Phase One IQ3 100mp. Shipping now.

[Bo Dez]

If we want to be negative the biggest threat is that 135 is becoming too good. It's similar to when MFD took over large format film. The break point was 39 megapixels with P45+, many thought LF film was still better, but the 39 megapixels was close enough, more practical and fulfilled all reasonable printing needs. But I think MFD can exist as a niche, having the best stuff even if it's meaningless in any quality aspect still has some nice prestige too it.

This was my indirect point - 135 has taken over and 36-40MP covers most things. Prestige is a marketed ideal that we dinosaurs have been spoon fed on. The kids don't really care so much about it and they are the ones booking photographers now.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

My P45+ produces a file big enough for any kind of commercial use.  The only problem I have with it as of late is that the deep blacks are not up to par with current sensors.

Hi Joe,

Not that I want to create awareness of another problem you may or may not (sub)consciously suffer from (depends on subject and shooting settings), but higher resolution also prevents many aliasing issues and produces more accurate colors, especially in the shadow regions.

Given the choice, I'd rather have a hassle free 40 or 50 mega-pixel full framed modern back then a 100 mega-pixel back with a host of additional issues due to smaller pixels.

Many of those 'issues' are already there at lower resolutions, but are now just more easy to see, and more easy to solve with proper tools.

Cheers,
Bart

[JoeKitchen]

Hi Joe,

Not that I want to create awareness of another problem you may or may not (sub)consciously suffer from (depends on subject and shooting settings), but higher resolution also prevents many aliasing issues and produces more accurate colors, especially in the shadow regions.

Many of those 'issues' are already there at lower resolutions, but are now just more easy to see, and more easy to solve with proper tools.

Cheers,
Bart

LOL, when I wrote that I was wondering if you would point out moire and aliasing issues with lower res backs. 

However, I can not see better color being a product of higher resolution, maybe higher quality pixels that just happen to be smaller? 

Maybe though, I am getting ahead of myself here since no tests have been completed yet. 

[araucaria]

At pixel level, a bayer filter image will always look bad, even with diffraction and defocus around, it would look better with real color sampling. I've downloaded the raw file and after removing the horrible processing it had applied I saw a nice image and was suprised that the schneider 80 2.8 was doing "good".

[Manoli]

About five years ago I saw several estimates that seemed to agree that the total worldwide market for high-end digital backs was about 7,000 units. My guess is that it's not all that much different today. How the mix of markets breaks down is anyone's guess though.

If you're correct on that , it makes a worldwide market of $350,000,000,  retail - and that's assuming they're all running IQ3-101's ( let's not forget the extra megapixel!). In a word: dismal.

Your other point, regarding the affluent Chinese is perhaps more relevant in the short term and there, 7,000 units could easily be a gross underestimation - but equally that depends on how 'flash' your typical Far Eastern buyer views swanning it with an IQ-100 round his neck. My guess is that by the time the next OLED iPhone comes out - not so much.

Nevertheless, kudos to Sony (and Phase) for producing what's no doubt a landmark camera.

[Ken R]

There are some bitter and unhappy folk in this thread. (w/ A.D.D.) Some will never be happy with anything. Geez.

If you can't afford the new back, do not need it, do not want it, if it rained the morning of the announcement, who the fudge cares! This has nothing to do with the back and the way it performs and what it can do. The former might be important to the manufacturer and dealers (a few less sales) but it's their business.

Focus people, focus...

Michael, great points.

As a whole I think PhaseOne has done a great job polishing and rounding out the entire system. Front to back.

[Quentin]

And of course, not to be forgotten (because it is likely one of the largest constituencies), are wealthy amateurs. About five years ago I saw several estimates that seemed to agree that the total worldwide market for high-end digital backs was about 7,000 units. My guess is that it's not all that much different today. How the mix of markets breaks down is anyone's guess though.

I will say that when one runs high-end travel / photography workshops (the way we do) and sees the number of serious and often talented amateurs shooting with $40-$80K MF systems, I would not be surprised if as many as half the world market for high-end MF is to affluent individuals. These are the same people who buy top-end cars, boats and homes. People for whom purchasing a $50K camera system like the XF100MP requires little more thought then whether they should upgrade to this year's BMW 750, or wait another 6 months to see the latest models for 2017.


Michael

That's not much of an endorsement, Michael, for the need for these cameras.  Sure, some wealthy amateurs are outstanding photographers, but for the rest of that constituency, its largely a vanity market. 

[torger]

I asked a british dealer about the ratio enthusiast vs pro photographers, and they've seen a sharp increase of enthusiast photographers in recent years. In Europe it's not only the highest end products from Phase One that gets all the attention though, the CFV-50c has been very popular for example much thanks to its pricing.

The preowned/second hand market is great too, so those interested in playing around with MFD does not need to spend that much, it's a bit sad that the latest gear gets almost all attention.

If you care about more than resolving power and DR, you can find much joy in using MFD. The reason I use MFD is to be able to shoot in "large format style" (using a Linhof Techno) without having to mess with film. High image quality is only one aspect of that, movements and the slow pace is an intergral part of the photographic process.

If the trend continues and MFD end up being about resolving power only, and movements you fix with focus stacking and perspective correction in post I might just start shooting film in the end . My purpose with photography is trying to make art, and to make art it actually does matter to me how much of the photographic process that is a craft in the field and how much is post-processing at the computer.

When at large format film, I'd like to say that it very quickly would become more expensive than the MFD gear I have. Shooting large format film has some pretty high running costs.

[michael]

That's not much of an endorsement, Michael, for the need for these cameras.  Sure, some wealthy amateurs are outstanding photographers, but for the rest of that constituency, its largely a vanity market.

And at the risk of sounding facetious, I would respond "So what?"

There are lots of ways for wealthy people to spend their money. All other things being equal, I see no harm in them indulging themselves with expensive cameras. Keeps the wheels of commerce churning, doesn't it?

Michael

[torger]

I think the thing is that the high pricing is a bit provoking, together with the marketing like

"I use Phase One because it’s the best. I just can’t afford not to." - David LaChapelle

like if you're not using Phase One you're not among the best photographers, and if you can't afford it then you're really crap. Doug's salesman style about how great P1 is, is pretty pushy too

[adammork]

We're on it. Just as soon as our demo units arrive! They are en route at the moment; we are tracking them eagerly!

Doug, when testing the 32HR, could you please make a test with full shift up and to the sides of a clear blue sky - this will clearly show how this back is handling banding, tilling and other not so nice things for us AP - it's ok if the metal disc in the lens is showing.

Thank you very much in advance!
/adam

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

However, I can not see better color being a product of higher resolution, maybe higher quality pixels that just happen to be smaller?

No, it's due to the denser sampling with a Bayer CFA. In the lower exposure regions, the shot noise plus read noise constitute a random brightness sample in one color band per pixel position. That means that the more random an average sample is, the less accurate the demosaicing will be, and the less accurate the resulting color. This is, amongst others, a reason why deep shadows gain a magenta cast (there is a relative under sampling of Red and Blue noisy samples, but they get interpolated to fill in the missing pixel positions). Larger Red and Blue blotches are the result. A higher resolution sensor offers more of those random samples, and they are like all larger sampling quantities getting closer to the real mean value for those locations (larger sample quantities produce smaller standard deviation).

The fact that the individual samples are also less noisy also helps, they enforce eachother.

Cheers,
Bart

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Bart,

Interesting…, statistics can be fascinating.

Best regards
Erik

No, it's due to the denser sampling with a Bayer CFA. In the lower exposure regions, the shot noise plus read noise constitute a random brightness sample in one color band. That means that the more random an average sample is, the less accurate the demosaicing will be, and the less accurate the resulting color. This is, amongst others, a reason why deep shadows gain a magenta cast (there is a relative under sampling of Red and Blue noisy samples, but they get interpolated to fill in the missing pixel positions). Larger Red and Blue blotches are the result. A higher resolution sensor offers more of those random samples, and they are like all larger sampling quantities getting closer to the real mean value for those locations (larger sample quantities produce smaller standard deviation).

The fact that the individual samples are also less noisy also helps, they enforce eachother.

Cheers,
Bart

[Bo Dez]

I think the thing is that the high pricing is a bit provoking, together with the marketing like

"I use Phase One because it’s the best. I just can’t afford not to." - David LaChapelle

like if you're not using Phase One you're not among the best photographers, and if you can't afford it then you're really crap. Doug's salesman style about how great P1 is, is pretty pushy too

In fashion, photographers getting the most attention and work, at least at the moment, are shooting film. There is a real resurgence in Mamiya RZ and Pentax 67, and scanning colour prints being printed by the photographer in the darkroom.

[Joe Towner]

There is just one problem. Lenses. Several of the Pentax newer 645 lenses are made to cover the 33x44mm format, just. IIRC the 28-45mm zoom is for 33x44mm sensor only. Ironically the older 645 lenses might work nicely although I would not expect them to get the best out of a 100mp sensor. Even the Hasselblad HCD lenses, the 24mm, 28mm and the 30-90mm only work with 1.1x crop or smaller sensors.

The 100mp chip is the same size as the Dalsa 60mp, which is the same chip in the H5D-60, so the Hasselblad lenses are fine - except for the first and last row (Phocus adjusts accordingly).  The P645 lenses will be interesting, the 28-45 works, based on the chatter about adapting it to other platforms.  The 25mm I believe was canceled due to coverage issues, but I still want one.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Steve Hendrix at Capture Integration seems to be a very serious and hands on guy. I always listen to him. That also applies to some other guys at CI.

I think Doug is OK, too, but to much enthusiasm may harm his credibility, at least IMHO.

Best regards
Erik

I think the thing is that the high pricing is a bit provoking, together with the marketing like

"I use Phase One because it’s the best. I just can’t afford not to." - David LaChapelle

like if you're not using Phase One you're not among the best photographers, and if you can't afford it then you're really crap. Doug's salesman style about how great P1 is, is pretty pushy too

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Interesting…, statistics can be fascinating.

Hi Erik, yes they can if they work in our favor ...

Just imagine a 16x multi-exposure sensor shift version of this huge slab of silicon. Quadruple file size, but also double resolution, even better color, and virtually no aliasing artifacts (and huge artifact free sharpening potential). It would of course be very hard to get a vibration free shot, but the quality would be awesome !!! Heck, even a 4x multisampling sensor would be a sensation, but why stop there ...

Cheers,
Bart

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Hasselblad used to make multishoot, but according to Doug their lenses are not up to the task, so why even try?

Another way to see it that Hasselblad had a 200 MP product for a long time and that actually worked well under benign conditions.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Erik, yes they can if they work in our favor ...

Just imagine a 16x multi-exposure sensor shift version of this huge slab of silicon. Quadruple file size, but also double resolution, even better color, and virtually no aliasing artifacts (and huge artifact free sharpening potential). It would of course be very hard to get a vibration free shot, but the quality would be awesome !!! Heck, even a 4x multisampling sensor would be a sensation, but why stop there ...

Cheers,
Bart

[Doug Peterson]

Doug, when testing the 32HR, could you please make a test with full shift up and to the sides of a clear blue sky - this will clearly show how this back is handling banding, tilling and other not so nice things for us AP - it's ok if the metal disc in the lens is showing.

Thank you very much in advance!
/adam

If I can get a blue sky and air temperature I can tolerate standing in for the 2-3 hour test you will get your wish!

[Ken R]

If I can get a blue sky and air temperature I can tolerate standing in for the 2-3 hour test you will get your wish!

28º and Sunny, perfect weather! The back will be nice and cool. Even less noise?