Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: hobbsr on April 19, 2008, 06:27:12 am
-
Hi All,
As I have no experience shooting with DMF and am looking for a digital back for my Mamiya 645 AFD II can someone please supply an example Phase One P30 back shoot from an outdoor session?
I need to compare as have an option on a new D3 body or get a P30 back?
Any help would be great as really trying to get the best option and need to see the DMB difference for myself.
Regards
Rodney
-
Hi All,
As I have no experience shooting with DMF and am looking for a digital back for my Mamiya 645 AFD II can someone please supply an example Phase One P30 back shoot from an outdoor session?
I need to compare as have an option on a new D3 body or get a P30 back?
Any help would be great as really trying to get the best option and need to see the DMB difference for myself.
Regards
Rodney
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Your Joking right?
Snook
-
Your Joking right?
Snook
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=190584\")
You might want to wait for the 24 Meg Dwhatever camera which is due, you might, but only might, not raise as many laughs.
[a href=\"http://photoclubalpha.kilpatrickmedia.net/2008/04/16/nikon-d3x-244-megapixel-sensor-leak/]http://photoclubalpha.kilpatrickmedia.net/...el-sensor-leak/[/url]
-
A D3 or a P30? That's a pretty huge gap, in terms of image quality and price, if you ask me.
If you want to see the difference between full-frame 12MP and a P30, pick up a used 5D for an easy $1,800 or less, and see if that's all you need.
-
That's ridiculous! Why do you all sound so smug?
The guy is only asking for a sample raw file to see the difference by himself. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
-
Rodney,
I own D3 and Aptus75s with both H2 and Rz.
I am not going to laugh like other because I for one actually use it. D3 is a great camera. If you do not need all that resolution of DB it does an outstanding job. There is a difference of course. The biggest one is on the large screen when you are shooting tethered. The image from A75s looks alive while the D3 is flat. Once the images are processed and printed to 11x14 it is much harder to tell them apart. Once they are magazine published good luck in telling them apart.
http://AndreNapier.com (http://AndreNapier.com)
-
That's ridiculous! Why do you all sound so smug?
The guy is only asking for a sample raw file to see the difference by himself. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=190671\")
No nothing wrong with that. Except the 'recent work' thread
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22425#]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....howtopic=22425#[/url]
contains enough images, OK not actual files, to make some kind of judgement surely and if another SLR v MFDB back thread starts there will be suicides to contend with.
I thought my advice was pertinent in that a higher resolution version of the D3 is coming which might, given we are told by the OP very little about his requirements, provide a closer resolution match to a P30 I certainly did not intend to sound "smug" but would have hoped the OP would have done some searching first or, given the recent threads ( wasn't the advice on forums at one time to read for a while before posting? ), at least just ask for a P30 file to look at, full stop.
Rodney asks for help for the best option for him, fine, but "outdoor session" is all we have to go on.
I would if I had a P30 gladly send him a file I'm not smug I'm trying to help. My "raise a laugh" comment is based on recent postings where this comparison has been flogged to death perhaps I should have said a hollow laugh.
-
Well, ok but although the 'recent work' thread has plenty of jpg samples, there is nothing like a raw to see for yourself and play with the different raw processors, so I sympathised.
There is very little in the way of raw files available for downloading, I don't really know why.
For instance, I've logged on to the Phase One site and I could not find anywhere where I could download samples, why not, why make it so difficult, anything to hide? Maybe I didn't look properly, but if they are there at all, they are certainly well hidden.
Leaf, however, have plenty of samples, this tells me a lot about a company.
Edward
-
Well, ok but although the 'recent work' thread has plenty of jpg samples, there is nothing like a raw to see for yourself and play with the different raw processors, so I sympathised.
There is very little in the way of raw files available for downloading, I don't really know why.
For instance, I've logged on to the Phase One site and I could not find anywhere where I could download samples, why not, why make it so difficult, anything to hide? Maybe I didn't look properly, but if they are there at all, they are certainly well hidden.
Leaf, however, have plenty of samples, this tells me a lot about a company.
Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190686\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Did not really mean to offend anybody..
Just the subject has been beat to death and they are both for different types of shooting.
I also believe there were a couple of RAW samples posted before.
I also think that Phase or some of these smaller dealers have their own test examples you can download.
Also what kind of subject to you want to compare it to..
What type of light etc.. just any RAW picture is not probably going to help you in you decision.
Snook
-
What is goofy isn't a comparison between a D3 and a P30, its the thought that someone would base a decision whether or not to spend $12,000 upon a raw someone else shot. The P30 produces a higher quality image in every respect. That shouldn't even be a question. The question is whether you are cool shooting at 1.3 frames per second, whether you can live with ISO 400 at the top end of usable, and whether the AFd is the cam for you. Thus, you need to rent one, or go to a dealer and shoot one for an hour at least to give you an idea of what you can expect. These things cost like cars. Would you buy a car without a test drive? Base your decision on what a stranger says about the ride/handling?
-
Hi All,
Glad that my post gets a laugh! I did not mean the question to be that funny nor am I stupid to not have tried many other options before posting and have tried to post other threads to draw on the great skills and experience that you all have as I am new to MF and DMF.
1. I am not going to base this decision on a single file being provided on a thread!!
2. My local dealer showed some example files shoot by a very well known wedding photographer and to me they did not do that much for me
3. I have a D3 for the next day or so and have example images that I have taken
4. I can't seem to get my hands on a P30 or a P anything to test
So of course this type of topic has been done to death, of course there are heaps of rumors going around about the next versions of the cameras but I am trying to see for myself what I can see in the IQ.
The key choice for me is to:
1. trade an M8 for a D3 - M8 at lower iso is great and I think from some examples and my own images is a great system but does have limits around manual focus and high iso. D# is a image machine so quick and can shoot in any light the high iso is unreal - so two very different systems but only one option with the money I have
2. Lease a P30 and try and take my work to a whole new level where I can work within the limits of a 645 system a still have a D3 or D300 for the times I need speed and high iso.
Hope that helps and does not raise any more laughs only trying to improve and grow as a professional.
The key is to be different and that is all I am trying to do by having the best IQ I can so I can focus on creating images.
Regards
Rodney
-
These things cost like cars. Would you buy a car without a test drive? Base your decision on what a stranger says about the ride/handling?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I bought a car without a test drive..worked out OK.
-
Hi All,
Glad that my post gets a laugh! I did not mean the question to be that funny nor am I stupid to not have tried many other options before posting and have tried to post other threads to draw on the great skills and experience that you all have as I am new to MF and DMF.
1. I am not going to base this decision on a single file being provided on a thread!!
2. My local dealer showed some example files shoot by a very well known wedding photographer and to me they did not do that much for me
3. I have a D3 for the next day or so and have example images that I have taken
4. I can't seem to get my hands on a P30 or a P anything to test
So of course this type of topic has been done to death, of course there are heaps of rumors going around about the next versions of the cameras but I am trying to see for myself what I can see in the IQ.
The key choice for me is to:
1. trade an M8 for a D3 - M8 at lower iso is great and I think from some examples and my own images is a great system but does have limits around manual focus and high iso. D# is a image machine so quick and can shoot in any light the high iso is unreal - so two very different systems but only one option with the money I have
2. Lease a P30 and try and take my work to a whole new level where I can work within the limits of a 645 system a still have a D3 or D300 for the times I need speed and high iso.
Hope that helps and does not raise any more laughs only trying to improve and grow as a professional.
The key is to be different and that is all I am trying to do by having the best IQ I can so I can focus on creating images.
Regards
Rodney
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You should consider a P21.
Still, I don't know what kind of work you do. It would help actually.
-
Rodney
If I read between the lines of your post I assume your main photographic interest is in shooting outdoors, but that also leave a heck of a lot of room for speculation. Do you shoot landscape or sports or events, rodeos, travel? It would also help us clue in on where you’re located. The US, East, South, or Southwest if you’re uncomfortable with an exact location give us a general area; this can help you out as well. If you’re close to the Tucson area then maybe I might be able to lend you a hand and let you see (and use) my Mamiya AFD II & P30+ - this offer is only good for a couple weeks as we are off to Alaska very shortly.
If memory serves me correctly, I think Capture Integration (Chris Lawery (http://www.captureintegration.com)) has or had a couple test shots available for downloading you may want to consider contacting them for the information.
Others have said this before but I’ll add my voice to it – comparing digital medium format (any make) to digital 35 (any make) is a big mistake as they just don’t compare well. If what you’re trying to do is see what you can live with for the lesser amount of money then just go with 35mm.
My main camera format is medium format I use this exclusively for landscape and panorama work. This said, I still have and use my Canon 1Ds II for wildlife which is less than 5% of my work. My wife uses a Canon 1Ds III for all her work and it suits her style. How does the 1Ds III compare to the P30? It doesn’t. They’re both great cameras but there is just too much difference between the two camera types to make a meaningful comparison. I would submit that the same is true with any camera manufacture.
I reread your latest post – I think you are close to being on target in your #2 thought process of choices. Medium format is not the cure all format; there isn’t any one size fits all here, it’s whatever is right for you and your style.
2. Lease a P30 and try and take my work to a whole new level where I can work within the limits of a 645 system a still have a D3 or D300 for the times I need speed and high iso.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My offer is good for the next two weeks only - after that I’m unavailable for many months to come. You might also want to look in your area and check on-line to see where your Phase One dealers are and contact them for a demo.
Can’t think of any other suggestions/recommendations. Good luck with your final decision.
don
-
Hi,
I am based in Melbourne, Australia but do spend quite a bit of time in Sydney. I mainly shoot mid to high end weddings and portrait work. I want to start getting back into some fine art projects that will end with A3 or A2 type prints.
Currently I shoot mainly by available light and do not shoot in studios and have limited knowledge of that kind of lighting setup.
I am talking with Chris at capture integration and he is being very supportive. I also have some of the sample images from there site.
I really want to get a feel for the printed outcome and what the differences look like at that level oppose to just some pixel peeping.
Rodney
-
I have D3 and sinar22mp
The D3 images are soft (the filter) and pixelated (the rez) when you do side by side tests
However with the D3 every frame is a keeper - excellent AF
The requirement for carrying lighting is quartered
Many images at 1/250s and perfect focus at 12mp actually outresolve a slightly misfocussed image at hand held 1/80th at 22mp
ect
I think they are different tools for different jobs - the D3 is an excellent tool handheld - the MFDB need to slow shooting approach to shine and when they shine they really shine
Buy both
SMM
-
If you have an M8 you are running Capture One in some form ? Why not buy the Walter Borchenko book or even better borrow just the disc this has Phase One files from different backs different shooters and yes very varied scenes to play with.
I also run an M8 and while the files are of high quality, no AA filter helps, my venerable P20 leaves them standing but the handling and use of an M8 against A 'blad V system is chalk and cheese. I am also looking at a D300 for the reach/autofocus situations my reading is that the D3 and M8 are of similar when processed "properly" IQ.
You can run one SLR say 1DsIII and say it covers all the bases but remember Jack of all trades master of none.
-
Rodney,
If you can get up to Sydney, go see Bruce Pottinger at L&P in Artarmon. They are the Phase One importers in Australia, and have a shelf full of various backs.
I am currently having a similar evaluation, between a 1Ds Mk III and dipping my toe in the MFDB arena. Thanks to Bruce, was able to spend an hour shooting with both around Centenial park last week. Very informative. (My files are only from a P20+ back, so not really usefull to you). Also having never ever used a AFD II before, they mostly suck
Regards
Mark.
PS: I have no affiliation with L&P other than I shop there waaaay too often.
-
Hi Mark,
Thanks have been speaking with Richard at L&P they are looking for a P30 back for me to use here in Melb.
Do you have a p21+ file for me to have a look at as this is the other option for me to consider?
What is your view to the 1D MIII vs P21+?
Rodney
-
Here is a link to show you some of our tests comparing serveral P+ and non P+ backs.
http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/)
Chris Lawery
Sales Manager
chris@captureintegration.com
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer of the Year (http://www.captureintegration.com)
877-217-9870 | National
404-234-5195 | Cell
Sign up for our Newsletter (http://visitor.constantcontact.com/email.jsp?m=1101868815210&p=oi) | Read Our Latest Newsletter (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
-
As someone who shoots both the D3 and a P45+ back on a Mamiya AFD II, I'll say the following:
The primary thing the P+ back has over the D3 is MP. I don't see much difference in dynamic range, and per pixel quality and the ability to pull clean detail out of the shadows isn't as far apart as you'd think. I expected, and wanted, the P45+ to stomp the D3, if for no other reason than to justify my P45+ purchase, but I have to admit I was surprised by what I saw. I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for saying this, but I think it's a fair statement.
For grins, I've shot both side by side at different focal lengths and then cropped a 12MP, 3:2 aspect shot out of the P45+ image so that I ended up with the same field of view and the same number of MP as the D3 shot, and then compared the shots at 100%. There are some color differences, but the amount of detail captured is similar (remember, I've shot at different focal lengths so that I ended up with two images with the same field of view and the same MP). I give a slight edge to the P45+ pixels, probably due to the lack of the AA filter, but it's closer than you'd think. Of course, if you're shooting at similar focal lengths from the same location, it's no contest. In this situation, the higher MP that the back delivers yield much more detail than the D3 could ever hope to capture, and of course you can print the P45+ files much bigger.
Regarding dynamic range, the ability to pull clean detail out of the shadows (generally considered a MFDB strong point) is very comparable, as long as you shoot in 14-bit mode on the D3. With both the P45+ and D3, I can pull amazingly clean detail out of the shadows. One other consideration is that the D3 and P45+ use very different tone curves, and as a result, the D3 has more highlight headroom than the P45+ does at default RAW converter settings. You generally don't have to pull up the shadows as much on the D3 as you do on the P45+.
They both have their place. I use the P45+ for landscapes from moderately wide to short telephoto focal lengths, where I want to print big, and for that it can't be beat. For everything else, I pretty much use the D3.
-
It is a disgrace for the forum what is happening here. After 21 posts and many well-meant advice, still not one person has offered what the OP has asked for. Looks like everybody is creating images only for exhibitions. Of course, Capture Integration too is shy to show raw images.
Rodney, I have some P30 raw files on HD from a fellow member, marcmccalmont. If he does not mind it, I will upload those files for you. I emailed him and I am waiting for his reply.
-
Regarding dynamic range, the ability to pull clean detail out of the shadows (generally considered a MFDB strong point) is very comparable, as long as you shoot in 14-bit mode on the D3
Which raw processor(s) have you used for teh comparison, and at which ISOs have you shot with the P30?
One other consideration is that the D3 and P45+ use very different tone curves, and as a result, the D3 has more highlight headroom than the P45+ does at default RAW converter settings
Neither the D3 nor the P45 use any tone curves when recording in Raw.
-
Which raw processor(s) have you used for teh comparison, and at which ISOs have you shot with the P30?
ACR for this comparison, and it was a P45+ I shot with, not a P30 (yes, I know, the OP asked about the P30, but I was really addressing some of the other comments in this thread that scoffed at using a D3 in comparison to a MFDB). I shot at ISO 200 on the D3 (it's minimum std ISO), and 100 on the P45+. Obviously the lenses were different. It's possible I'll get more DR or detail extraction out of the P45+ with Capture One, but so far I haven't seen any evidence of that. However I'll be the first to point out I don't use CO very often (mostly because I'm happy with ACR in Lightroom). I do like CO colors a bit better for the default conversion, but I can easily get the same colors in ACR with just a few tweaks in the color channels.
Neither the D3 nor the P45 use any tone curves when recording in Raw.
True, but the RAW converter does, and that's what I was talking about. Obviouisly the RAW file isn't much of anything until you run it thru a RAW converter. I should have been clearer.
I'm certainly not bashing the P45+. I love the results I get from it, and wouldn't give it up for anything. I'm simply saying that in some specific areas, the D3 is pretty good also (detail extraction from the shadows being a prime example). I'm sure the same can be said for various Canon cameras, but I don't have any of those, so my comments are limited to my D3. By the way, I would not say the same for my D300, or any of the earlier Nikon's I've owned. The D3 is a totally new animal and has left all other Nikon's in the dust.
-
True, but the RAW converter does, and that's what I was talking about
Watch out with this. ACR makes an auto "exposure adjustment" to the P30 and P45 shots: -1 EV with ISO 100, +1 EV with ISO 400 and +2 EV with ISO 800. I don't know how much it is with ISO 200, but if you upload such a file, I can determine it. It is not natural, that it would be 0 EV.
This is important for you to know, because you don't see this adjustment: ACR does not indicate it, you see only the effect. In other words, if you want to know how the image looks without adjustment, you have to compensate for the auto-adjustment. This fact may affect the comparison as well: the shadows of the P45 ISO100 images are displayed one stop darker than they should be. On the other side, clipping may become hidden. The opposite will happen with higher ISOs .
-
After 21 posts and many well-meant advice, still not one person has offered what the OP has asked for. Looks like everybody is creating images only for exhibitions. Of course, Capture Integration too is shy to show raw images.
Yes, this is very strange...
Also, Phase website, no raw files to be seen. Ditto for Capture Integration, a link leading to nowhere when I checked earlier.
If only someone could explain the reason why.
My own theory is that the sellers don't want to lay their cards on the table. They want you to call them so they can give you the sales talk, like, there's much more to a digital back than a raw file, there's the workflow, after sales, bla, bla, bla. We know, believe me, we know all that.
I'm sure the reason is driven by sales. But not everybody wants to call the dealers for a demo initially, they may want to have a preliminary examination of files, ask a few people around and so on. Much like buying a car, you read reviews, you buy magazines, you compare prices and options....then, eventually, you make up your mind to go to the dealers for a test drive.
Since the process of buying a medium format digital back is shrouded in secrecy, from dealers prices to vested interests, to inaccurate or non existent reviews and comparisons, how can anyone blame someone who is a little confused at the very least, and wants to see some initial proof with his own eyes, call it the carrot, before taking further steps.
I've had five camera backs and countless DSLRs, I know the importance of workflow, software integration, after-sales service, reliability, warranty, replacement policy, etc. but I've always wanted to see files beforehand, before I call the reps, and I know I'm not the only one.
Edward
-
Watch out with this. ACR makes an auto "exposure adjustment" to the P30 and P45 shots: -1 EV with ISO 100, +1 EV with ISO 400 and +2 EV with ISO 800. I don't know how much it is with ISO 200, but if you upload such a file, I can determine it. It is not natural, that it would be 0 EV.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190810\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just out of curiosity, what is the logic behind this?
Thanks,
Ron H.
-
Just out of curiosity, what is the logic behind this?
I don't know. IMO there is no actual reason whatsoever, it is simply a mistake of ACR.
Perhaps others, who had use earlier versions of such backs could contribute to solving this question. One possible explanation is, that earlier models did not have "true" ISO settings, higher ISO was realized simply by numerical adjustment, and that is, what ACR is still emulating. Such behaviour is very normal nowadays, for example the mentioned Nikon D3 offers ISO settings up to 25600; however, 12800 and 25600 are numerical derivatives of 6400 (but the multiplication occurs in-camera, the data in the raw file is already adjusted, the raw processor does not need to make any extra steps).
-
Rodney,
here are five raw files from the P30, courtessy to Marc:
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019371.TIF (http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019371.TIF)
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019372.TIF (http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019372.TIF)
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019666.TIF (http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_CF019666.TIF)
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL...00_CF019157.tif (http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_ISO400_CF019157.tif)
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL...00_CF019153.tif (http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_ISO800_CF019153.tif)
The best one for a comparison might be CF19372. It has been shot for dynamic range comparison with the Canon 5D, and it is perfectly exposed, with some dark area for noise analysis.
I guess you don't have C1 yet and you will open the files with ACR. ACR applies an initial exposure adjustment, -1 EV for the ISO 100 images, +1 for ISO 400 and +2 for ISO 800, but it does not say that it is doing so. Therefor you need to counter-adjust in order to see, how the image looks without adjustment.
For example the ISO 800 image is vastly underexposed, about 3 1/2 stops from the right edge; still it appears very normal in ACR due to the clandestine adjustment (it speaks a lot for this camera, that an image so vastly underexposed looks still so).
I captured the *raw* histograms of these images and put them in a layered TIFF
http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_Histograms.TIF (http://www.panopeeper.com/Download/Marc_LL_Histograms.TIF)
if you take a look at the layers, you will see how the exposure was.
Have fun.
-
Watch out with this. ACR makes an auto "exposure adjustment" to the P30 and P45 shots: -1 EV with ISO 100, +1 EV with ISO 400 and +2 EV with ISO 800. I don't know how much it is with ISO 200, but if you upload such a file, I can determine it. It is not natural, that it would be 0 EV.
Well, that's interesting. That would explain why many of my P45+ images (I often shoot at ISO 100, and rarely higher) appear brighter when I open them in Capture One. Generally, I find the default brightness I get with Lightroom (ACR) to be better, more in keeping with my actual exposure. I'd be interested in knowing the source of this information, just so I can read up on it a bit.
Regards,
Mort
-
My apologies. After reading Edmund's comments I discovered that several of the links, including the P30 raw file on the page Chris linked to earlier in this thread were broken.
They have been fixed. http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/)
Not to interfere with your conspiracy theories, but the reason the links were broken was because I am an imperfect webmaster (I've been working on my personal website (http://www.doug-peterson.com/index.php) all weekend).
Doug
Yes, this is very strange...
Also, Phase website, no raw files to be seen. Ditto for Capture Integration, a link leading to nowhere when I checked earlier.
If only someone could explain the reason why.
not the only one.
Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190814\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I'd be interested in knowing the source of this information, just so I can read up on it a bit.
Sorry, there is nothing to read about it. You can find the fact when analysing DNG images converted from the native raw files, as these contain a tag called BaselineExposure. This tag is present in the raw fiels of several cameras, but nowhere else in such "brutal" manner, i.e. two full stops.
We had a discussion about this subject for perhaps two weeks ago, but that does not give a clue for the reason specifically this adjustment (of the Phase One images) is done.
-
They have been fixed
I am sure they were not meant to me, but thanks anyway.
A very interesting and instructive comparison.
1. The lack of AA filter helps the initial sharpness of the P30 and P45. However, it helps creating nice Moire as well; see the shirt.
2. Noise: the P45 is much noisier than the P30, which is at the same level as the Canon. The larger pixel sites of the P30 are cleaner.
-
They have been fixed. http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/)
Not to interfere with your conspiracy theories, but the reason the links were broken was because I am an imperfect webmaster (I've been working on my personal website (http://www.doug-peterson.com/index.php) all weekend).
Doug
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190866\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you for fixing it and for your own tests. Still, it would be helpful if all manufacturers had clear and relevant raw sample files, easily accessible on their websites.
Edward
-
Thank you very much for the sample files, I am on the road at the moment and will wait until back in the studio to see them in the right light and on the bigger screen.
Any other comments or views compared with other systems like D3 or M8 would be great.
Regards
Rodney
-
Rodney,
I have been interested in trying out some Phase backs, too. I was amused to see that you have been in contact with American dealers, Rodney, since, like you, I am in Australia as well.
I think it is a real indictment of our Phase dealer in Australia that we have both had to look to the States - in my case to get competitive pricing, and to try to check availability of RBs.
Also, in spite of the repeated requests I have made over several weeks to the local dealer to set up a demo of a Phase back on an AFD platform, no demo has been arranged - I have given up on Phase altogether now, since no one has taken any great interest in selling the product to me. In fact, I also had problems trying to ascertain from the US dealers whether they had any refurbished units available. Is this the great Phase One refurbished back conspiracy? Are there simply none of these units out there?