Phase One IQ3 100mp. Shipping now.

[jng]

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

Chris,

This would be my take as well, provided the lenses perform well enough at the edges and corners of the larger sensor (which some but not all of these old lenses seem to do). The beautiful and technically excellent images you have posted here speak for themselves.

- John

[alatreille]

Do I remember reading somewhere that the 17 and 24mm will cover this sensor still with some movements?  Thus the 17 becomes an 11(ish) with movements and the 24 a 17(ish) with some movements.   (adjusted focal lengths referring to field of view in 35mm terms)

I think someone tested these on the H-Cam?

Really interesting then to have on the view camera.

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

[Domenico]

I think this new achievement is opening a world of opportunity to see new product and some concurrence / price reduction in the months that come.
First maybe someone selling the old gear to buy the 100MP increasing used market on the net that is where second hand from professional, doctor & dentist gear gone in good hands of creative and jung photographer that simply can afford the buy of this MFD gear / back's.
Generally speaking all old gear have characteristics and IQ well beyond what it's possible to achieve with a DSLR (also the newest), so if also Pentax and Hasselblad enter in this run for the big 100 Mp i think some benefit and price reduction (like the one active in this holidays for H5D-50c) will arrive.

To return to the discussion about the new born, I admit to have some doubt about the performance, especially about the noise in low light,  the 4,6 microns are at the level of some apsc dslr and no sony nor others brands perform brilliant in low light / high ISO (well, recently they have improved but after all i use always base ISO if I search the best IQ).
Dubt about the 16 bit.... it's not clear, and from the doc I have see there is a cloud around it, first SONY doesn't distribute a DATASHEET of the sensor perfrormanche and the schematic block of the multiplexer / ADC....  remember the DALSA and KODAK (now ON Semiconductor) data-sheets (I.E. http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/KAF-40000-D.PDF   for who doesn't even see one in it's life)... Well, where is the data sheet of SONY 50Mp MF Cmos ?,  and the 100Mp MF Cmos ?? 
Without evidence in any form and rumors that ALL are 14Bit and some one says also with a sort of compression I doubt the performance of the new born put it in a class od it's own, surely is larger that benefit low DOF and little more evident MF look on the image but said that, nothing more.

I regularly use the 50c camera from Hasselblad, and before I was using the CCD version, testing also other models and brand I have the feeling that introducing DSLR CMOS tech in this way, is wrong... Specially the race of more and more pixels, the 50 CMOS on the bench had a slight edge over the best professional DSLR IQ wise especially for the 5,3 microns photo site that slight larger... with the 100Mp and 4,6 micron photo site it possible to get better results ?
NO...  You have only more pixels for peeping and bigger files to impress Your customer !! 
 
So far so good, but for me an attractive game changing product would be a  10x10 micron 50Mp true full frame sensor with true 16 or more bit processing made without micro lenses and with strategy to avoid cross talk between pixel and with high angular response for tech cameras...

Something but NOT like the sensor SONY put in the A7S-II, something with more conservative CFA Bayer Matrix and a new ADC array designed for precision (not for speed perf) maybe 20Bit that after the on chip elaboration become true (not compressed) 16 bit !

I admit this is my dream,  the real situation is that they sell a reworked type of sensor only scaled to squeeze the maximum profit from a type of design, using the same tooling, foundry and process...

To return on my start, I think this is not the kind of sensor for my photography workflow, but surely is an achievement and awakening of this segment of photography almost known to be conservative and quality oriented.

Best regards,  Domenico.
 

[calindustries]

So..... let me check my piggy bank, but is there a Credo version in the works?

[Theodoros]

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.

Do you mean that a version that "speaks" the old M protocol is difficult to make? Or is it an intentional decision of P1 not to offer the possibility?
Listen Doug, the most unethical way to avoid saying the truth, is to answer irrelevant on a question... P1 could have the  "intercomponent communication protocol" or the "old M protocol" both included as user choice in the menu... That would allow old P+ users of backs, as well as users of other brand backs to select the "old protocol" if they want to keep their old  back and change to the "newer protocol" if they ever decide to upgrade to an 1Q back... Most of all, it would cost absolutely nothing (but a few KBs of memory) to do so...

As with Hasselblad, most probably they would consider to support the "old protocol" as their MS mode backs wouldn't work with the "newer one" and "my friends" (as you call them - although they are not more friends than you are to me) in Sinar, make an adapter for the "old protocol" for many years now and I don't think they would ever consider the "newer one" unless the user can take advantage of the MS mode of the backs...
By the way... this is great news we've had from you... I mean the information you shared that Hasselblad will offer back their backs for third party platforms! ...great news indeed!

I guess if in P1 they'll decide to "open up" the (great) XF body to the "old protocol" that will be even more great news! ...and if they decide to ever offer a back (I suggest the IQ 160) with multishot ability, it would even be greater news!
I guess you think that the criticism (not only from me) to P1's products or decisions (that you consider as being "perfect") is bashing... but I assure you, its only criticism which aims to help MF grow... After all, all makers must be doing (or have done) something wrong if MF market is shrinking.... isn't it? ...and not supporting film backs is one of this "wrong"...

[[email protected]]

First 32HR and SK43 examples.

The SK43 seems to be problematic.......


https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/new-phase-one-100-mp-back-on-the-alpa

[Ken R]

First 32HR and SK43 examples.

The SK43 seems to be problematic.......


https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/new-phase-one-100-mp-back-on-the-alpa

Thx for posting. The 32HR shots look stunning. The 40HR should work even better.

[JoeKitchen]

First 32HR and SK43 examples.

The SK43 seems to be problematic.......


https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/new-phase-one-100-mp-back-on-the-alpa

The 32mm is nice, however the top of the sky gets fairly noisy. 

Since they did not list it, I have to assume this was taken without the CF, so part of that noise may be coming from light fall off correction, as well as for lens cast.  Would that be a good assumption? 

The 43mm looks really bad at the bottom! 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

There are two benefits of smaller pixels and they are that:

• You can print larger
• There will be less problem with moiré like stuff

On the other hand, there is no real downside with smaller pixels. Also pixel sizes get reduced with newer design technologies. So we had one optimal pixel size for 0.5 micron design rules and another for 0.18 micron design rules.

There are two disadvantages with smaller pixel sizes. The first is a small reduction in dynamic range, the other is that pixel shading effects and risk for crosstalk (contamination of colour between pixels) increase with small pixel sizes. These effects don't really affect SLR type devices but are definitively problematic with technical cameras when used with non retrofocus wide angle lenses.

The present 100 MP sensor gains it's resolution from increase in surface area over the 50 MP sensor. The pixels are not smaller there is just more of them.

Best regards
Erik

I think this new achievement is opening a world of opportunity to see new product and some concurrence / price reduction in the months that come.
First maybe someone selling the old gear to buy the 100MP increasing used market on the net that is where second hand from professional, doctor & dentist gear gone in good hands of creative and jung photographer that simply can afford the buy of this MFD gear / back's.
Generally speaking all old gear have characteristics and IQ well beyond what it's possible to achieve with a DSLR (also the newest), so if also Pentax and Hasselblad enter in this run for the big 100 Mp i think some benefit and price reduction (like the one active in this holidays for H5D-50c) will arrive.

To return to the discussion about the new born, I admit to have some doubt about the performance, especially about the noise in low light,  the 4,6 microns are at the level of some apsc dslr and no sony nor others brands perform brilliant in low light / high ISO (well, recently they have improved but after all i use always base ISO if I search the best IQ).
Dubt about the 16 bit.... it's not clear, and from the doc I have see there is a cloud around it, first SONY doesn't distribute a DATASHEET of the sensor perfrormanche and the schematic block of the multiplexer / ADC....  remember the DALSA and KODAK (now ON Semiconductor) data-sheets (I.E. http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/KAF-40000-D.PDF   for who doesn't even see one in it's life)... Well, where is the data sheet of SONY 50Mp MF Cmos ?,  and the 100Mp MF Cmos ?? 
Without evidence in any form and rumors that ALL are 14Bit and some one says also with a sort of compression I doubt the performance of the new born put it in a class od it's own, surely is larger that benefit low DOF and little more evident MF look on the image but said that, nothing more.

I regularly use the 50c camera from Hasselblad, and before I was using the CCD version, testing also other models and brand I have the feeling that introducing DSLR CMOS tech in this way, is wrong... Specially the race of more and more pixels, the 50 CMOS on the bench had a slight edge over the best professional DSLR IQ wise especially for the 5,3 microns photo site that slight larger... with the 100Mp and 4,6 micron photo site it possible to get better results ?
NO...  You have only more pixels for peeping and bigger files to impress Your customer !! 
 
So far so good, but for me an attractive game changing product would be a  10x10 micron 50Mp true full frame sensor with true 16 or more bit processing made without micro lenses and with strategy to avoid cross talk between pixel and with high angular response for tech cameras...

Something but NOT like the sensor SONY put in the A7S-II, something with more conservative CFA Bayer Matrix and a new ADC array designed for precision (not for speed perf) maybe 20Bit that after the on chip elaboration become true (not compressed) 16 bit !

I admit this is my dream,  the real situation is that they sell a reworked type of sensor only scaled to squeeze the maximum profit from a type of design, using the same tooling, foundry and process...

To return on my start, I think this is not the kind of sensor for my photography workflow, but surely is an achievement and awakening of this segment of photography almost known to be conservative and quality oriented.

Best regards,  Domenico.

[jsiva]

Thx for posting. The 32HR shots look stunning. The 40HR should work even better.

The 32HR does look good, but with 10mm of rise, the sky does not have a lot of detail to judge.  You do see some noise, which could be from lack of a CF.  Cant wait to see samples at 15mm with detail in the corners

[Theodoros]

The present 100 MP sensor gains it's resolution from increase in surface area over the 50 MP sensor. The pixels are not smaller there is just more of them.

How did you ever end up to this conclusion? The surface area (entrance) of the 100MP sensor pixel is almost 30% reduced if compared to the respective 51mp one... 

[Chris Barrett]

First 32HR and SK43 examples.

The SK43 seems to be problematic.......


https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/new-phase-one-100-mp-back-on-the-alpa

No shifts over 10mm shown.  Possible dealbreaker for Architecture. 

[Jeffery Salter]

@Chris Barrett

In your view, what is the maximum amount of shift needed with a 32mm lens for architectural photography?  If the type of structure you are shooting allows for nodal panos, is shooting the 32mm cause too much distortion?

I'm not an architectural photographer, just curious. Thank you.

[Joe Towner]

Why are issues with the XF not supporting P backs or film rolling into this thread about a 100mp back?

I'm interested to hear if there will be a Credo version, but given the delay on Credo support on the XF, we may have an answer.

[torger]

It doesn't look too good on the wide angle compatibility. The 32HR has loss of color fidelity with only 10mm shift. The effect is much stronger on the symmetric SK43 of course.

Crosstalk issues are a bit unpredictable as they are orientation and subject specific so it's hard to make a final judgement based on one shot, but my guess is that if this back is better than the IQ250 it's not with a wide margin, still considerably worse than the Dalsa CCDs.

The super-high DR will somewhat compensate the signal loss, but loss of color fidelity is hard for me to swallow, as I think color is at least as important as resolving power. If you want you can see it as a sort of creative vignetting effect and live with it though.

But I guess that Rodenstock needs to start making some new wide angle lenses, because this is the new deal, Sony is probably not going to adapt to tech wides. A little too early to say drastic things but I'm afraid that Rodenstock wides may now be as obsolete as Schneider Digitar wides became with the 6um Dalsa - eg they've become more or less center frame lenses unless you use them with the older sensors (with Digitar it was using Kodak instead of Dalsa, and with Rodenstock its using with Dalsa instead of Sony)

[jsiva]

The 32HR can be pushed to almost 15mm +/- on the CCD backs, so would be nice to see more extreme samples.

Is it me or is there some strange vertical blotching in the sky areas of both 32HR images?  The edges are not quite well defined to be called banding, but there is somethings strange going on there.

[pemihan]

Is it me or is there some strange vertical blotching in the sky areas of both 32HR images?  The edges are not quite well defined to be called banding, but there is somethings strange going on there.

I see it quite clearly too. If you convert to B&W it gets worse. OF course this is only jpg files so should be taken with a grain of salt.

Peter

[torger]

You can look at the top corner of the building of the first 32HR shot. If you're used to see color fidelity issues you can see that the're something wrong despite the low saturation color. There's residual casts after the LCC has been applied, which is typical crosstalk effect.

You can also see the shifted areas be clearly noisy, and as this is an extremely low noise sensor it means that the LCC algorithm is really pushing it.

You can clearly make images with this combination but it will be "unstable" in some cases it will work out fine, in others you get residual effects, often quite mild which you need to look hard to see like in those two 32HR shots. Sure that will be okay to some, but to me it's not acceptable for a high end system to perform this way. Then I rather use "yesterday's" hardware like an IQ380 on that 32HR...

As we know the Dalsa's are not without issues on the Rodies either, ripple and tiling can show its ugly face sometimes, but my preliminary guess from these jpegs is that this new CMOS will have much larger issues than those. Center frames are probably fine though, so the Phase One "A" system (=an Alpa with no movements) is probably okay.

[BernardLanguillier]

I guess that our friend Doug will cast some light on the shift performance when he gets his sample of the new back.

I would be surprised if Alpa had shot the 32mm without center filter though.

The whole appeal of the back as a universal solution is pretty much at stake here.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Chris Barrett]

@Jeffery, in the past, using the SK43 and the IQ260, it wasn't uncommon for me to shift up to 15mm.  With the SK35, I could get away with maybe 12.  So the 32mm HR may be a workable solution if it can go to 12 or 13mm.  The problem with architecture, though, was there was never a wider solution that was really workable and I always had to carry the 17 TS-E and a dslr for those occasional superwide shots.

Nodal stitching is a no go for me as I'm already always compositing for dynamic range and having to work rotations into that too is a nightmare for post.

I'm testing the back all day tomorrow alongside my A7r2 with Kevin.  I'll post my results.  Sadly, I have no wide Rodenstocks to try out.