Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: Phase One IQ250 Tech Cam Testing (vs IQ260 vs IQ280) by Digital Transitions  (Read 23342 times)

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Phase One IQ250 Tech Cam Testing (vs IQ260 vs IQ280) by Digital Transitions
« Reply #60 on: September 12, 2014, 12:05:04 pm »

Yes I would be careful if you require movements and wide lenses on a tech camera. The 50 MP chip is not a good solution.  Crosstalk and loss of color fidelity.  If you are using longer lenses 90mm and up its a great solution.

DT early on reported some severe issues with the 60XL both on center and with movements. Doug was going to do more testing but I don't know if that ever occurred.

Also note that since announcement Phase One to my knowledge has not sponsored any information on with the IQ250 on a tech camera. All of their sponsorship has been on the DF+.  There have been good results with the IQ250 using the Canon TS-E wides with both the Alpa FPS and Hcam. Neither a good solution for me.

Paul

Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

yaya

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1254
    • http://yayapro.com
Re: Phase One IQ250 Tech Cam Testing (vs IQ260 vs IQ280) by Digital Transitions
« Reply #61 on: September 12, 2014, 01:25:55 pm »

Great test. I am coming from an Aptus II 12 R. I shoot product on a sinar P2. using a bass V mount. I am wanting to upgrade and get a MF system as well. With the release of the 50mp back, the higher iso is attractive. I can't seem to shoot my back above 100 without it starting to fall apart. All I really need is 400, and that would help a lot. I don't see much loss of detail between the 80 and the 50, besides the loss in megapixels. Do you see any reason not to downgrade to 50 megapixels?

Hi Bill,

If you change your back to say the new Credo 50 you will see a few differences:

1. The sensor is smaller so your lenses will become a bit longer and you will gain a bit more DOF if you try to keep the same framing
2. Live View on the Credo 50 is much, much better than on your Aptus, whether you use it tethered to Capture One or on the back. The latter is very handy on the P2 as you don't have to look at the computer
3. Base iso on the Credo 50 is 100
4. Your 12R has a rotating sensor. Other backs don't have it...

Hope this helps

Yair
Logged
Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One - Cultural Heritage
e: ysh@phaseone.com |

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: Phase One IQ250 Tech Cam Testing (vs IQ260 vs IQ280) by Digital Transitions
« Reply #62 on: September 12, 2014, 04:45:10 pm »

Great test. I am coming from an Aptus II 12 R. I shoot product on a sinar P2. using a bass V mount. I am wanting to upgrade and get a MF system as well. With the release of the 50mp back, the higher iso is attractive. I can't seem to shoot my back above 100 without it starting to fall apart. All I really need is 400, and that would help a lot. I don't see much loss of detail between the 80 and the 50, besides the loss in megapixels. Do you see any reason not to downgrade to 50 megapixels?

As stated above, smaller sensor (longer effective length for any given lens) is the biggie. Dropping from 80mp to 50mp is a loss of resolution, but both are quite high in resolution for most applications. Ultimately only you can decide how much resolution you want and how much you need. Take some of your 80mp files and downsample them to 50mp; the result won't be exactly the same, but close enough to make an educated decision based off of. Alternatively contact a dealer and get relevant raw files from the Credo 50 or IQ250 so you can make your own processing and output and decide what you feel about the resolution.

The 50mp sensors struggle with movement on wider lenses, especially symmetrical lenses like those of Schneider, when used on a tech camera for architecture or interiors, especially when used at infinity. It's still very possible to use an IQ250 for those purposes, you're just limited to Rodenstock lenses and less movement than you could get with other backs, so in general it's not our 1st recommendation for those applications (landscape/architecture). In contrast, when shooting product about bread-box sized and smaller this isn't much of an issue - your focus distances mean that the lens is quite far from the sensor and the amount of movement usually isn't as significant as with architectural/interior and it's less common to use very wide lenses. We did some fairly extensive testing for a client who exclusively shoots table top product; in his case (meaning the lenses, focus distances, and amount of movement that were typical for him) the color cast was not deemed an issue on either back and the significantly improved live view won the day.

My suggestion, which is transparently selfish, but I think a good suggestion none the less, is to work with a dealer which has done extensive testing on these questions, and communicate to them exactly what kinds of lenses, movements, and focus-distances you use and they can let you know if you're barking up the right tree. If you fall outside the "clearly okay" or "clearly a problem" ranges then arrange to do testing at their facilities, or arrange a rental through them to do testing at your own studio.

But really, for live view, you'll be amazed at how nice the USB3 based Live View is on a large monitor (or also on the back itself in the case that you're arranging items in front of the camera and don't want to crane your neck to see the monitor).
« Last Edit: September 12, 2014, 04:55:21 pm by Doug Peterson »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Phase One IQ250 Tech Cam Testing (vs IQ260 vs IQ280) by Digital Transitions
« Reply #63 on: September 12, 2014, 04:58:33 pm »

Hi,

Seems to me like a good and honest analysis, what I would expect from Doug :-)

Best regards
Erik

As stated above, smaller sensor (longer effective length for any given lens) is the biggie. Dropping from 80mp to 50mp is a loss of resolution, but both are quite high in resolution for most applications. Ultimately only you can decide how much resolution you want and how much you need. Take some of your 80mp files and downsample them to 50mp; the result won't be exactly the same, but close enough to make an educated decision based off of. Alternatively contact a dealer and get relevant raw files from the Credo 50 or IQ250 so you can make your own processing and output and decide what you feel about the resolution.

The 50mp sensors struggle with movement on wider lenses, especially symmetrical lenses like those of Schneider, when used on a tech camera for architecture or interiors, especially when used at infinity. It's still very possible to use an IQ250 for those purposes, you're just limited to Rodenstock lenses and less movement than you could get with other backs, so in general it's not our 1st recommendation for those applications (landscape/architecture). In contrast, when shooting product about bread-box sized and smaller this isn't much of an issue - your focus distances mean that the lens is quite far from the sensor and the amount of movement usually isn't as significant as with architectural/interior and it's less common to use very wide lenses. We did some fairly extensive testing for a client who exclusively shoots table top product; in his case (meaning the lenses, focus distances, and amount of movement that were typical for him) the color cast was not deemed an issue on either back and the significantly improved live view won the day.

My suggestion, which is transparently selfish, but I think a good suggestion none the less, is to work with a dealer which has done extensive testing on these questions, and communicate to them exactly what kinds of lenses, movements, and focus-distances you use and they can let you know if you're barking up the right tree. If you fall outside the "clearly okay" or "clearly a problem" ranges then arrange to do testing at their facilities, or arrange a rental through them to do testing at your own studio.

But really, for live view, you'll be amazed at how nice the USB3 based Live View is on a large monitor (or also on the back itself in the case that you're arranging items in front of the camera and don't want to crane your neck to see the monitor).
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up