My thoughts on the new PhaseOne XF (what are yours?)

[Matthew Glover]

Wait a minute...they arent releasing the IQ3 backs in a hasselblad mount? There keeping it exclusive to the XF?

[BJL]

Wait a minute...they arent releasing the IQ3 backs in a hasselblad mount? There keeping it exclusive to the XF?

According to this spec sheet
https://www.phaseone.com/~/media/NEW_WEB/Tech-Spec/XF/XF_Technical_Specs.ashx
the IQ380 body (the only one with a new sensor) will come in both Hasselblad mounts (H and V), with the other two sensors provided for Hasselblad mounts via the IQ250 and IQ260 staying around.

[Weldon Brewster]

I'm from Texas, I love pigs and farms.

[ciccio]

anyway this is already an albatros , we can bet !

let see in one year how many sales number....

bets are open ....

untill the first back cmos full frame will be released there will be zero real improvement for our pictures.

the rest is only talking about gadget details that will not change anything in our results of our photography.

best,c.

[synn]

Synn,

First and foremost I care about the photograph and the state of our industry . . . photographers not camera makers.

If it works for you, believe it or not I'm happy and I hope it does everything you want.

The real ONLY problem I have with this is so many phase users suffered through the DF waiting for a new camera only to be told that if they use their current backs they lose some functionality.

In today's world of electronics, I find that kind of a rip.  

Those loyal users should have been rewarded, not hobbled and I know that everyone does it, RED, Apple, every electronic company that can find a way to reach into your wallet.

It may be the new standard business model but it gets old real fast.

No I don't love my REDs.  They've helped me make good money, they were the first cinema camera I could afford that look like cinema, not video, but they have the same business model as phase but for the latest upgrade money they've seen the last purchase from me and there is no anger or malice in that quote.   It's just today there are better alternatives.

For motion  when the time comes I'll move to Blackmagic "if" they get their issues ironed out before they deliver, because I think they've found a place that the market can accept.   Under $5,000 for a cinema camera is where they should have been all along and since they offer a coloring suite, compositing and moving into editorial solutions, they are covering the basis without holding anyone back.

Now if I was buying medium format today and didn't have cases of cameras, I'd probably do a Pentax because they're at a price and functionality that the market requests, or a Hasselblad if I needed to tether, because they've been in the market so long, you can rent anything anytime, almost any place.


Thanks.

IMO

BC

BC,

I am not sure if you have all the facts right about the new platform (Or maybe I don't, feel free to correct me), but users of existign first gen backs like me are NOT losing any existing functionality. We are gaining new features and the stuff that we don't get (Such as power sharing or adjusting some body parameters from the back) are not deal breakers. Since you like smartphone analogies, consider it like when a new version of iOS comes out. The latest and greatest handsets get all the features, the older ones get most of them (Thereby improving their current featureset), but miss out on  a few new ones, either for marketing reasons or technological ones.

Now if they pulled some crap like Hassy did back in the day by saying "Some lenses only work with the new body/ Back" or whatever, I would have a genuine axe to grind. In this case, I really don't see it.

...and once again, this being a stills only platform doesn't bother me one single bit. In fact, I welcome it with  both hands. There are enough jack of all trades players in the market. There should be a few dedicated ones too. It's the same rationale I have for traveling with a dedicated FLAC player and DAC instead of plugging my headphones into a phone as 99% people do.

Cheers!

[Theodoros]

Ι asked this on the other conversation that Doug started, but it seems like a late question since there is no reply yet... Does anyone knows the answers?


" Three more questions please:

1. Will the XF body work with any current third party backs that are made for m645 mount? (eg. the Sinarbacks)
2. If not, will it allow third party backs to work on the platform via a new compatible interface plate?
3. Will the XF allow for multishot captures with a multishot able third party back?

Thanks... "

[Doug Peterson]

Wait a minute...they arent releasing the IQ3 backs in a hasselblad mount? There keeping it exclusive to the XF?

It's just an artifact of the naming.

Nearly every new feature of the IQ3 is coming to the IQ2 backs (any platform) by free firmware update. The only feature that requires an IQ3 is Power Sharing on an XF body. So there is no logic in tagging an "IQ3" for Hassy H or Hassy V.

Current owners of a P1 back in a Hassy H/Hassy V mount just received four new tools and improved tethering speed (it was already the fastest but now is even faster) for free. (Or will when this firmware is released in a few weeks).

[Theodoros]

There are three kinds of possible customers in to any maker that makes a modular system...
1. Those that are interested to approach the system as a complete offering.
2. Those that are interested to invest on the maker's camera body and (as a consequence) lenses.
3. Those that are interested to invest on the maker's digital (image area) offerings only and consider to adapt them on their existing cameras...

I believe that there is good information for 1&3 above... But none on 2...  Soooo, Lets suppose that one wants to buy a Sinarback 86H and considers to adapt it on an XF body.... (Sinar makes adapter plates that mechanically are compatible with m645) ...can he do so? Will his back work? Will he be able to have multishot captures on an XF? ...or is H5X the only (6x4.5) platform in current production that he can use?

[pedro39photo]

My god !!!
XF camera body, IQ3 digital back, PrismViewfinder & Schneider Kreuznach 80mm LS lens: XF IQ3 80MP – $48,990.00 / 38.990,00 EUR !!!
Don´t was in this forum for several months because i leave the DMF (Hasselblad 39MP) , for full time 35mm and Motion, and i am in perplexed how its possible in present days to sell a still camera for this price???

Its great for me! because now the C300 MarkII fell cheap !!!

I was a industrial energy and environment corporate photographer, but in the last 2 years all my clients have LCDs with corporate movies on there buildings, and fairy booths no more big 500$ prints... just 2 or 3 LCDs...
Any one here go to the shopping mall? in the cloths stores? any big prints? nooooppppp just lcds...with motion
For my case, i just sold my DMF stills for 7.000$, bought a 5D markIII and a C100 markI.
And after knowing the tecnology, specs chips in motion camera like a c100 or a c300 or a blackmagic ursa, for 6.000 or 15.000$ and just cant get this 50.k figures....
No problem, the people have the right to spend the money on anything.
  

[ciccio]

i agree with you pedro very very small market....
reduced from last year.

[Jeffery Salter]

untill the first back cmos full frame will be released there will be zero real improvement for our pictures.

best,c.

Hi Ciccio,

CCD or CMOs not,  if you have nothing to say in your images then it really doesn't make a difference.  

It's difficult to comprehend where you are coming from as an artist.  Please share your website or the type of photography you do.

Most professionals look very hard at their camera kit. You don't reach the leagues of BC or Annie without being very pragmatic.  To be frank  if I put my money on the counter the gear had better pay for itself either in the growth of my bank account or helping me grow creativity.

I have been able  to work well with my DF+ however every time I pick it up I get the sense that it was not designed to interactive fully with my IQ series digital back.  And when you are working with a client breathing down your neck or have given up your valuable time on a personal weekend project its not cool to have to sweat camera body issues.

I have not used the XF camera body.  Have you?  When I do I will share my results.  The idea is to forget you have that black box between you and the subject. Thats the goal.  Whatever new camera can help me do that then I will consider.

When you look at the work of Dan Winters, Gregory Crewdson or Tim Walker do you think they focus on the camera? Or about creating great photography?  

In regards to the the CMOs full frame revolution, to be honest I have to deal with what I have right now in front of me.  My career in photography will/is not made upon future tech.  Or rather by saying hey I can't shoot this corporate portrait or magazine editorial today...but I do have time on my calendar in 2017...

regards,
Jeffery

[eronald]

Most professionals look very hard at their camera kit. You don't reach the leagues of BC or Annie without being very pragmatic.  To be frank  if I put my money on the counter the gear had better pay for itself either in the growth of my bank account or helping me grow creativity.

Jeffrey,

The abysmal state of Annie's finances was all over the news a while ago; skill as a photographer does not imply commercial survival. And I do wonder whether the good state of "BC"'s practice doesn't stem as much from creativity, proficiency and hard work, as also from a business sense that identified the need for a timely and well managed integration of video, and the receipt of video billings.

Which brings me to my point, which I think mirrors "BC"'s : For a commercial working photographer, a $50K stills-only product often doesn't really make *monetary* sense these days, not only because it's a lot of money, but because it does NOT provide video INCOME. Given managed lighting, decent stills can probably be made with the assistant's C or N —I've heard that not only amateurs but even some respected artists shoot dSLRs —  but good video really demands that pricey setup - if you have the money.

Nowadays, a video component with sound is expected for any marketing that ends up on the net. For kids, a 20 second video is "the new Kodak moment". Of course self-financed amateurs, renowned great artists, landscape photographers and those working for cultural institutions can escape chasing the latest marketing fashion.

The fashion-free are now Phase's core market.
 
Edmund  

[ndevlin]

I can make no comment on the business case for stills cameras priced like this in the commercial photo world (though Cooter casts some serious doubts), but as a non-commercial shooter I would need a net worth north of $5m to ever consider this kind of a spend. That's the market.  Phase knows that, and is unapologetic about it.  That's business.

- N.

[Theodoros]

I can make no comment on the business case for stills cameras priced like this in the commercial photo world (though Cooter casts some serious doubts), but as a non-commercial shooter I would need a net worth north of $5m to ever consider this kind of a spend. That's the market.  Phase knows that, and is unapologetic about it.  That's business.

- N.

Without having any statistics on hand, my opinion (out of experience) is that the overpriced equipment is not targeting pros... It mainly targets wealthy amatures that are playing "the photographer"... most pros use their old 22, 33 & 39 mp backs with their view cameras and use DSLRs for anything other than still life...

[synn]

Is this thread about the new body or the usual tyre kicking about MFD prices?

And btw, I forgot when Joe Cornish and Joey L and so many others stopped being pros and became "wealthy amateurs". Because last time I checked, they were using the same phase gear many here say pros don't buy anymore.

Why can't you use what you want to use and stop passing anecdotal statements about what other people should and shouldn't buy?

...and yes, can we talk about the new body? It's a novel concept, but sticking to the thread title is kinda cool, you know?

[Theodoros]

Is this thread about the new body or the usual tyre kicking about MFD prices?

And btw, I forgot when Joe Cornish and Joey L and so many others stopped being pros and because "wealthy amateurs". Because last time I checked, they were using the same phase gear many here say pros don't buy anymore.

Why can't you use what you want to use and stop passing anecdotal statements about what other people should and shouldn't buy?

...and yes, can we talk about the new body? It's a novel concept, but sticking to the thread title is kinda cool, you know?

Taking about the body.... Oh yes... I just made a statement about that on another forum... let me repeat it here...

" Ok... no use of your good old back on the new body, no multishot, no film and... no way to use your JAS adapter to share the lenses with your Nikons or Canons...
Gimme a reason why I should change my Contax 645 with Fuji GX680 (contax back fit) combination where I can share my 39mp 4x multishot able back and my other 22mp 16x able (again) multishot back (for 88mp of true color)... Don't tell me "Image quality" to start with.... I'm waiting...
Forgot anything? ...Oh yeah! ...maybe that superb OTF TTL flash metering of the Contax.

P.S. Don't tell me the WLF either... I had that 12 years ago when sold my Bronica for the Contax (along with the spot metering with WLF)... and long before that with the Bronica.
P.S.-2 And don't mention the JAS adapter either which allows me not to have any 35mm lens either in the (much restricted) bag ....other than my old 17-35/2.8 (for UWs) and micro 85/2.8 PC (for when Fuji is an overkill)."

of course (as you said) money is irrelevant...

[synn]

So, YOU don't have a reason to upgrade.
Good for you, your current gear works just ad well today as it did last week.


There are others who do. Please don't belittle their needs based on a projection of yours.

[Theodoros]

So, YOU don't have a reason to upgrade.
Good for you, your current gear works just ad well today as it did last week.


There are others who do. Please don't belittle their needs based on a projection of yours.

But I don't... One can speak only on his needs... Still from an outside view, (out of my needs) I can see many selecting the H5X platform than the XF only to avoid the "closed system" trap... IMO.

[eronald]

So, YOU don't have a reason to upgrade.
Good for you, your current gear works just ad well today as it did last week.


There are others who do. Please don't belittle their needs based on a projection of yours.

Synn,

 I think you are too indulgent with people who hang on to obsolete equipment.

 Cnn have yet again run some pictures taken by an amateur using some wierd french Lumiere process - who are these guys? It looks like that useless old trash will never die. Someone might get the idea of running an inkjet to coat plates - now that is frightening indeed!

Edmund

[Chris Livsey]

 Someone might get the idea of running an inkjet to coat plates - now that is frightening indeed!

Edmund

Why bother? Ilford already coat plates commercially for special applications, not a stretch to replace the emulsion with an optically/photographic friendly one.
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=56
They use a horizontal conveyor moving the plates under a coating head. The plates are then chilled by a cold-water bath just reaching the bottom of the plate then continue on the conveyor before being stacked in a filtered chiller room to fully set.

BTW Is this OT ?