645z Tethered Shooting

[ndevlin]

Yeah, the transfer time is about 5-7 seconds into LR.  Make sure all your image correction settings are turned off in the camera. 

- N.

[gwhitf]

Yes, massive improvement to go to Lightroom CC most recent. Just did that, and now I'm getting raws at about four seconds and JPGs at three seconds, into LR. USB3 cable, into MacBookPro 15 Retina. Thanks for your help.

[gwhitf]

To anyone else trying to tether a 645Z:

I'm setting the Slot 1 to RAW and save to Card.
I'm setting the Slot 2 to JPG Extra Small, and only one star of quality. (Seemingly the smallest possible size for tether).

I'm only sending the Extra Small JPG to the Watched Destination Folder. Then, Lightroom CC watches for a new JPG and imports it.

I'm getting four seconds, from time of shutter release to viewing it in Lightroom. To me, for a real job under pressure, this seems too long. Are there any other tweaks to the camera, or to Lightroom, or to ImageTransmitter 2, to speed up the transfer?

Using white short USB 3.0 cable, to the USB port of a 15 inch Retina MBook Pro.

Any help appreciated.

[michaelbiondo]

I think that, for the moment, 4 seconds is as good as you are going to get.

[ndevlin]

Use a Large 1* jpeg.  The camera doesn't have to downsize it then. I found these faster than smalls, ironically.

[algrove]

Looks like some good progress has been made with IT2 and LR. Good to know. 3-4 seconds is fine, heck I remember when I had to go to a darkroom just to see negatives and tbat took many hours to get a dry negative which had to be enlraged to see what I had on a proof sheet-which useed to look like LR filmstrip at the bottom.

[gwhitf]

Thanks Nick. I ended up returning the camera. The whole tethering thing is just too quirky and slow for advertising work. Amazed why, if the camera has been out for a year, that Adobe has not adopted it for tethering.

Will stick with 5D3 and the new R version for jobs. Clients don't want excuses, on set. It must work. Surprised that for a camera that's second generation now, and one that's set to compete with Phase and Hasselblad, that a solid tether solution was not found before it was released.

It's a great camera; it's a shame about the tethering.

[Doug Peterson]

Thanks Nick. I ended up returning the camera. The whole tethering thing is just too quirky and slow for advertising work. Amazed why, if the camera has been out for a year, that Adobe has not adopted it for tethering.

Will stick with 5D3 and the new R version for jobs. Clients don't want excuses, on set. It must work. Surprised that for a camera that's second generation now, and one that's set to compete with Phase and Hasselblad, that a solid tether solution was not found before it was released.

It's a great camera; it's a shame about the tethering.

"that a solid tether solution was not found" makes it sound like the engineers just need to look around more and they'll find good tethering hiding in a box at the back of the closet.

It's very easy to underestimate how hard it is to do high-resolution, high-speed raw tethering.

Phase One has been doing medium format tethering since 1998 and has been working on and tweaking USB3 tethering since before USB3 became a stable standard. They were tethering 22mp with fast transfer times at a time when just opening a 22mp JPG could crash a normal PC. They were tethering 80mp raw files back in 2010. They have a lot of history and expertise in tethering, and it is central to a large percentage of their target market.

All the internals (both hardware and firmware) of a Phase One back are designed and selected for use in a high-performance digital back; nothing is repurposed from consumer cameras. The R+D team can select internal components based on performance rather than value. Moreover the hardware/firmware team can work directly with the software team at the lowest level. Every bottleneck from shutter-release to final-display on screen can be eliminated.

Phase has one of the best raw compression algorithms, and a great compression pipeline (the raw file is compressed on it's way to the buffer, so it can be read out of the buffer faster). They use an in-house designed four-core processor to chug through compressing high resolution raw files nearly instantly. Their lossless compression is class leading and their IIQ-S lossy compression results in an even smaller raw file (same resolution, smaller in megabytes) which has very nearly zero visual loss in quality even when you push the crap out of the file and you know what to look for. An IQ250 IIQ-S file is around 30mb.

Phase One is also a huge player in the industrial mapping aerial market - using the same backs as you buy as a commercial photographer. This market demands cameras that can capture at an absolutely consistent rate for tens of thousands of captures in a row; hitting a buffer or slowing down means the plane has to make another run and burn more fuel - absolutely unacceptable. All of the hardware technology, software refinement, firmware improvements, and general knowledge Phase One gains from serving this market benefits their commercial clients.

If you put all these ingredients/advantages together you can machine gun on a Phase One IQ250 (or IQ150 or Credo 50 etc) for minutes and look over see the most recent image you captured come in almost instantly. No need to shoot JPGs and reconcile selects/adjustments/edits with raws later; every file sent was the full raw file. No need for two separate programs, just Capture One. You even get native wireless review/editing/control to an iPad/iPhone as a nice bonus for when you don't want to be tethered.

[ndevlin]

Make the cheque payable to : "Luminous Landscape, Advertising Receivables".

Seriously.  Helpful technical insights from sales reps, who often have a wealth of working knowledge, is a useful and appropriate contribution to the forum, and legitimately showcases their potential to be helpful partners to working photographers.  But most photographers looking to pay a $25,000 markup on a digital back know how to find a press release on the internet.

gwhitf : I agree that the tethering is below what I would have expected and desired.There is no read technical or business reason for this deficiency besides a failure to understand market.   I think Canon will, haters notwithstanding, do very well with the 5Dr, as I gather Canon's tethering is still best-in-class.

- N.

[Chris_Brown]

Make the cheque payable to : "Luminous Landscape, Advertising Receivables".

ROFL

As raw files become larger, perhaps we'll begin to see SDI/coaxial cables and SSD drive packs with monitors, and do away with USB. Wouldn't that be dismal on a backpacking trip.

[eronald]

ROFL

As raw files become larger, perhaps we'll begin to see SDI/coaxial cables and SSD drive packs with monitors, and do away with USB. Wouldn't that be dismal on a backpacking trip.

Much of what Doug says is relevant, but once it gets going, consumer technology with its attendant economies of scale always outstrips special purpose tech.

The movie guys have been dealing with the data rate issues for ages - they have solutions for this eg. 4K@60Fps, and I think we're going to see them adapted to the still camera world anyway, because almost every still camera sold now is also a movie camera.

I think the most recent iteration of HDMI already has the necessary bandwidth.

Edmund

[Kolor-Pikker]

Surprised that for a camera that's second generation now, and one that's set to compete with Phase and Hasselblad, that a solid tether solution was not found before it was released.

In my opinion Pentax isn't competing with Phase and Hasselblad. It doesn't have a removable back, it doesn't have any (practical) leaf shutter lenses, but the new lenses are being equipped with stabilization from here on out, and the sensor is optimized for sensitivity. The 645Z is surely a landscape and hand-held available light photographers dream camera right now, and while I am happily using it the studio as well as outside, your use case is the kind Phase and Hasselblad cater to. I was actually surprised Pentax even had a tethering solution when I first learned about the Image Transmitter software recently, let alone the price they're charging for it.

[Dshelly]

I'm a commercial photographer who works primarily in studio. My main camera is the Canon 5D3, but I'm slowly incorporating the 645z into my workflow as I grow more comfortable with it.

Personally, I find the 3-4 seconds wait time in LR to be just fine. If a client is at the monitor, 3-4 seconds is just enough time to gauge whether the image is a keeper and to entertain thoughts on any adjustments to what I'm doing in terms of lighting, composition, posing, etc. I do expect, or at least hope, that Pentax continues to refine the software to offer us a better interface, as well as speed to offer a more satisfying workflow for those who want images to appear more quickly.

[gwhitf]

Of course Doug is absolutely correct: Phase is now the runaway leader in all this advertising work. There's CaptureOne and then there's everything else. No question. If there's a big budget on the table, you simply call up and rent the Phase camera and back.

Pentax *is* marketing the 645Z against the Hassie and Phase. I've seen their three-column comparison feature checklist. Nowhere in there is Canon or Nikon mentioned. Of course Pentax is competing with price. And it is a very good camera.

But without tethering, isn't really just competing against Nikon and Canon? And now with the 5dsR on the way by end of month, it'll be interesting how they fare.

I also wonder why Adobe has not adopted them into the list of supported cameras; the 645Z has been out for a year or so now; Adobe is usually very quick to adopt. There must be a reason. But without Adobe, Pentax really loses. Because Phase will obviously block Pentax from CaptureOne, unless it's thru the use of a watched Hot Folder. Which is very slow.

Yes, the hot folder would work, but when there's a job on the line, the Pentax workflow does not inspire confidence.

All these are my subjective personal opinions. It might be different from everyone reading this. But with used Pentax lenses getting hard to find, and when the 90mm is $4400, and without tethering, the Canon or Nikon solution seems much more appealing.

One opinion.

[eronald]

Pentax *is* marketing the 645Z against the Hassie and Phase. I've seen their three-column comparison feature checklist. Nowhere in there is Canon or Nikon mentioned. Of course Pentax is competing with price. And it is a very good camera.

I would agree with Doug and probably everybody else on this forum that the Phase solution is still much more flexible than the 645Z, many of us doubtless feel that the lenses of the Leica are way better than those sold by Pentax, and personally I prefer the Hassy ergonomics. But most of us at some point need to look to the price, and this is where the Pentax has a completely unfair advantage.

By the time Phase upgrades their camera body to match the high level set by their backs and software, I would expect Pentax to bring out new electronics with better tethering - Japanese engineers do have a proven track record of creating capable electronic hardware.

Edmund

[Steve Hendrix]

By the time Phase upgrades their camera body to match the high level set by their backs and software, I would expect Pentax to bring out new electronics with better tethering - Japanese engineers do have a proven track record of creating capable electronic hardware.

Edmund

Phase One upgraded camera body.

Pentax new electronics with better tethering.

Are you willing to wager that Pentax is first in this scenario?


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[Ken R]

I would agree with Doug and probably everybody else on this forum that the Phase solution is still much more flexible than the 645Z, many of us doubtless feel that the lenses of the Leica are way better than those sold by Pentax, and personally I prefer the Hassy ergonomics. But most of us at some point need to look to the price, and this is where the Pentax has a completely unfair advantage.

By the time Phase upgrades their camera body to match the high level set by their backs and software, I would expect Pentax to bring out new electronics with better tethering - Japanese engineers do have a proven track record of creating capable electronic hardware.

Edmund

You wont rest until PhaseOne is bankrupt and off the face of the earth. You are pretty persistent I give you that.

The Hasselblad H5X is available and its an excellent body and the H lens line is extensive and of very high quality.

The 645z is a great body looking for lenses and of course a CaptureOne like solution.

Yes, the H system lenses are not exactly cheap. But the new Pentax 645 lenses are not either.

[gwhitf]

QUOTED: "By the time Phase upgrades their camera body to match the high level set by their backs and software, I would expect Pentax to bring out new electronics with better tethering - Japanese engineers do have a proven track record of creating capable electronic hardware." END QUOTE

I paid full price for Image Transmitter 1 at $299. It was really crude and basic, but I cut them some slack since it was first generation. When I received Image Transmitter 2, I fully expected that they'd had the time to really develop the software for full tethering. But in fact, I could see little if any difference in Version 1 and Version 2 of the software; only that it had been altered to run the 645Z instead of the 645D.

Until Pentax fully understands that part of the reason to buy this camera, is to tether it for pressure advertising jobs, I think the software will be considered an afterthought. Like Doug said, it takes a major commitment of enthusiasm and money to develop working software -- look how long it took Capture One to be really stable -- years and years.

So don't get your hopes up about Pentax tethering. I don't know who they see their target audience, but it does not seem to be advertising photographers, who have come out of years of medium format shooting. It seems to be landscape guys, so why bother with tethering at all?

The whole "hot watched folder" approach is just silly. Yes, it might work, but if you trot that out for a client who's used to Capture One quickness and thoroughness, you're going to have a very disappointed client.

One subjective opinion.

[eronald]

QUOTED: "By the time Phase upgrades their camera body to match the high level set by their backs and software, I would expect Pentax to bring out new electronics with better tethering - Japanese engineers do have a proven track record of creating capable electronic hardware." END QUOTE

So don't get your hopes up about Pentax tethering. I don't know who they see their target audience, but it does not seem to be advertising photographers, who have come out of years of medium format shooting. It seems to be landscape guys, so why bother with tethering at all?

The whole "hot watched folder" approach is just silly. Yes, it might work, but if you trot that out for a client who's used to Capture One quickness and thoroughness, you're going to have a very disappointed client.

One subjective opinion.

There is some innovative tech in the latest Phase, Pentax, Hassy products, it is the fact that the Sony backs can extract information at high frame rates (video).
For now I think all three companies have simply adapted the working process of their old backs, dumping complete images down the tether. But we are going to see mirrorless MF soon, and electronic viewfinders. Video technology has entered the still photo arena, and we can count on some disruption. I expect photographers will also adapt to extracting stills from video.

Edmund

[eronald]

Phase One upgraded camera body.

Pentax new electronics with better tethering.

Are you willing to wager that Pentax is first in this scenario?


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

Steve,

 As you are handing me a soapbox, I would say that paradoxically it doesn't matter if  Phase puts a  new bodybox in front of an IQ back, their real problem and need for investment comes with the necessity of revamping their back's architecture completely to deal with the challenges and abilities of mirrorless, EVFs and on-sensor focus, and burst-video Medium Format frame rates.

 The pro photo market is pushed by the consumer tech, and video is undergoing a huge acceleration that will unavoidably up the expectations in the advertising and live-shot business. The problem is not that Pentax might tether a bit faster, it is that the customer might demand that a Phase back do 60 images per second frame rates like a RED or ARRI, at least in bursts of a few seconds,  with fast preview and preview scrolling on the back's monitor and on an attached PC. The real future competition for Phase in advertising is not Pentax, it is the video camera crowd who historically have had  access to very similar albeit smaller sensors, but who also have developed and perfected the technology for offloading, previewing and storing the data at a much higher framerate.

Edmund