but somehow I don't feel the unstoppable urge to upgrade. While my heart says "do it" my mind is not convinced and the question is "why?". Usually new things are decidedly better than prior models, but I am struggling to make the case here.
As a tech camera user, to me, IQ4-150 is better than IQ3-100 in the following meaningful ways:
- Much less need for LCC because of much reduced lens color cast
- Better dark frame management i.e. less need to capture dark frames
- Improved dynamic range
- Improved high ISO performance
- Higher resolution => meaning even bigger prints at comparable DPI/PPI
On the flip side, I feel IQ3-100 is better than IQ4-150 in the following ways:
- Diffraction: With a pixel pitch of 4.6 microns (versus 3.76 microns for IQ4-150) diffraction kicks in later e.g. f9 vs f8
- Adhoc Wifi: for triggering ES from Capture Pilot or using Capture Pilot for Composition (I am sure Phase One will rectify this via firmware at some point)
- Slightly better battery consumption.
So, the IQ4-150 is actually better for a technical camera use. When I think about IQ4-150 advantages individually, I feel they are "nice to have":
- While capturing LCC shots is not fun, but LCCs also help with dust spots. Will I stop capturing LCCs? Probably not.
- The need to capture a dark frame after small changes in shutter speeds is annoying. I'd certainly appreciate/prefer IQ4-150 behavior.
- I feel IQ3-100 has plenty of dynamic range. I am not sure I'd value the improved dynamic range IQ4-150 has to offer.
- I almost always shoot at base ISO 50, and rarely shoot higher than 200 - so I dont think I'd value the improvement.
- I value every pixel of resolution. So, I think I would value the improvements here.
This is my current mindset and thought process on this matter.
Would be nice to hear from those who have already upgraded or made the decision to upgrade share their thoughts.
Cheers!
Last edited: