Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds  (Read 23434 times)

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2015, 05:14:40 am »

I was close to buying a medium format rig, I am still on the edge, but having seen the link comparing the 5DS with the IQ160, I don't feel like it's such a good thing to rush into.
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4033
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #21 on: June 30, 2015, 09:31:26 am »

I was close to buying a medium format rig, I am still on the edge, but having seen the link comparing the 5DS with the IQ160, I don't feel like it's such a good thing to rush into.

I was interested in this link, however after looking at the shots, I looked for the information on the cameras/lenses uses but did not see it.  I was especially curious on the IQ160/camera solution as at F16, I would also assume to see a bit of diffraction starting to effect the image sharpness.  I also did not see if they used Capture One or LIghtroom or another raw converter.  I still feel that Capture One is the best solution for Phase raw. 

I have no doubt that the new 50MP Canon cameras will have better results than a P45+, the P45+ was first sold in 2008, almost 6 years ago.  The Canon is brand new.

However the P45+ can within it's limits deliver a very good result and in fact may beat the Canon on 30  minutes or longer exposures within the temperature limits of the P45+. 

One thing I have learned with MF backs, the optics are critical.  I have seen other tests on eyeballs etc. where a Phase One 160/180 with both the Phase camera and Hasselblad cameras did very well.  Not trying to knock Chris's notes, as he has done more than I will ever do in a comparison but what glass did he use?

To me the real question is can you justify the cost of a CMOS MF back over a Canon 50MP camera or the soon shipping Sony A7rII.  Here the DR will be very close and the resolution about the same, just 8 million or so pixels different.  But don't want to steer away from the OP's question.

I feel, if you compared the P45+ to the output of the 5Ds or other Canon with the Low cancelling filter, you would be very hard pressed to get a even result.  The Canon is going to give a cleaner overall file and it has significantly more resolution than the P45+.  If you are not considering a tech camera then the Canon is to me going to make a better working camera.  Just the overall easy of use alone to me makes the decision easy.  I am not a huge fan of the CCD look, just don't see it in my files.  And I do print big.  When I worked the the 50MP CMOS Phase back, I just did not see any difference in the images I shot, besides the 10MP resolution.  There were slight color differences, but easily handled in C1.

I give full Kudos to Canon, they have a great new set of cameras, with excellent resolution.  I wish they had been there 3 or so years ago.  Not going back now.  But if I was in the process of making the decision, I would give the Canons a strong look for sure as I have always loved their IQ, and setup (6D excluded).

Back to the 160, looking at the samples on the link, I was impressed by the results that they received at IQ800.  I assumed this was full resolution, not sensor plus?  He was shooting in studio with controlled lighting, not sure if flash was used.  However in the field I know I can't get anywhere near that clean a file with my IQ260 @ iso 400. 

Great time to be purchasing a new camera as the technology just keeps getting better.

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

dhdhdh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #22 on: June 30, 2015, 09:40:46 am »

Thank you, Paul, for the feedback.

I do own the P45, and have loved it, it was a huge jump over my Canon 5DMk2, a 22MP camera.  I was shooting studio still life for fine art prints at about 44" and the upgrade to the P45 was night and day. Seemed like I was shooting 4x5 film compared to 35.

But the P45 has been sitting in my cabinet because it is a bit of a hassle to use out of the studio. I feel that I'll use the Canon 5Ds a lot more.  And some I've decided to list the P45 on eBay, probably today. 

I'm considering looking into adapting the Mamiya 120 f4 macro lens to the Canon.  Not sure if it's a good idea, but it is a sweet lens and performed admirably on the P45.

Anyhow, thanks again

dhdhdh
Logged

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #23 on: June 30, 2015, 11:15:15 am »

Good points.

I don't own medium format backs but have been renting the for jobs that require it for several years now, it's always been a better business model for me. However in very recent times, the photographic industry is struggling and an extra couple thousand dollars on the bill for MFD hire is being continually questioned. So my plan was to buy it, and manage each jobs budget as required. I've been working mainly with the IQ180, P65+ and P45+, all of them giving incredible results. The first time I used the P65+ I thought the mother ship had landed with it's mind-boggling tonality and colour.

I initially scoffed at the Canon, given the small sensor and, IMO, relatively average lenses, but I have to say, despite seeing some terrible first samples from this camera I have been blown away with the production model samples I've been seeing from time to time. It's hard to tell the what the parameters are just yet, the jury is still out, there seems to be strange things going on with noise and gradations, the DR, the colour seems suspect at this stage in some instances but i've gone from "no way ever" to "wow, this is interesting".

The Sony doesn't interest me at all as a camera. It is a plus that I could use my Leica glass on it, although again no idea how well it will work this stage. It just seems such an amateur camera this stage in its development. The EVF without an additional OVF is something I really don't like the idea of one bit. My opinion on that may very well change, perhaps the time is right for the commercial markets to embrace these ideas.

To cut the story short, I was close to pulling the trigger on the 60MP Phase One but now I feel uneasy about investing into older Medium Format technology, when it's so much more cumbersome and convoluted. If there was open system which had Zeiss glass I would be more into it. It seems this Canon may just well be a far more versatile camera who's compromises in IQ are balanced by price and usability. Strange for me to say this because I have always been Max IQ at all costs. The Canon may well be that good. I am excited to see more.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2015, 11:18:28 am by Bo Dez »
Logged

MatthewCromer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 505
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #24 on: June 30, 2015, 11:33:27 am »

It sounds like you just don't like the EVF.

Regarding the A7R2, it does have a lot of image quality advantages over the Canon, most particularly a lack of mirror slap, ~2 stops of additional dynamic range, and on-sensor focus accuracy (no more messing with micro-focus adjustment).

Logged

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #25 on: June 30, 2015, 12:41:56 pm »

Sure, on paper I think the Sony seems good. But there is so much more to this than a spec sheet. I guess you could say I'm vaguely open to it using it, but more interested in finding out how well it works, with time. When you count on it for your living you don't jump into different things when your existing set up is hunky-dory. I admit that I'm looking at it without trying it though, so my biased opinion is most likely half baked or perhaps tainted with other stuff as I will try to explain without sounding like a douche.

What EVF's I have used I've not liked at all. The extra DR interests me and the fact I can use my Leica lenses interests me. I think the new sensor is going to work better with these lenses because of the more shallow light wells from the BSI design. The EVF does really turn me off, yes. Like watching a TV or being caught in a shopping mall all day. Manual focussing in a dark studio with stopped down focussing is not ideal. I might feel differently once I try it, but when a big OVF works so well I have no reason to try it. How well does it tether? I've heard it is slow?

Lastly, and this may raise some eye-brows, but it matters, then there is the size of it. The "client perception" that any brand carries. Some don't even look at what you use, most don't care but I get strange and worried looks from clients occasionally when I use my Leica M on some projects, as it is, but it's reassuringly expensive and there is some brand influence there too, and of corse the results are impressive (which is why I choose it and continue to despite all this) and there's no problem, ultimately, but it isn't all that matters unfortunately. A discussion about it normally ends any issues but it can be awkward and just because they appear happy does not mean they are not potentially worried or easily swayed by your competition (who use these sort of stupid things, trust me!). Client perception is very important and I don't believe they're going to want me shooting their big campaign on something they see as an amateur camera, that looks to them like a toy. When they are paying you lots of money they are expecting lots of gear. I wish these things didn't matter, but sadly, they do, and are out of my control as much as I've tried in the past. I've also found there is an inherent commercial value, a client perception in the craft of photography and mastering big and/or complex cameras to great effect, particularly when the results are so good, unique etc. There comes a time when it's not just about your photography. Your photography has got to be outstanding or your out. Everyone elses, your competition, is and at that point there is also a show you have to put on for your clients. A little a7r, while possibly in some senses, capable, doesn't really fit into that. There is simple differentiation also...that's a whole other thing. It seems people consider you a bit of a dick or a douche for saying this sort of stuff but this is what my experience is, take or leave.

Finally, most importantly, ultimately, it just seems more like a computer than a camera to me. Like an appliance. It does not inspire me one iota and I have no interest in the camera itself, but the same can be said for a lot of modern camera designs.

But the industry is changing and budgets are shrinking. Some things that really mattered don't really matter any more. Some things stay the same. There are of corse new things to worry about too. Clients need more for less, they have less time and more things to worry about themselves.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2015, 12:48:29 pm by Bo Dez »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13878
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #26 on: June 30, 2015, 06:51:36 pm »

Lastly, and this may raise some eye-brows, but it matters, then there is the size of it. The "client perception" that any brand carries. Some don't even look at what you use, most don't care but I get strange and worried looks from clients occasionally when I use my Leica M on some projects, as it is, but it's reassuringly expensive and there is some brand influence there too, and of corse the results are impressive (which is why I choose it and continue to despite all this) and there's no problem, ultimately, but it isn't all that matters unfortunately.

Sticking an Otus 85mm f1.4 in front of any DSLR does seem to fix the size perception problem. ;)

On the initial topic, in my view the P45+ would deliver value if mounted on a view camera, other than that recent top class DSLR win in most areas by a wide margin.

Cheers,
Bernard

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #27 on: June 30, 2015, 07:01:51 pm »

"On paper" is all we know about the Sony A7R2 at this time. I too am intrigued by the possibility of increased dynamic range of the Sony sensor (sensor new to this model, so one can't generalize from the A72 or A7R) and by higher resolution. On the other hand, a 20 MP consumer camera (6D) is sufficient for my current (amateur) use with small prints, so I tell myself, improve my skills, then consider a specialty camera, Canon or Sony.
Logged

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #28 on: July 01, 2015, 05:02:15 am »

True about the Otus, but then it becomes a matter of ergonomics on a camera like the a7r. It's way to small, unbalanced and awkward to shoot with a lens like that. I would rather use it on a D810 or 5DS, That form factor is right. This was the thing thing I left out i my post above - I feel the a7 cameras are great headline grabbers, and spec sheet wonders, but there is a limit to what they are ergonomically usable for, IMO, they are too small for a camera you are going to use on a 3 day shoot with big lenses.
Logged

Conner999

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 864
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #29 on: July 01, 2015, 09:10:24 am »

Interesting discussion - particularly re: the perception of some 1st time clients re: gear.

OP -I've used and use the 120/4 adapted to once Canon and for last few years on D800e for portrait work. Utterly fantastic optic. I'd pay a body part for a native Nikon mount version of it.
Logged

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #30 on: July 02, 2015, 08:58:42 am »

What I am most noticing about the 5DS is the way it renders transitions from steep dark tone or colour, to light. It renders it as broken up noise. For me, at least, it's really quite off putting even at 50%. The rendering is really quite rough and, IMO, ugly unless the tone, colour and light is quite even. Further, there appears to be issues going on with the colour with a stange and seemingly looking uncorrectable magenta cast laying unevenly in the file.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2015, 09:05:02 am by Bo Dez »
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8901
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #31 on: July 02, 2015, 10:56:03 am »

What I am most noticing about the 5DS is the way it renders transitions from steep dark tone or colour, to light. It renders it as broken up noise.


Hi Bo,

It's (usually) the Raw converter, not the camera ....

Which converter are you using, and what settings do you use? Compare with a Canon DPP raw conversion as benchmark. Any differences?

Quote
Further, there appears to be issues going on with the colour with a stange and seemingly looking uncorrectable magenta cast laying unevenly in the file.

Is that with the 5DS or the 5DS R? Again, the Raw converter may have something to do with it. I found that the Nikon 800 and 800E also rendered differently in ACR, with a reddish glow for the 800E which uses a low-pass cancellation filter stack. In Capture One Pro that was not the case. Don't know what Nikon's own converter did.

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: July 13, 2015, 03:44:06 pm by BartvanderWolf »
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #32 on: July 02, 2015, 11:27:21 am »

Hi Bart,

I'm only going on the review samples I've been seeing on blogs etc from both 5DS and 5DR. I've not seen a photo that contradicts this yet, except for when the image has long tonal gradients that don't have much variation. This is a known issue on previous 5D models too, though to a lesser extent with 24MP.

The colour is more likely to do with the Raw conversions though. For Canons sake I hope so. I have read on several accounts that the current acr profile is weak.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #33 on: July 02, 2015, 05:34:46 pm »

Hi,

Just to say, generating profiles is easy with Adobe DNG Editor and a Color Checker target.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Bart,

I'm only going on the review samples I've been seeing on blogs etc from both 5DS and 5DR. I've not seen a photo that contradicts this yet, except for when the image has long tonal gradients that don't have much variation. This is a known issue on previous 5D models too, though to a lesser extent with 24MP.

The colour is more likely to do with the Raw conversions though. For Canons sake I hope so. I have read on several accounts that the current acr profile is weak.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

orc73

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #34 on: July 13, 2015, 03:05:43 pm »

The raw converter is important and should be part of a camera evolution.
I have a h4d-40 and it's great to have files from Phocus, LR is redish and lacks a lot.
I have a 5dsr and yet to find a proper raw converter.
LR is redish and just not nice. I tryed to make a color chcker profile but it always fails(lr cc on yosemite).
Capture one renders better, but generic 5dsr profile is over saturated and still quite red.
Also tethering does not work yet on lr and c1, and capture pilot neither.
The option with the hotfolder does not work on c1 for me, as it will set the default settings, which as described before are crap, i dont want my customer to see it.

So for now the 5dsr is not used when i have acccess to a computer for tethering, not selling my hassy yet.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up