Phase One IQ3 100mp. Shipping now.

[[email protected]]

We really need to see those tests which Doug's is making for us as soon as he gets the back

Although I dream of a CMOS that can do the SK28XL without issues, if this just reaches Dalsa 6um class on the angular response it's hugely great news. If on the other hand the sensor makes the Rodenstock wides obsolete it's pretty bad news, so the wait for those tests is really tough

+1
This "exceptional wide angular response" would also strongly increase the used price of the SKs....

[Hulyss]

I'm myself interested in art photography, and indeed film is big there too. But it's not so much the quality, it's the process, being more "real photography", and the also the look. I'd love to shoot film for my own work, but I'm just too lazy, or at least I say so, to be honest I'm probably shooting too little volume to keep up a stable skill to not do beginner's mistakes on important shots. Digital is afterall a lot more forgiving...

To be honest, by my latest test, I'm less and less lazy. Many labs around me (and I'm country side) invested in new development machines specially suited for film. Those machines can even "chemically" print digital images on reactive paper. The bath are automatically controlled and are clean and filtered. I understand who give up about film. This is the guys who faced hardgore the digital transition (sorry Doug ^^). They started to digitalise thousands and thousands of negatives thus killing any joy in the process. Digital for them is a Deliverance, to say the least.

Today film is maxed and do not suffer WA smearing Digital isn't maxed yet but is a super complement. Digital is the new pola. It is a good period for a photographer to "taste" real MF with film at little expense. Take your roll in any labs (at least with modern frontier or equivalent) and you are done. Choose the pics you want digitalized or do it yourself at home with a lightbank and a Merrill sensor stitch. For ppl seeking a pleasure of photography it is ONE way to go, for sure (not the way).

Of course such expensive and top notch items will find a house somewhere on the planet. Michael said the market is 7k Unit but IHMO, in late 2015 and start 2016 it is more 5k units worldwide. Asia market will buy most of the units. Asia is now where USA where in the 80/90's but with modern tech. When they do something it is just huge.

[Theodoros]

To be honest, by my latest test, I'm less and less lazy. Many labs around me (and I'm country side) invested in new development machines specially suited for film. Those machines can even "chemically" print digital images on reactive paper. The bath are automatically controlled and are clean and filtered. I understand who give up about film. This is the guys who faced hardgore the digital transition (sorry Doug ^^). They started to digitalise thousands and thousands of negatives thus killing any joy in the process. Digital for them is a Deliverance, to say the least.

Today film is maxed and do not suffer WA smearing Digital isn't maxed yet but is a super complement. Digital is the new pola. It is a good period for a photographer to "taste" real MF with film at little expense. Take your roll in any labs (at least with modern frontier or equivalent) and you are done. Choose the pics you want digitalized or do it yourself at home with a lightbank and a Merrill sensor stitch. For ppl seeking a pleasure of photography it is ONE way to go, for sure (not the way).

Of course such expensive and top notch items will find a house somewhere on the planet. Michael said the market is 7k Unit but IHMO, in late 2015 and start 2016 it is more 5k units worldwide. Asia market will buy most of the units. Asia is now where USA where in the 80/90's but with modern tech. When they do something it is just huge.

Speaking of film, there are a few comments I want to make about P1's XF camera...
It certainly looks to be a very capable tool of equipment... but P1 has made everything in their power to exclude a major part of the market from buying it...
1. There is no provision for film backs
2. One can't use a multishot back on it.
3. Even older "in family" MFDB owners can't retain their backs and upgrade to the new camera...
4 ....the IQ3-100 back is only usable along with an XF platform...

I've no clue as to why P1 is closing their system, I've only to remind them what the (financial) result was with Hasselblad when they took similar decisions against the markets requirements. I can remember people in forums ADVISING Hasselblad to reconsider their (stupid) decisions ASAP... They didn't listen, they kept insisting that "they know better than the photographers on photographers needs..." (!!!!!)

Well... if in P1 they think the same, I have ONE proposal for them as to test the result...
 Offer an alternative version of the XF camera with all the interface "blocking" of MFDBs removed, compatibility with MS MFDBs and film backs too... (abilities that the H5X already offers)...[/i] Lets then see which will be more successful... Will it be the current version or the "simplified" one? Come on guys... it's a simple marketing "test" that costs nothing... it only may help you to "wake up" before its too late...

As for Hasselblad, one must say they haven't wake up completely yet... Not unless they will resurrect the CF series of backs and offer them "open" to other platforms as they used to do... Especially the MS versions of the backs which they now sell as stand alone backs (but only for H-mount)...

[Doug Peterson]

There is no "block".

The XF speaks a different language (aka "intercomponent communication protocol") than legacy Mamiya bodies. Using the Mamiya 645 digital interface spec would have been very limiting given it was developed more than a decade ago.

If Hassy or Sinar want to make a back for the XF they are welcome to. I think Hassy will have no interest as they want to support the M platform. Feel free to talk to your friends at Sinar.

[Hulyss]

Also I think Phase One innovate and invest a lot. They can't keep old tech while building new. They can eventually restart a "legacy" market and even a scanner based on their backs and relaunch the mamyia 7ii or equivalent I know I dream but I smell a little niche market based on this idea.

I'm sure they know their still potential in film but it seems to be hard to predict such market.

[KevinA]

Having never shot with a high mp back, I do wonder other than detail, does the high mp back give better gradation or is that entirely down to bit depth?
I would of thought the ability to capture gentle tonal variations is going to make a photograph more beautiful or real rather than being able to count a few more blades of grass.
Is there a difference between 50mp and 100mp in this area?

[douglevy]

I thought I saw on their site that P1 was offering this in H mounts? Don't dash my hopes of owning a used one 10 years from now :-)

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

But the IBIS? Maybe Phase left the IBIS on the drawing table to leave something to upgrade for in 2 years?

Hi Eric,

IBIS is not just a sensor, but it is a sensor-assembly (which does not yet exist for this format) that holds the sensor, electronics and acceleration sensors, and lens info/sensors, to even make a first start at stabilizing.

Developing a sensor assembly may be interesting if Phase wants to add multi-shot capabilities, it could serve both goals, but the multi-axis stabilization part is quite something else than shifting the sensor back and forth in half or full photosite pitch increments.

And then there is the software part ...

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Hi,

I checked a bit on the image, in C9. Pushing 3.08 EV, with sharpening and noise reduction set to zero, I see some colour blotching in grey areas I would that I would not expect. So I checked in  RawDigger and saw that the image is exposed pretty ETTR, with clouds close to clipping.

Yes, just a few pixels in the Christmas lights are clipped, pretty much ETTR.

What I noticed in raw digger is that the file is 16 bits, but only contains 14-bit data. So the image is a 14 bit file.

I haven't had time to dig much further, but that would be consistent with the Dynamic Range that I found, 13.65 stops (assuming Rawdigger interprets the file data correctly).

Cheers,
Bart

[Ken R]

Having never shot with a high mp back, I do wonder other than detail, does the high mp back give better gradation or is that entirely down to bit depth?
I would of thought the ability to capture gentle tonal variations is going to make a photograph more beautiful or real rather than being able to count a few more blades of grass.
Is there a difference between 50mp and 100mp in this area?

In short, given equal composition and similar per pixel performance, yes, it helps a lot since you are increasing your sampling of any given area in the frame with more pixels.

Im sure the resident tech crew in this forum will chime in with a bunch of charts, numbers and what not.

[Doug Peterson]

I thought I saw on their site that P1 was offering this in H mounts? Don't dash my hopes of owning a used one 10 years from now :-)

This back will be made in H mount (Hasselblad H1, H2, H4X, H5X) and M mount (Phase One DF+ and Phase One XF) versions.

C mount (Contax 645) and V mount (Hasselblad 500) are not currently planned. But if you would want one I suggest you contact your local dealer. They could always reconsider if there is sufficient demand.

[KevinA]

In short, given equal composition and similar per pixel performance, yes, it helps a lot since you are increasing your sampling of any given area in the frame with more pixels.

Im sure the resident tech crew in this forum will chime in with a bunch of charts, numbers and what not.

Thanks Ken, Out of my price range, but that would be just about the only reason to buy one for me.
 Too many charts and graphs in photography these days to decide if something is good or not. If you can't hang a number on it people have no idea or confidence in a product.
i'm waiting for the day when we have to add a written Aim, method, result and conclusion synopses to every picture so viewers know wether its any good or not :-)

[torger]

Having never shot with a high mp back, I do wonder other than detail, does the high mp back give better gradation or is that entirely down to bit depth?
I would of thought the ability to capture gentle tonal variations is going to make a photograph more beautiful or real rather than being able to count a few more blades of grass.
Is there a difference between 50mp and 100mp in this area?

I suggest you compare sample shots and make test prints, because there's many different opinions about these things. The thing with "better tonality" is one of those effects that's hard to show in any measurements but some experience it, if it's placebo or not I can't really say.

To be considered is that the standard is moved forwards all the time, in all formats. It becomes more and more difficult to see issues in the images, and as such the differences become smaller and smaller. Personally I doubt that you would get a big tonality improvement from an IQ250 to an IQ3 100. In fact I think it would be difficult to tell prints apart on a normal viewing distance.

Higher sampling is good though, you get less aliasing in small details, which can be an advantage in certain shooting conditions.

I'd say that today's hardware is so good across the board that "tonality" is more up to profile design than actual hardware properties.

[KevinA]

I suggest you compare sample shots and make test prints, because there's many different opinions about these things. The thing with "better tonality" is one of those effects that's hard to show in any measurements but some experience it, if it's placebo or not I can't really say.

To be considered is that the standard is moved forwards all the time, in all formats. It becomes more and more difficult to see issues in the images, and as such the differences become smaller and smaller. Personally I doubt that you would get a big tonality improvement from an IQ250 to an IQ3 100. In fact I think it would be difficult to tell prints apart on a normal viewing distance.

Higher sampling is good though, you get less aliasing in small details, which can be an advantage in certain shooting conditions.

I'd say that today's hardware is so good across the board that "tonality" is more up to profile design than actual hardware properties.

I was just curious, not enough to start downloading files and making prints. I would hope the new back brings more to the party than resolution, the 50mp cmos looked to be a big step forward for MF.
I can only think of one job I've done in the last two years where resolution has been of any importance, no doubt for others it will be important, the rest of us 16 - 25mp is probably enough.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

In short, given equal composition and similar per pixel performance, yes, it helps a lot since you are increasing your sampling of any given area in the frame with more pixels.

Im sure the resident tech crew in this forum will chime in with a bunch of charts, numbers and what not.

No need, the answer to Kevins questions is, Yes.

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Higher sampling is good though, you get less aliasing in small details, which can be an advantage in certain shooting conditions.

I'd say that today's hardware is so good across the board that "tonality" is more up to profile design than actual hardware properties.

Resolution is improved and aliasing is reduced at the same time, both allow more accurate tonality and smoother gradients and better microcontrast. The physically larger sensor will allow to use a larger magnification factor on sensor for the same Field of View, compared to a physically smaller sensor, which will then result in a higher MTF, which also gives more solid data (higher S/N ratio) for postprocessing.

Cheers,
Bart

[torger]

Resolution is improved and aliasing is reduced at the same time, both allow more accurate tonality and smoother gradients and better microcontrast. The physically larger sensor will allow to use a larger magnification factor on sensor for the same Field of View, compared to a physically smaller sensor, which will then result in a higher MTF, which also gives more solid data (higher S/N ratio) for postprocessing.

Indeed, but exactly how relevant is this difference, and how easy is it to detect? I think it's very hard to detect and you need to go into very specific situations.

[Chris Barrett]

I don't really ever get into the deep technical issues, so let me know if my logic is flawed here...

The IQ3 100 and the A7r2 have a similar pixel pitch, 4.51 µ on the Sony and 4.6 µ on the Phase.  Given that, lenses that resolve well enough on the Sony should be fine with the IQ3 100, yeah?

I've been using 'Blad CFi and CFe lenses (and the Canon TS-e's) since I built my Sony rig and have been pretty happy with their sharpness, so I'm guessing I'd be happy with them on the new back, too.  Of course, I'd need to add the focal plane shutter to my Arca.  Hmm... interesting.

CB

[Kevin Raber]

Next week the Phase One team will be visiting the Indianapolis - Luminous-Landscape offices.  We’ll have the chance to sit down with them and learn more about the new Phase One XF 100mp Camera.  We’ll also be doing a Capture One 9 video tutorial update.

If there is something you are interested in as far as questions regrading the new camera or Capture One please send them to me by email or personal message.  We’ll gather them together and do our best to cover them during our discussion.  Please don’t post them as part of the topic or it may not get on the list.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I don't really ever get into the deep technical issues, so let me know if my logic is flawed here...

The IQ3 100 and the A7r2 have a similar pixel pitch, 4.51 µ on the Sony and 4.6 µ on the Phase.  Given that, lenses that resolve well enough on the Sony should be fine with the IQ3 100, yeah?

That's correct Chris, within the image circle limitations of the particular lens of course.

Cheers,
Bart