Mark Dubovy - IQ 180 first impressions

[Noel Greene]

Let me say first of all that it is very unlikely that I will ever spend $40000+ on a Camera back .. but I really enjoyed Mark Dubovy's article on the new Phase One 80mp .. his essay is objective and should be welcomed for what it tells us .. Phase One are listening and are proactive in meeting the needs of Photographers. It is also clear from Mark's essay that in his view we may be at a new level in Camera backs and you have to applaud Phase One in this regard. Surely the new technologies that Phase One are bringing to the market will force the mainstream Camera makers like Nikon and Canon to move forward and try and match the obvious benefits that the likes of Phase One are bringing to their clients. If Phase One are taking big steps forward with their new IQ range .. well bring it on .. we can all benefit

[Mark D Segal]

Very interesting review Mark - much about the new design apart from increased pixel count we didn't know was coming. One thing I'm curious about - does it have a Sensor+ feature, allowing an 80MP sensor to become a 20MP sensor? If so, I'm wondering what that does for image quality.

[Mark D Segal]

OK, on re-reading Michael's First Impressions from the other day i see it does have Sensor+ - so only my second question remains - did you have a look at what it does for IQ?

[lenelg]

Here is a man whose personality and intelligence serve him extremely well to interface with photographers and people associated with photography in all different fields and at all levels.  He is a man that can translate needs, wants and complaints directly into design and technology.  He is a man who cares enough about improving the art and the craft of Photography that he is willing to spend weeks at a time a number of times per year to travel to workshops, interact with advanced as well as beginner photographers, to visit fashion photographers, product photographers, architectural photographers, etc., and to actually personally shoot  pictures with different kinds of equipment under all these different scenarios.

Claus is as much at home in the middle of the wilderness taking photographs, in the middle of a high-pressure fashion shoot or in the middle of a semiconductor plant designing a new sensor architecture.

I have spent a large part of my career trying to understand what makes great technology companies great. Understanding user needs in detail always comes at the top of the list. And this means going out there in the field, not doing focus groups. It means working with your most demanding customers, not the easiest prospects. It seems Dr Mølgaard is ticking all the right boxes, and PhaseOne would make a great business school case study..

[Jonny Gawler]

Over here in Pedants' Corner, someone (who can't be bothered to do the maths) has remarked that they would expect a 100% crop from an 80MP image to look a bit more magnified than the bicycle handlebar pic appears – is that really 1:1 pixel for pixel?

[Jack Flesher]

OK, on re-reading Michael's First Impressions from the other day i see it does have Sensor+ - so only my second question remains - did you have a look at what it does for IQ?

It's amazing, even if "only" 20 MP.  Here's an ISO 800 S+ sample (full shot for reference then 100% ISO800+ crop):

[Mark D Segal]

It's amazing, even if "only" 20 MP.  Here's an ISO 800 S+ sample (full shot for reference then 100% ISO800+ crop):

Hi Jack -

Well, exactly why I asked. That quality sensor with "only 20 MP" could become an attractive proposition for those people who don't necessarily make huge prints but anyhow want the quality of those large effective pixel pitches and the resolution of a Phase back. Looks as if it would make fantastic 13*19s or 17*22s without much down-sampling and without the huge file size of an 80MP resolution.

BTW - that image you posted - I hope you haven't been through a tornado there. Anyhow, it's at least a nice resolution test - even over the internet one can see that the fineness of the detail it captured is pretty amazing.

Mark

[Alan Goldhammer]

Hi Jack -

Well, exactly why I asked. That quality sensor with "only 20 MP" could become an attractive proposition for those people who don't necessarily make huge prints but anyhow want the quality of those large effective pixel pitches and the resolution of a Phase back. Looks as if it would make fantastic 13*19s or 17*22s without much down-sampling and without the huge file size of an 80MP resolution.

BTW - that image you posted - I hope you haven't been through a tornado there. Anyhow, it's at least a nice resolution test - even over the internet one can see that the fineness of the detail it captured is pretty amazing.

Mark

Now we are getting into the cost/benefit analysis.  If you are restricting your printing to the sizes above, are you really getting much more visual quality in the print than with a top of the line DSLR and correct lens at 1/10 of the cost of the back?  I can see the benefits with very large prints but am skeptical about smaller size prints.

[Jack Flesher]

Anyhow, it's at least a nice resolution test - even over the internet one can see that the fineness of the detail it captured is pretty amazing.

Thanks Mark, yes it is.  And of course the point was to use a dimly-lit, higher detail subject to help ascertain file characteristics, not art .

[Mark D Segal]

Now we are getting into the cost/benefit analysis.  If you are restricting your printing to the sizes above, are you really getting much more visual quality in the print than with a top of the line DSLR and correct lens at 1/10 of the cost of the back?  I can see the benefits with very large prints but am skeptical about smaller size prints.

Hi Alan,

(A) I knew someone would ask that question, and
(B) you are asking this of someone who made a career of cost-benefit analysis and has become very jaded about some of its fundamentals - another talk show.

It's the usual problem - costs are often much easier to quantify than benefits, unless you are a commercial studio and you can see how ownership of gear translates into revenue you otherwise wouldn't attract. But for amateurs in the literal sense of the word (i.e. doing high-end work that doesn't necessarily make money) the benefit is how much you value that extra bit of quality, and this is very subjective. There can be an extra dose of print quality even at 13*19 inches, but that depends on how you use the equipment, the kind of image it is, etc. So is it worthwhile? Totally in the eye and wallet of the beholder.

[Jack Flesher]

A comment re value, since it invariably comes up whenever a new DB is announced.

My experience with PhaseOne is that each time I've upgraded, I have "recouped" a healthy percentage of my past expenditures toward the upgrade cost.  Point is, once you get past the initial buy-in, it's been a pretty manageable net hard cost to stay current.  Yes, I have to pay the piper for the upgrade, and yes when I finally pull out for good I'll take whatever hit I take (more accurately my heirs will), but still when amortized over a photographic career, hard costs are not too bad I think.

My .02 only,  

[Mark D Segal]

A comment re value, since it invariably comes up whenever a new DB is announced.

My experience with PhaseOne is that each time I've upgraded, I have "recouped" a healthy percentage of my past expenditures toward the upgrade cost.  Point is, once you get past the initial buy-in, it's been a pretty manageable net hard cost to stay current.  Yes, I have to pay the piper for the upgrade, and yes when I finally pull out for good I'll take whatever hit I take (more accurately my heirs will), but still when amortized over a photographic career, hard costs are not too bad I think.

My .02 only,  

I think this is a very sensible way to evaluate it. It's a dynamic process, hence the initial buy-in cost is a necessary but not sufficient metric for determining long-run value.

And perhaps we can encourage our inheritors to appreciate the beauty of the last beast we purchase before we croak? :-)

[Ray]

It's amazing, even if "only" 20 MP.  Here's an ISO 800 S+ sample (full shot for reference then 100% ISO800+ crop):

I'm very impressed. That looks very acceptable to me at ISO 800. I can't wait to see a comparison with a D3X at ISO 800.

However, I do have a question, Jack. There's something odd about the Phase ISO values, according to DXOMark tests of previous models. The only ISO sensitivity that comes close to being accurate is the base ISO of 50 which is around ISO 44 or 45. From there upwards, there seems to be a discrepancy of a full stop or more in relation to the Phase ISO markings. ISO 100 is still ISO 44. ISO 200 is 89, and ISO 800 is 360, and so on.


It makes a difference. If someone does take the trouble to compare this new 80mp back from Phase with the D3X at ISO 800, he might in fact be comparing the IQ80 at ISO 360 with the D3X at ISO 674, unless Phase have changed their policy regarding ISO markings.

[BernardLanguillier]

It makes a difference. If someone does take the trouble to compare this new 80mp back from Phase with the D3X at ISO 800, he might in fact be comparing the IQ80 at ISO 360 with the D3X at ISO 674, unless Phase have changed their policy regarding ISO markings.

Knowing that this policy is liked by most back users as it gives the impression of highlight recovery, it would be surprising if Phaseone had decided to go back to a stricter definition of ISO.

On the article, interesting and well written, thanks Mark.

Now, one detail that made me smile... as usual we are now finding out that the supposedly perfect shadows of the P65+ were in fact not that clean. I wonder if the consequent 6 stops additional DR claim still applies to the P65+, or whether is has been automatically re-mapped to the IQ180? 

Cheers,
Bernard

[Mark D Segal]

ooooooooh   :-)

[Alan Goldhammer]

Now, one detail that made me smile... as usual we are now finding out that the supposedly perfect shadows of the P65+ were in fact not that clean. I wonder if the consequent 6 stops additional DR claim still applies to the P65+, or whether is has been automatically re-mapped to the IQ180? 

Cheers,
Bernard

The increased number of pixels has now increased the dynamic range by 1/3!!

[PierreVandevenne]

fact not that clean. I wonder if the consequent 6 stops additional DR claim still applies to the P65+, or whether is has been automatically re-mapped to the IQ180? 

I think they have now been remapped on the brain of the Phase One exec.

[Ray]

Knowing that this policy is liked by most back users as it gives the impression of highlight recovery, it would be surprising if Phaseone had decided to go back to a stricter definition of ISO.

On the article, interesting and well written, thanks Mark.

Now, one detail that made me smile... as usual we are now finding out that the supposedly perfect shadows of the P65+ were in fact not that clean. I wonder if the consequent 6 stops additional DR claim still applies to the P65+, or whether is has been automatically re-mapped to the IQ180? 

Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard,
Potentially, an 80mp DB with a binning capability that produces clean 20mp images at high ISO would be a tremendous selling point.

The larger sensor would still have a DoF disadvantage when an extended DoF is desired, but in binned mode it should have a resolution advantage when a shallow DoF is desired, and when the lens is used at its sharpest aperture, provided too much noise doesn't get in the way.

One thing that's not clear to me is whether the sensor+ mode is available at all ISOs. If it is, is there any DR and noise advantage at low ISOs?

The increase from 60mp to 80mp might sound like a lot, but it's really no different from an increase from 6mp to 8mp. When I upgraded my Canon 6mp D60 to the 8mp 20D some years ago, I didn't find the increased resolution to be at all significant, although it was noticeable at a pixel-peeping level.

The main improvement in the 20D was its vastly improved performance at high ISO, compared with the D60.

[Mark D Segal]

Bernard,
Potentially, an 80mp DB with a binning capability that produces clean 20mp images at high ISO would be a tremendous selling point.

The larger sensor would still have a DoF disadvantage when an extended DoF is desired, but in binned mode it should have a resolution advantage when a shallow DoF is desired, and when the lens is used at its sharpest aperture, provided too much noise doesn't get in the way.

One thing that's not clear to me is whether the sensor+ mode is available at all ISOs. If it is, is there any DR and noise advantage at low ISOs?

The increase from 60mp to 80mp might sound like a lot, but it's really no different from an increase from 6mp to 8mp. When I upgraded my Canon 6mp D60 to the 8mp 20D some years ago, I didn't find the increased resolution to be at all significant, although it was noticeable at a pixel-peeping level.

The main improvement in the 20D was its vastly improved performance at high ISO, compared with the D60.

The main idea of Sensor+ is to allow much higher ISO at lower noise than feasible at default resolution.

[Ray]

The main idea of Sensor+ is to allow much higher ISO at lower noise than feasible at default resolution.

Mark,
That's what I thought, in which case I sure hope the IQ180 has better performance at high ISO then the P65+, otherwise it will still be marginally overshadowed by the D3X, at a real ISO 800 with both cameras.