Remote question for Phase One DF body

[Paul2660]

For the Phase One DF body, I have the standard coiled cable Mamiya release.  For night photography I am working with,
I have the need to make multiple exposures longer than 30" with the DF body.  I understand that I can take multiple 30" exposures or less by putting the camera on Continuous and locking the release.  However for a longer series, with the remote
I have I would have to manually make the exposures, i.e. multiple 2 minutes exposures. 

Does anyone know of a solution that works like the Canon TC-80N3 that has a timer/interval option, so you can set the camera to take multiple exposures longer than 30" for a Mamiya/Phase One DF body?

Thanks
Paul Caldwell
http://www.photosofarkansas.com

[ondebanks]

Paul,

I had the exact same problem, with my 645AFD (same remote port as the DF). I solved it by making an adapter between a JYC intervalometer/timer/remote (a cheap but very good clone of the Canon unit) and a Quantum motor cable for the 645AF line. Both end in a 2.5mm jack, so all that was needed to join them was a 2.5mm T-splitter from Maplin. I'll look up the parts numbers later when I get a chance.

Ray

[ondebanks]

Paul,

As promised, this is what you need:

1) Maplin N97CX "2.5mm Stereo Plug to 2x 2.5mm Stereo Sockets" (aka a Y-shaped splitter for 2.5mm stereo)...or equivalent from another supplier. Cost me about €3 in my local Maplin store. You need this for the twin sockets; the plug end is actually not used (you can cut it off if you wish).
2) Quantum Instruments Motor Drive Cord for Mamiya 645AF. Part # 467. Cost me $50 on ebay.
3) JYC Timer Shutter Release For Canon 500D (get the type with the Canon 2.5mm jack, not the type with the Canon multi-pin socket). Cost me $29 shipped on ebay.

Simply plug them all together and you're set. For the price of Mamiya's own-brand simple remote release, you get a far more functional remote release + timer + intervalometer in one. For multiple long exposures, set the body on B and program the JYC unit for the required shutter speed, number of frames, and (if desired) delay before starting the first frame, and (if desired) interval between frames. 

On my 645AFD, I love the fact that I can mechanically lock up the mirror as well, and it stays up through the whole sequence. Not sure if the electronic mirror lockup on the AFDII/AFDIII/DF can do this as well, or if the mirror comes down again after every exposure (which would be useless in an automated multi-exposure sequence). I hope that someone else can clarify that.

Ray

[Paul2660]

Ray,

Thanks, for the info on your setup, when you get a sec, could you post a quick pic or 2 showing the completed assembly.
This should work for me.

Thanks
Paul Caldwell

[Paul2660]

Ray:

I missed the part on cutting of the end on the y plug, that had me confused.

I take it the quantum cord plugs into the remote port on the DF on one end, the other end to one socket on the Y plug, then
the JYC plugs into the other port on the Y plug. 

I have ordered all the parts.  Thanks again, I am also not sure if ML stays up all the time throughout the whole sequence, but as
you point out it would be nice.

Thanks
Paul Caldwell

[ondebanks]

Ray:

I missed the part on cutting of the end on the y plug, that had me confused.

I take it the quantum cord plugs into the remote port on the DF on one end, the other end to one socket on the Y plug, then
the JYC plugs into the other port on the Y plug. 

I have ordered all the parts.  Thanks again, I am also not sure if ML stays up all the time throughout the whole sequence, but as
you point out it would be nice.

Thanks
Paul Caldwell

Hi Paul,

Yes that's correct, that's all there is to connecting the bits together. Hope it works well for you.

Ray

[subrata1965]

Hi Paul,

    Corresponding with you after long time.

    Do you mind to publish a picture of the setup?

    Also I guess mirror lock will get released after some time?

    Thanks,

Subrata

[ondebanks]

Paul - hope it worked out for you. I'd also be interested to know if you found the mirror lock being released between exposures.

BTW, for future reference, I no longer recommend cutting off the unused plug of the T-splitter. Mine started behaving erratically after I did that. I replaced the T-splitter and it's been working perfectly again since. Learning by my mistakes - that's €2 I'll never see again! 

Ray

[Paul2660]

Ray,

It's funny, I started to order all the materials, and ended up with some of them.  But I gave up on the the process as I moved to stack shooting for my night work. The P45+ and it's corresponding dark frame just didn't work out that well.  I ended up upgrading to the IQ series and since it has no real long exposure capabilities, I switched back to Nikon and Canon for all my long exp. work.

Paul

[Graham Welland]

Paul,

I ended up going the same direction. D800 for night exposures for stacking. The LENR dark frame of the MFDBs is the killer for stacks.

[ondebanks]

Paul,

I ended up going the same direction. D800 for night exposures for stacking. The LENR dark frame of the MFDBs is the killer for stacks.

Remember last year when we were begging Phase One to release new P+ firmware, making the dark frames optional...and were told to get lost?

Now you've just confirmed what happens when companies are short-sighted like that: customers vote elsewhere with their wallets!

Ray

[julius0377]

Perhaps the TriggerTrap could work in some way?

https://triggertrap.com/

Don't know if it functions with the 645, but it works really well with my 5D mkIII

[Steve Hendrix]

Remember last year when we were begging Phase One to release new P+ firmware, making the dark frames optional...and were told to get lost?

Now you've just confirmed what happens when companies are short-sighted like that: customers vote elsewhere with their wallets!

Ray

You make it sound so personal and targeted. Like the idea of satisfying your requirement was abhorrent to them. It is interesting to me how the concept of important business and developmental decisions are ignored by some for what seems to be an easy and gratuitous shot at a company that, at the core, is simply trying to produce the best products it can with the technical resources it possesses. Would modifying a 2 generation old product so that dark frame subtraction is no longer necessary stave off those who would be choosing a Nikon instead? Not likely, and certainly not in any numbers compared to who they would attract by forging ahead with their resources to create the best possible products for today and tomorrow.

It's a cold, hard truth, but our industry and many others are filled with companies who have had to make the same hard (and usually wise) choices regarding legacy products and their further development. To say - Hah, they didn't care, so we showed them! seems like a shallow and narrow-minded viewpoint. They chose - so far - to not dedicate the resources to attempt to modify that product and as a result, some will wind up using a different product. It's not a lesson to them. It's the logical result of a rational decision they made when it comes to allocating time, effort, and resources in the best interests of the company, and ultimately, in the best interests of the majority of their existing and future clients.

You don't know if it is short sighted or not. Perhaps if they dedicated resources to disable a dark frame subtraction on a product 2 generations back, the time, expense, and effort involved could damage the prospects of the company for future growth and viability. It's easy to point to some who use a different solution for that reason and exclaim - See, they told us to f off! So we voted with our wallets! On the whole, neither you or anyone else has a clear idea of what would have been involved in producing what you wanted and what cost or negative effect it would have had on the company, assuming it was even viable to perform the modification.

I understand the regret - but instead of - I wish Phase One would have been able to allocate resources to modify my 2 generations old product, but since they couldn't, I'll have to use a Nikon (Canon, Panasonic, Nokia 808, etc) for that purpose, the sentiment seemed unnecessarily snide.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[Graham Welland]

To be honest Steve Phase One won't give us this feature for our IQ backs either.

I'd like to think that MFDB users are sensible/wise enough to be able to use LENR as an optional feature with any generation back, including IQ and preferably P+, in particular those with xpose+ which are used for long exposure work. One in particular comes t mind and that is the P45+ which is still in production and has no current replacement.

[Steve Hendrix]

To be honest Steve Phase One won't give us this feature for our IQ backs either.

I'd like to think that MFDB users are sensible/wise enough to be able to use LENR as an optional feature with any generation back, including IQ and preferably P+, in particular those with xpose+ which are used for long exposure work. One in particular comes t mind and that is the P45+ which is still in production and has no current replacement.

We don't know for sure if they will or will not add this feature to the IQ series. (though I am doubtful - it likely would already have been implemented or mentioned) It remains to be seen how easily this would be accomplished and what compromises it may involve. Even if they wanted to divert resources to this, the results may not be positive, and they likely are already aware of this. We'll probably never know. I'm not questioning anything other than the snideness toward their supposed motives.

To be clear - Phase doesn't do themselves any favors by not having better public dialogue on issues like this (but then, count them among many). If it were possible to sit down with the person who is responsible for making this decision or coming to this conclusion and you and he/she could discuss the merits, challenges, and reasons why it will or will not be implemented, I'm sure the idea that they just want you to get lost wouldn't be part of the conversation.

There's many things they would like to do to make their products even better, many of them will never be able to come to fruition. I believe they have enthusiasm for what they are able to do and (at least the engineers) regret at what they are not able to.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[Graham Welland]

This is off-topic now from remotes now I guess ... but I agree with you that more openness about sharing why important features aren't available would be generally helpful. I don't think that Ray was being snide so much as just stating that if you can't use a product in a certain way and there's no updates to add the functionality you need, then don't be surprised if people vote with their wallets and change to different competing tools.

I know that in my own case I bought a full spectrum UV-IR D800 to handle my needs not addressed by my IQ. (i.e. predominately night shooting / star trails etc). That said, I also just bought a P25+ from you folks at CI (yesterday in fact ) to complement my IQ back for long exposure shooting beyond the 1-2 minute range where my IQ160 kind of hits the noise wall. Actually, I bought another P25+ because I realized that I loathe the 35mm 3:2 format and I hate not using my Alpa for this longer exposure stuff too.

[Steve Hendrix]

This is off-topic now from remotes now I guess ... but I agree with you that more openness about sharing why important features aren't available would be generally helpful. I don't think that Ray was being snide so much as just stating that if you can't use a product in a certain way and there's no updates to add the functionality you need, then don't be surprised if people vote with their wallets and change to different competing tools.

I know that in my own case I bought a full spectrum UV-IR D800 to handle my needs not addressed by my IQ. (i.e. predominately night shooting / star trails etc). That said, I also just bought a P25+ from you folks at CI (yesterday in fact ) to complement my IQ back for long exposure shooting beyond the 1-2 minute range where my IQ160 kind of hits the noise wall. Actually, I bought another P25+ because I realized that I loathe the 35mm 3:2 format and I hate not using my Alpa for this longer exposure stuff too.

Yeah, off topic for a resurrected thread, for sure. Yet again!

I don't know if snide is the right word, but the reaction (or lack of it) from Phase One was exaggerated in a negative way and it was declared they were short sighted by not implementing it. Everyone is welcome to their opinion. I just don't hold with the idea that they were being short sighted. There's far too many details that are unknown for someone to conclude the decision vs the alternative is short sighted. I also feel pretty confident that if they could do it, and it made sense for them to do it, they'd love to. They don't experience joy from limiting the experience of their clients.

Congrats on your P25+ - I didn't even know we had one. A relatively rare beast these days. Just goes to show you gotta move fast sometimes because they don't stay on our shelf very long!


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration