P45 Dynamic Range

[Mort54]

Phase One claims 12 stops of dynamic range for their backs. For those that have a Phase back, how realistic is this claim? And specifically, how many stops above midtone can you retain details in highlights? For example, if you want to hold detail in snow, how many stops above midtone do you expose the snow for? With my Nikon D2X and D200, for example, I typically put snow or other very bright highlights at +2 or +2 1/3 stops. At +3, highlights are almost featureless white.

Mort.

[pflower]

Never having used one I can't say for certain but 12 stops seems implausible.  But I have been intrigued by the claim since I am slowly beginning the process of talking myself into thinking about thinking about buying a back for my Hasselblad.

In my days of black and white in the darkroom I plotted curves with densitometers, tested film and developer combinations for normal plus and minus developments and I never ever got close to 12 full stops of range on any film.  

With a sensitive densitometer and very careful development 10 full stops from Zone 1 to Zone 10 might have been claimed on neg but they would never translate fully on paper.  If you then include Zone 0 (pure black) and Zone 11(pure white) and count them as part of the dynamic range you could end up claiming 12 stops but again the separation from Zones 0 to 2 was absolutely minimal on paper and likewise between Zones 9 to 11.  Given that each stop is twice (or half) the exposure of the one before I cannot believe that 12 full stops of useable information can be achieved but I would love someone with one of these backs to tell me that I am talking nonsense and show me the evidence!

Anyone?

[Mort54]

...I cannot believe that 12 full stops of useable information can be achieved but I would love someone with one of these backs to tell me that I am talking nonsense and show me the evidence!

Nikon and Canon DSLRs generally get 8 stops or so, but typically only about three to three and a half stops of that is above midtone. The rest is in the shadows below midtone. Which is why I'm particularly interested in how many stops above midtone Phase can achieve.

[Dustbak]

Nikon and Canon DSLRs generally get 8 stops or so, but typically only about three to three and a half stops of that is above midtone. The rest is in the shadows below midtone. Which is why I'm particularly interested in how many stops above midtone Phase can achieve.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115397\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I never actually tested the DR of my back however having used the D200 and D2x my back gives me noticeably a lot more room to work and detail.

Stuff that would have been totally lost by the DSLR's is still there in my Aptus files. How much stops more? Don't know, 12 stops it might very well be. My perception is that I get about 2 stops more above midtone than with the DSLR's.

This together with the 16bits colors is why I am using my back over the DSLR whenever I can.

When you do want to know exactly and have it proven to you just rent/borrow/lend one and find out I would say.

[clawery]

Dustbak is correct.  I would actually rent / demo a Phase back to see what the DR is.  Phase One does have an expanded range, especially with the new P+ series.

Chris Lawery
Sales Manager
Capture Integration

PHASE ONE PARTNER OF THE YEAR - 2006

[MichaelEzra]

I doubt any digital back can compare with Fuji S3/S5 in dynamic range:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...thread=23062402

[Dustbak]

I doubt any digital back can compare with Fuji S3/S5 in dynamic range:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...thread=23062402
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the Fuji is supposed to have a bout 2 stops more than Nikon or Canon DSLR's that would mean still 2 stops less than any MFDB.

Now, if you want to point towards a DSLR that has an advantage over most MFDB's it is the SD14 with its non-interpolated colors.

[pss]

I doubt any digital back can compare with Fuji S3/S5 in dynamic range:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...thread=23062402
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

do yourself a favor and test one for yourself....any Dback will give you a higher DR then any DSLR....not even close....looked at your example, absolutely makes my point.....

i am not sure how much actual DR there is with Dbacks, my experience with my leaf and phase backs is very good, always could be better, don't know the exact numbers (never did any real scientific tests to find out the DR of any of my backs).....but i can promise that any DSLR does not even come close....i would say about 2stops less? i think that the 1dsmkII has pretty good DR, but the highlights blow out much faster and i am not even going to talk about shadow detail.....

i am waiting to test the new P+ backs to see if they are even better then the P series.....

[Mort54]

Dustbak is correct.  I would actually rent / demo a Phase back to see what the DR is.  Phase One does have an expanded range, especially with the new P+ series.

Actually, I have a P45+ on order, along with a Mamiya 645 AFD II system, and should receive a loaner P45 in a week or so to use while I'm waiting on the P45+ delivery. So I'll be able to test it then. In the meantime, I was interested in finding out what others had experienced with their backs as far as dynamic range goes (especially on the high side of midtone). So that was the purpose of this thread. Since my original question seems to have gotten lost in the discussion, let me reask it - with MF backs (Phase in particular, but answers for other backs would be equally interesting), how many stops above midtone can you retain details in highlights?

I know I'll get better dynamic range with digital backs. I shot some test images on a loaner P45 a few weeks ago, but due to timing contraints, I had to return the back before I could do any dynamic range testing. The files I got made it clear to me that I would get a huge improvement over my Nikon stuff, but the test images weren't sufficient to quantify the dynamic range improvement.

[MichaelEzra]

FYI, I have tested Aptus 22 and Fuji S3 side by side for DR comparison. Fuji S3 wins.

[pss]

FYI, I have tested Aptus 22 and Fuji S3 side by side for DR comparison. Fuji S3 wins.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115533\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

like i said my experiences are quite different....

lets say you shoot a superhigh DR scene with a Dback and a DSLR and expose for the highlights, in my experience the file from the Dback will let you open up the underexposed shadows much, much more and much cleaner then the DSLR file, which will simply provide a noisy, muddy mess.....this is in my opinion also related to the 12vs16bit......

either way, if you found what you were looking for with the fuji, that is what counts.....i urge everybody to do the same tests to see for themselves....

[alba63]

lets say you shoot a superhigh DR scene with a Dback and a DSLR and expose for the highlights, in my experience the file from the Dback will let you open up the underexposed shadows much, much more and much cleaner then the DSLR file, which will simply provide a noisy, muddy mess.....this is in my opinion also related to the 12vs16bit......

Hello, if I may step in, maybe the mistake here is to say "a DSLR", because the Fuji S3 and now S5 is the only DSLR that is optimized for high DR - internally blending 2 captures for shadows/ midtones and for highlights (S & R pixels). While it has several disadvantages and not very high resolution (actually it is basically a "good 6MP" camera, only interpolating to 12MP), its DR and tonality are the best of any DSLR. As far as I know it is also the only one that uses 14bit converters that result in smoother gradients etc. It has a very smooth and natural look, much more like film than the Canon FF that I have.

But, of course, resolution and detail are not anywhere near a MF back. So it is not something that should be compared really.

regards, Bernhard

[pss]

Hello, if I may step in, maybe the mistake here is to say "a DSLR", because the Fuji S3 and now S5 is the only DSLR that is optimized for high DR - internally blending 2 captures for shadows/ midtones and for highlights (S & R pixels). While it has several disadvantages and not very high resolution (actually it is basically a "good 6MP" camera, only interpolating to 12MP), its DR and tonality are the best of any DSLR. As far as I know it is also the only one that uses 14bit converters that result in smoother gradients etc. It has a very smooth and natural look, much more like film than the Canon FF that I have.

But, of course, resolution and detail are not anywhere near a MF back. So it is not something that should be compared really.

regards, Bernhard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115541\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i just read a review of the S3 and went to the fuji website....yes the s3 is 14bit and the extra sensors do pull in an extra stop or two......
what i found interesting in the review is that they had much better results (for pulling even more DR) when processing in ACR compared to the fuji software.....of course this review is not very new and now the S5 is on the market......

interesting camera (i used to have a fuji DSLR S2?) with a very interesting "philosophy".....i find it  strange that the fuji (with the focus on DR) and the sigma (with the layered chip) are both out of the mainstream and therefor have less chances of "making a splash" in the big picture....yet these are the technologies that should be explored for future chips.....i would much rather see a 40mpix(20+20 for extra DR), 3 layered sensor then a 60mpix "regular" sensor.....

[Dustbak]

i just read a review of the S3 and went to the fuji website....yes the s3 is 14bit and the extra sensors do pull in an extra stop or two......
what i found interesting in the review is that they had much better results (for pulling even more DR) when processing in ACR compared to the fuji software.....of course this review is not very new and now the S5 is on the market......

interesting camera (i used to have a fuji DSLR S2?) with a very interesting "philosophy".....i find it  strange that the fuji (with the focus on DR) and the sigma (with the layered chip) are both out of the mainstream and therefor have less chances of "making a splash" in the big picture....yet these are the technologies that should be explored for future chips.....i would much rather see a 40mpix(20+20 for extra DR), 3 layered sensor then a 60mpix "regular" sensor.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Same here. A Foveon 17Mp (real resolution not the interpolated view Sigma is using) with 'R-pixels' (these I believe were the pixels used for additonal room in the highlights by Fuji?) would be awesome. It does have over 51M fotodiodes without the 'R-pixels' so it probably is something of a challenge to make.

I am considering a S5 for its allegedly beautiful skin tones.

I would be buying a SD14 when it would have a F-mount.

[ixpressraf]

Same here. A Foveon 17Mp (real resolution not the interpolated view Sigma is using) with 'R-pixels' (these I believe were the pixels used for additonal room in the highlights by Fuji?) would be awesome. It does have over 51M fotodiodes without the 'R-pixels' so it probably is something of a challenge to make.

I am considering a S5 for its allegedly beautiful skin tones.

I would be buying a SD14 when it would have a F-mount.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Or you could go for a contax 645 AF or hasselblad 645 with multishot back....

[Dustbak]

Or you could go for a contax 645 AF or hasselblad 645 with multishot back....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115567\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know (as you know) but the '(wet)dreamsensor' can do the same in one shot.

Personally in the absence of such a device I agree the multishot back would be my preferred solution.

[pss]

I know (as you know) but the '(wet)dreamsensor' can do the same in one shot.

Personally in the absence of such a device I agree the multishot back would be my preferred solution.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i am very happy with my P30 mamiyaRZ/645....multishot backs are unfortunately completely useless for me....and most of the time so is HDR (sandwiching exposures)....i just wish phase/leaf/sinar/hass would focus on something like the foveon or fuji's "R" pixels.....

there was talk of canon working on a layered chip....but i guess the market showed that the higher mipx number wins.....just ask sigma....they made a great camera, but the "true resolution" of 3mpix just wasn't good enough for the consumer when canon and nikon had 6mipx....that the images were very comparable did not make a difference....marketing power always wins.....so i guess canon took the easy route and just milked their chips instead of taking the much more expensive direction of designing a "new system".....

any way, i think the latest DSLRs and point& shoots show that the mpix race is pretty much over, people don't really want to deal with a 15mb file of granny smiling.....and another one of granny blinking....so i think we will see more pixel depth and probably something in the foveon and fuji direction from canon and nikon as well sooner or later anyway.....