Luminous Landscape Forum

Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: wolfnowl on May 11, 2011, 01:40:33 am

Title: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: wolfnowl on May 11, 2011, 01:40:33 am
Looking forward to reading more about your trip and this back!  At the risk of being picky, is the minimum ISO 32 or 35?  Seems to bounce back and forth... but I've never heard of ISO 35.

Mike.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: EricWHiss on May 11, 2011, 11:03:56 am
A slight difference in sensors between Aptus 12 and IQ180 was mentioned in the article.  I'm really curious to know what differences are and how the image quality compares between the Leaf and Phase backs.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Christopher on May 11, 2011, 12:24:58 pm
I don't think there is one. The actual sensor is the same. However, i am not sure. I would guess everything else is different.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: EricWHiss on May 11, 2011, 01:07:57 pm
Here's the quote from the article that prompted my question, "What I see from the IQ180 is resolution that, with the exception of the Leaf Aprus II-12, is the highest in the world. (Leaf is owned by Phase One and a similar (though not identical) Dalsa sensor is used in that back))"

If not identical, then what are the differences?   I realize that Phase adds their own circuits after the sensor and may handle the images different in RAW conversion.  Just curious to know how much difference in the final image quality there will be?
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: BernardLanguillier on May 11, 2011, 05:46:11 pm
If not identical, then what are the differences?   I realize that Phase adds their own circuits after the sensor and may handle the images different in RAW conversion.  Just curious to know how much difference in the final image quality there will be?

The phase has sensor plus, right? It is unclear to me whether this is only signal treatment of whether there an actual difference to the sensor involved.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: A.Garcia on May 11, 2011, 07:03:58 pm
Sensor + may need some different output shift registers architecture.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Anders_HK on May 11, 2011, 09:48:36 pm
The phase has sensor plus, right? It is unclear to me whether this is only signal treatment of whether there an actual difference to the sensor involved.
 

I believe that Sensor+ is pixel binning, while Aptus-II 12 has Sensorflex which seems to enable crop of actual pixels to reduced size raw file. Can someone please confirm?

If not identical, then what are the differences?   I realize that Phase adds their own circuits after the sensor and may handle the images different in RAW conversion.  Just curious to know how much difference in the final image quality there will be?

Indeed it would be interesting to hear of actual differences both technical of IQ 180 and Aptus 12 sensor implementation and image quality. Is it only that IQ 180 cost so much more for the user interface that is mere added electronics and inside computer parts?

“Back in February when I had a brief two days with a pre-production IQ180 in Mexico, my initial response on seeing the files was that yes, having the extra resolution (over my 60MP P65+) was nice, but it paled in comparison with the other advances of the IQ180. Now, with a full production back in-hand, and the bulk of its features fully implemented (with more coming soon), its possible to start to take the full measure of this remarkable device.”


Was this not at same time as looking at Aptus-II 12?? ? ??

Would above quoted  statement not mean that Aptus-II 12 is the more remarkable tool of the two, since arguably it may not be realistic to justify the extra $$ for the IQ for the sake of what the user interface actually brings to the images after capture, and perhaps not in reality brings that much more to the capture process if one really thinks about it?

Regardless of the sidebar disclaimer the article seem to me to come across as biased, with special delivery and all. Per memory the two other articles that were originally published of Aptus-II 12 and IQ180 were published in a row at time for the IQ series launch, whereas the Aptus-II 12 had been announced several months earlier. Thus should one perhaps question a fan boy advertising and favoring of one brand with much too glaring eyes? Internet publishing should in my opinion be neutral, since same as other publishing it should exhibit a responsibility towards the readers. Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business :). BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

Regards
Anders
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Robcat on May 11, 2011, 09:54:00 pm
Is it reasonable to assume that the IQ140 and 160 will have similar image quality (apart from resolution), and the same features/functionality?
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Anders_HK on May 11, 2011, 11:56:40 pm
IQ 180 is one generation newer sensor than IQ 140 and 160, same as Leaf Aptus-II 12 is one newer generation than Aptus-II 8 and 10.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: DaFu on May 12, 2011, 12:38:39 am
Michael left a note at the end of the article:
Quote
Please note that the images included with this article are not intended for pixel peeping.
There is nothing that can be determined about a 500MB 16 bit image file from viewing on an 8 bit 100ppi monitor.
At least a 20X24" print is what's needed.

An appropriate warning . . . but here's something odd—nearly every one of those pictures seemed "right" in a way I can't really describe.

Fascinating.

Dave
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: barryfitzgerald on May 12, 2011, 09:38:01 am
Interesting article I would like to see some debate about tonality though this always seems to get passed over. Very subjective of course but still.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on May 12, 2011, 10:27:31 am
Hi,

Just some points. There are some differences between systems using the same sensor technology. Differences may be in CGA (Color Grid Array) and electronic paths, like preamps and cooling.

A very major source of potential differences is the postprocessing pipeline. Ther seems to be a broad agreement that manufacturers software gives best image quality, even if Jeff Schewe may argue that the same results can be achieved in Lightroom/ACR. My guess that the different profiles in programs like Capture One represent different looks, and that is a major factor in perceived image quality.

Best regards
Erik


I believe that Sensor+ is pixel binning, while Aptus-II 12 has Sensorflex which seems to enable crop of actual pixels to reduced size raw file. Can someone please confirm?

Indeed it would be interesting to hear of actual differences both technical of IQ 180 and Aptus 12 sensor implementation and image quality. Is it only that IQ 180 cost so much more for the user interface that is mere added electronics and inside computer parts?

“Back in February when I had a brief two days with a pre-production IQ180 in Mexico, my initial response on seeing the files was that yes, having the extra resolution (over my 60MP P65+) was nice, but it paled in comparison with the other advances of the IQ180. Now, with a full production back in-hand, and the bulk of its features fully implemented (with more coming soon), its possible to start to take the full measure of this remarkable device.”


Was this not at same time as looking at Aptus-II 12?? ? ??

Would above quoted  statement not mean that Aptus-II 12 is the more remarkable tool of the two, since arguably it may not be realistic to justify the extra $$ for the IQ for the sake of what the user interface actually brings to the images after capture, and perhaps not in reality brings that much more to the capture process if one really thinks about it?

Regardless of the sidebar disclaimer the article seem to me to come across as biased, with special delivery and all. Per memory the two other articles that were originally published of Aptus-II 12 and IQ180 were published in a row at time for the IQ series launch, whereas the Aptus-II 12 had been announced several months earlier. Thus should one perhaps question a fan boy advertising and favoring of one brand with much too glaring eyes? Internet publishing should in my opinion be neutral, since same as other publishing it should exhibit a responsibility towards the readers. Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business :). BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

Regards
Anders

Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Steve Hendrix on May 13, 2011, 12:57:42 pm
I believe that Sensor+ is pixel binning, while Aptus-II 12 has Sensorflex which seems to enable crop of actual pixels to reduced size raw file. Can someone please confirm?

Indeed it would be interesting to hear of actual differences both technical of IQ 180 and Aptus 12 sensor implementation and image quality. Is it only that IQ 180 cost so much more for the user interface that is mere added electronics and inside computer parts?

“Back in February when I had a brief two days with a pre-production IQ180 in Mexico, my initial response on seeing the files was that yes, having the extra resolution (over my 60MP P65+) was nice, but it paled in comparison with the other advances of the IQ180. Now, with a full production back in-hand, and the bulk of its features fully implemented (with more coming soon), its possible to start to take the full measure of this remarkable device.”


Was this not at same time as looking at Aptus-II 12?? ? ??

Would above quoted  statement not mean that Aptus-II 12 is the more remarkable tool of the two, since arguably it may not be realistic to justify the extra $$ for the IQ for the sake of what the user interface actually brings to the images after capture, and perhaps not in reality brings that much more to the capture process if one really thinks about it?

Regardless of the sidebar disclaimer the article seem to me to come across as biased, with special delivery and all. Per memory the two other articles that were originally published of Aptus-II 12 and IQ180 were published in a row at time for the IQ series launch, whereas the Aptus-II 12 had been announced several months earlier. Thus should one perhaps question a fan boy advertising and favoring of one brand with much too glaring eyes? Internet publishing should in my opinion be neutral, since same as other publishing it should exhibit a responsibility towards the readers. Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business :). BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

Regards
Anders



Yes, the IQ series (and the P65+/40+) all perform an innovative method of pixel binning with no crop of the sensor. But the IQ also can do a similar function to the SensoFlex function in the Aptus-II 12 (not sure if it's implemented yet).

I would say that the user interface is far more than just mere added electronics and computer parts. That would be like saying a MacBook Pro is just electronics and computer parts. There's much more involved, and similarly to a Mac product, I would say the interface, and the development of the interface, the implementation of the interface, the reliability and the operability of the interface with the components is quite a significant entity in itself and probably involved far more cost than the hardware components that are utilized.

That said, I also have always felt the interface of the Leaf Aptus series was and is a great achievement - logical, intuitive, and highly functional. And Leaf is prepping a complete interface update as well.

I feel both products have their own respective merits. One of the merits of the Leaf Aptus-II 12 is producing an 80MP capture device that is $12,000 less than the IQ180. Whether the additional $12,000 is justified for the IQ180 is very much a subjective perspective. Our clients are saying yes in dramatic numbers.

With that said, Leaf Aptus-II 12's are selling well.
http://www.captureintegration.com/category/news/

I don't see the issue over product neutrality. Michael goes to great lengths to clarify his position and relationship with vendors. The fact that he owns a Phase One product and has for years been a Phase One user should be enough full disclosure. I don't expect complete neutrality from him, and if there is some fan-boyness, I don't really blame him. I don't think he has ever committed that he will always be completely neutral (and who really is?). Considering he's a user of the product, I don't mind some fan-boyness because - at a not inconsiderable sum - he transparently has acknowledged that he has chosen this product for his personal use.


Steve Hendrix
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: michael on May 13, 2011, 03:10:21 pm
I have to say, I really hate the phrase "Fan Boy". It implies some sort of blind product admiration regardless of a product's merits.

As someone who has spent a significant part of his own money to buy a succession of Phase backs over the years, and who has also roundly criticized the company when they have screwed up, I suggest that it might not be the most appropriate phrase.

Special treatment? Yes – I suppose so. As someone who publishes a large widely read web site (the largest apparently covering medium format digital), it makes total sense for companies to get new products into my hands as soon as possible. Leaf has done this in the past, and quite a few other companies do as well...Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Epson, Olympus, etc, etc.

So, what else is new?

Michael
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Steve Hendrix on May 13, 2011, 06:01:52 pm
I have to say, I really hate the phrase "Fan Boy". It implies some sort of blind product admiration regardless of a product's merits.

As someone who has spent a significant part of his own money to buy a succession of Phase backs over the years, and who has also roundly criticized the company when they have screwed up, I suggest that it might not be the most appropriate phrase.

Special treatment? Yes – I suppose so. As someone who publishes a large widely read web site (the largest apparently covering medium format digital), it makes total sense for companies to get new products into my hands as soon as possible. Leaf has done this in the past, and quite a few other companies do as well...Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Epson, Olympus, etc, etc.

So, what else is new?

Michael


Just for the record Michael, in my defense of you, I was only using the term "fanboy" in reference to Anders post. I don't appreciate the term fanboy either. I do actually know some who might fit the description, but you would not be one of them, and you're 100% correct, generally speaking, it is not a complimentary term.


Steve Hendrix
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Anders_HK on May 13, 2011, 10:26:09 pm
Michael,

Thanks for your added explanations. It can of course be a fine line to write neutral and it is appreciated that this forum permits open discussion on matters. The new article by Mark is interesting as well and comes across per my impression more neutral. However, I would like to again point out that the quote used likewise in that new article "There is no question in my mind that in terms of image quality, the IQ 180 is currently the "King of the Hill" of  single shot digital capture devices." is not proven or necessarily correct and the Aptus/Afi-II 12 should be mentioned in comparison. It seems to beg for an article that I suggested in above:

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business :). BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

May I suggest an article "Aptus-II 12 Field Review" on the matter?


Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

In e.g. forum comments to the recent article on Alpa STC, myself and others pointed out that "To my knowledge no MF camera has this adjustment capability, and the Alpa is the only MF technical camera to offer a shimming solution for MF backs." was not a correct assessment. The Hy6, Pentax 645 apparent both have these features. Are articles updated per comments and corrections made by members in the forum?

Thank you.

Regards
Anders
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: EricWHiss on May 14, 2011, 12:50:48 am
Michael or anyone else - can you address the question I had about the differences in image quality between the Aptus 12 and the IQ 180, and also about the differences in the sensors?   
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: marcmccalmont on May 14, 2011, 02:12:31 am
I'm going to assume that liveview focusing will alleviate the need to shim the back? Comments
Marc
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on May 14, 2011, 02:46:03 am
Hi,

No comments on 'Fan Boy"-ism...

The reviews on this site are based on user experience that Michael Reichmann and other contributors use for their picture taking. The reviews are not comparative tests. Sometimes it happens that Michael compares stuff, but that is not usually the case. The idea is more about sharing the experience.

No one in this world is unbiased, not even me! We have certain expectations, previous experience. Meeting with the people developing and building the stuff certainly can create a positive relation to the equipment.

The way I see it, Michael and Mark write about equipment they actually bought. That is a real investment and a well informed one for sure. Both gentlemen can do an unbiased review of some different equipment, like the Aptus, but they probably prefer the equipment originally chosen.

Probably not much difference between the two. Phase controls both companies and I'd suggest that both share R&D.

I'd really expect that what matters most is not the back, but what is in front of it (subject, lens), under it (tripod) and behind it (photographer).

Best regards
Erik


I have to say, I really hate the phrase "Fan Boy". It implies some sort of blind product admiration regardless of a product's merits.

As someone who has spent a significant part of his own money to buy a succession of Phase backs over the years, and who has also roundly criticized the company when they have screwed up, I suggest that it might not be the most appropriate phrase.

Special treatment? Yes – I suppose so. As someone who publishes a large widely read web site (the largest apparently covering medium format digital), it makes total sense for companies to get new products into my hands as soon as possible. Leaf has done this in the past, and quite a few other companies do as well...Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Epson, Olympus, etc, etc.

So, what else is new?

Michael
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: michael on May 14, 2011, 09:00:57 am
Frankly, comparing image quality between the Aptus II 12 and Phase IQ180 is a bit like counting the hairs on the beards on the angels sitting on a pin. It would be the worst case of pixel peeping.

At this level of performance there are so many small variables that such a comparison would be fraught with difficulty.

The real differences aren't so much in the image quality as in the operational side of things. The Phase is hands-down the better back when it comes to features. But the Aptus provides similar image quality for many thousands less.

Michael

Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ternst on May 14, 2011, 09:47:45 am
What I find interesting are yaya's comments elsewhere saying LCCs may no longer be required for the AP2 12 when using a tech camera - which if that were true I assume this would also be available for the IQs perhaps? Seems like it is a software issue to begin with so that would make sense, and would take us yet another giant leap forward especially for tech cam users.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ternst on May 14, 2011, 10:47:35 am
Two observations about Mark's great writeup - first, he still uses a laser rangefinder and only uses the focus mask to confirm that his rangefinder worked. I'm hoping the focus mask will make use of the rangefinder mute. And secondly he is still using a wake up cable, with a comment that having the back turned on for 5-10 minutes (depending on ambient temp) did not induce any noise - that amount of time would be just getting started for me and I frequently spend 30 minutes or more shooting an outdoor scene. I wonder how long this back can be turned on without generating noise at 72 deg. F? I don't like using a wake up cable due to the fact you have to make two connections each time you change a lens (actually four - two off the old lens and two on the new lens) vs. just having to unplug/plug in the sync cable when the back is on all the time (like a Leaf). I much prefer to keep a cable release on each lens so all I have to do it change out the sync cable - much faster and saves wear and tear on the threads. I guess the alternative is to be turning the back off and then on again frequently. Colder weather would be better of course!
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: michael on May 14, 2011, 11:02:14 am
Focus Mask and even Live View won't make the laser redundant. As good as the mask is, there is the point of critical focus and the rest is depth of field and circle of confusion toleration.

So if the subject is at nine feet, ten and three quarter inches, the laser will tell you this. Even at its most restricted setting the focus mask will show subjects at, say 8 feet, and 11 feet as also being in focus (I'm making these numbers up to make a point. Don't take them as exact).

So, Live View will be good for accurate framing, and focus mask wil confirm focus, but for the critical focus that MF digital requires a Leica Disto 5 and fine focus marks on the lens (such as those on the Alpa rings HPF rings) will still be the preferable way of working.

I was dubious about this method, but after the first time out with it I found it to be fast, simple, and deadly accurate.

Michael
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ternst on May 14, 2011, 11:25:14 am
Thanks. I've got a disto in my bag anyway but almost never use it - I've been a zone focusser for many decades and it still seems quick and easy to estimate (with f16 or thereabouts)  - when doing macro or a longer lens I still use a ground glass.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: EricWHiss on May 14, 2011, 01:08:29 pm


The real differences aren't so much in the image quality as in the operational side of things. The Phase is hands-down the better back when it comes to features. But the Aptus provides similar image quality for many thousands less.



Michael, thanks for the info.   The one thing missing from the Phase backs for me is the rotating sensor which I find very useful with the AFi-ii 12, but I have a camera with a WLF and might not be a problem for 645 cameras. 
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: dchew on May 14, 2011, 01:31:06 pm
I'm going to assume that liveview focusing will alleviate the need to shim the back? Comments
Marc

No I don't think so.  Well, maybe not.  If the back is too far away, then you can't physically focus at infinity.  Shimming is the only way to fix that.  If the back is too close, then you simply loose a bit of close focus.  So, I think:
1. IF live-view becomes the most accurate tool for checking focus, AND
2. Your back is either just right or too close...

Then you should be able to focus just fine without shimming.  We've already heard there is a need for a ND filter in bright sunlight.  We don't know yet how useful live-veiw will be.  However, my expectation is that I will use various tools to ensure accurate focus:  Focus mask, zooming to 100%, using the Alpa HPF rings, distometer, and a shimmed back.  Just like those who use a lightmeter along with the histogram, there usually is a combination of tools used.  A shimmed back that accurately reflects what the distance scale on the lens reads is another tool that can help verify what the other tools are telling you.

And of course if your back is too far away AND you want to focus at infinity, your stuck.

Dave
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on May 14, 2011, 01:48:52 pm
Hi,

There needs to be some margin for thermal expansion so there needs to be some slack in infinity.

I´d suggest that LV focusing is the solution, but it may not be as easy as expected. In real world images don't snap in and out of focus and there is also some focus shift when stopping down.

Best regards
Erik


No I don't think so.  Well, maybe not.  If the back is too far away, then you can't physically focus at infinity.  Shimming is the only way to fix that.  If the back is too close, then you simply loose a bit of close focus.  So, I think:
1. IF live-view becomes the most accurate tool for checking focus, AND
2. Your back is either just right or too close...

Then you should be able to focus just fine without shimming.  We've already heard there is a need for a ND filter in bright sunlight.  We don't know yet how useful live-veiw will be.  However, my expectation is that I will use various tools to ensure accurate focus:  Focus mask, zooming to 100%, using the Alpa HPF rings, distometer, and a shimmed back.  Just like those who use a lightmeter along with the histogram, there usually is a combination of tools used.  A shimmed back that accurately reflects what the distance scale on the lens reads is another tool that can help verify what the other tools are telling you.

And of course if your back is too far away AND you want to focus at infinity, your stuck.

Dave
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: dchew on May 14, 2011, 01:59:01 pm
Erik,

On a DSLR I agree with you; my Canon lenses could be focused beyond the infinity mark. However, this is not the way Schneider and Rodenstock lenses are made.  The infinity mark is the end stop, and in fact the shimming procedure is set up to make the infinity stop equal to sharp focus at infinity.  So there is no slack at infinity on these lenses.  You could of course shim it that way, but that would, um, require shimming!  And all the distance scales would be off.

Dave

Hi,

There needs to be some margin for thermal expansion so there needs to be some slack in infinity.

I´d suggest that LV focusing is the solution, but it may not be as easy as expected. In real world images don't snap in and out of focus and there is also some focus shift when stopping down.

Best regards
Erik


Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: vjbelle on May 14, 2011, 02:21:26 pm

So, Live View will be good for accurate framing, and focus mask wil confirm focus, but for the critical focus that MF digital requires a Leica Disto 5 and fine focus marks on the lens (such as those on the Alpa rings HPF rings) will still be the preferable way of working.

I was dubious about this method, but after the first time out with it I found it to be fast, simple, and deadly accurate.

Michael
How exactly, then, did you check for critical focus?  Or, did you take numerous images at differing focus marks and pick the best one....  The whole idea of this back is to be able, somehow, to check for critical focus in the field...
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Wayne Fox on May 14, 2011, 03:24:21 pm
Focus Mask and even Live View won't make the laser redundant. As good as the mask is, there is the point of critical focus and the rest is depth of field and circle of confusion toleration.


So, Live View will be good for accurate framing, and focus mask wil confirm focus, but for the critical focus that MF digital requires a Leica Disto 5 and fine focus marks on the lens (such as those on the Alpa rings HPF rings) will still be the preferable way of working.

Michael
Guess I should reconsider waiting on the focusing rings.

Any particular reasons you feel live view focusing won't be as effective as on a dslr at 10x zoom. (may be the IQ's won't do 10x zoom ?)

Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: michael on May 14, 2011, 04:02:50 pm
Since no one outside of Phase's development lab has seen IQ live view yet, I think we should all wait a month or so and then judge what it can and can't do for ourselves.

Michael
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Anders_HK on May 14, 2011, 09:56:04 pm
Frankly, comparing image quality between the Aptus II 12 and Phase IQ180 is a bit like counting the hairs on the beards on the angels sitting on a pin. It would be the worst case of pixel peeping.

At this level of performance there are so many small variables that such a comparison would be fraught with difficulty.

The real differences aren't so much in the image quality as in the operational side of things. The Phase is hands-down the better back when it comes to features. But the Aptus provides similar image quality for many thousands less.

Michael

Michael,

The title of your article is rightfully "More than Megapixels" and likewise rightfully Mark points out "It is not all about megapixels!". There is much more to image quality and these backs than mere pixels and your reply of pixel peeping. Obvious one can assume that there must be more with the Aptus/Afi-II 12 and IQ80 since both have the newest generation sensor on the market. It would be interesting to read a comparison of those differences between the two backs.

The interesting thus is to find out what more than interface differs between the backs, and of what is different in the implementation of these sensors by Leaf and P1 (hardware and programming). Are the sensors the same? As I pointed out in my first post, Leaf has a longer history of working with Dalsa sensors and that could possibly mean that they may (or may not) have some extra up their sleeves.

Again it would be appreciated if you would find out through your sources.

I have also asked two times in posts above if you will update and edit these and other articles per corrections pointed out in this forum? It appears clear that for correctness the Aptus/Afi-II 12 and IQ80 are jointly at "King of Hill" in image quality of single shot devices. Without corrections it would seem that if not fan-boy label we could at very least speak of too much kool-aid on the newest toy gear segment?  ;) What digital backs are to I think most of us is mere TOOLS. What I ask for is simply info to find out how they hold up against each other and other such tools.

Regards
Anders

P.S. As compared to live view, the composition mode sounds far more interesting and simpler to use.
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on May 15, 2011, 02:39:56 am
Hi,

Thermal expansion coefficient for brass is around 20 ppm/C, so a temperature difference of 50 Celsius would cause a 0.05 mm change on a 5 cm long brass object. Aluminium is similar. So 0.01 mm of shim corresponds to about 10 degrees Celsius on a 50 mm object.

Best regards
Erik


Erik,

On a DSLR I agree with you; my Canon lenses could be focused beyond the infinity mark. However, this is not the way Schneider and Rodenstock lenses are made.  The infinity mark is the end stop, and in fact the shimming procedure is set up to make the infinity stop equal to sharp focus at infinity.  So there is no slack at infinity on these lenses.  You could of course shim it that way, but that would, um, require shimming!  And all the distance scales would be off.

Dave

Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: michael on May 15, 2011, 08:26:17 am
Anders,

The only information about the sensor difference that I could get from both Phase and Leaf is that – yes, it is the same sensor – and – no, it isn't.

My interpretation is that it is based on the same sensor die, but that Phase has some additional circuitry so that Sensor+ is supported.

What I do know is that the 80MP sensor was co-designed with Dalsa by Phase, to their specification, and that it is proprietary to them. We therefore will likely not see a competitor any time soon.

Michael
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: Jack Flesher on May 15, 2011, 01:18:35 pm


So if the subject is at nine feet, ten and three quarter inches, the laser will tell you this. Even at its most restricted setting the focus mask will show subjects at, say 8 feet, and 11 feet as also being in focus (I'm making these numbers up to make a point. Don't take them as exact).


Michael,

I am not so sure this is the case.  I have not specifically measured either, but in my tests with f2.8 captures and a higher tolerance setting of near 50, the range of "mask" indicated by the back was extremely narrow and closely matched the critical pixels when brought into C1 and viewed at 100% -- I'm talking a few inches or so of mask depth and actual pixel depth from an angled, detailed subject taken at around 20 feet with the 80LS.  I agree that it doesn't render the laser moot -- at least yet -- but the range focus mask selects may be tunable to the point it's more than adequately fine at higher settings for many types of imaging. More experimentation is needed, but IMHO it shows great promise for critical focus determinations...
Title: Re: More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review
Post by: michael on May 15, 2011, 01:26:20 pm
Jack,

You may be right. I haven't spent enough time testing this aspect. I will this week.

Michael