Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)  (Read 10118 times)

dchew

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1020
    • Dave Chew Photography
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #20 on: December 29, 2018, 12:17:38 pm »

I've been renting the 4150 the last few days to do a leather-sample project. In regards to the battery capacity, it is reminiscent of the original IQ series; the back does not accurately measure how much capacity is left in the battery. The back will blink battery dead, and alarm "not enough battery capacity", but when I pull out that battery and charge it the charger says 30% remaining.

So, good sign this will be improved with firmware.

Dave
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #21 on: December 29, 2018, 01:09:37 pm »

Should have been fixed before release.  SAD to see the same old tech batteries being used still.  They should be able develop a battery with more milliamperes.

At least IMO.

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

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #22 on: December 29, 2018, 04:31:18 pm »

Should have been fixed before release.  SAD to see the same old tech batteries being used still.  They should be able develop a battery with more milliamperes.

At least IMO.

Paul C
If they’re like most batteries, they’re not really batteries, they’re just a case containing some cells made by some company.  Since the XF uses the same “battery", I think we’re stuck with the overall size/style for some time. So without making them larger, it seems it might be possible to re-engineer what’s inside to get a little more storage. I haven’t torn one apart to see what cells are actually being used, maybe they’re the typical round style so quite a bit of extra space to use - and maybe they’ve maximized them with a custom rectangular cell.   It could be they just don’t have the resources to have custom cells designed to utilize the internal space.  considering a Pixel 2SL has a 3500ma battery and still room for the screen and electronics, it seems they could be more efficient.

But as mentioned, the firmware is still being tweaked, and I think battery life will get better.  I for one have no problem with it, I’d rather get my back mid January when it looks like it will arrive, and survive carrying a few extra batteries with me than wait while they tinker around with the firmware. 
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #23 on: December 29, 2018, 09:27:49 pm »

If they’re like most batteries, they’re not really batteries, they’re just a case containing some cells made by some company.  Since the XF uses the same “battery", I think we’re stuck with the overall size/style for some time. So without making them larger, it seems it might be possible to re-engineer what’s inside to get a little more storage. I haven’t torn one apart to see what cells are actually being used, maybe they’re the typical round style so quite a bit of extra space to use - and maybe they’ve maximized them with a custom rectangular cell.   It could be they just don’t have the resources to have custom cells designed to utilize the internal space.  considering a Pixel 2SL has a 3500ma battery and still room for the screen and electronics, it seems they could be more efficient.

But as mentioned, the firmware is still being tweaked, and I think battery life will get better.  I for one have no problem with it, I’d rather get my back mid January when it looks like it will arrive, and survive carrying a few extra batteries with me than wait while they tinker around with the firmware.

Low volume european tech. You need to be realistic, the thing works as specced from reports here, it's the world's highest resolution single-shot consumer camera, and so some compromises eg. battery life or display quality are inevitable in a  low-volume high-margin design.

Let's give them some credit - at least according to reports it works fine to make images.

Edmund
« Last Edit: December 29, 2018, 11:13:26 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

nik

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 218
    • Nick Vasilopoulos Photography
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #24 on: December 29, 2018, 10:50:01 pm »

Nice one Doug, reminds me of this Tom Waits song :) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2_snSkpULQ


The perfect camera costs $0, folds into the size of a coin (any smaller and you might lose it), has infinite ISO range, temperature-appropriate dispensers for red wine, scotch, espresso, and neosporin, and comes with a free kit lens with an infinite zoom and f/0 max aperture. It requires no menu, no buttons, and no power; it anticipates your intentions before you have them. It summons golden hour, double rainbows, or moody storms according to your preference. It inspires confidence in anyone you point it at, even your camera-shy relatives. Owning it means models show up on time, clients drop their weird requests, and invoices are paid on time. A special mode halts or even reverses aging, and the instruction manual reveals a surefire path to living a satisfying, meaningful, and enjoyable life.

Until we have that, every camera is a compromise of physical, performance, price, and philosophical factors. Different people will prioritize those factors differently and the same person might even prioritize these factors different from one day to the next, and that's not only okay, that's awesome.
Logged

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1044
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2018, 12:49:18 am »

That battery is not actually "low volume European tech" - it's an old Canon camcorder battery - so old (first used in 1997, if not earlier) that Canon no longer makes them as far as I can see, although they do make thicker versions that work on camcorders that hang the battery externally. The Phase One branded batteries have a higher listed capacity than the only other options (inexpensive no-name replacements)...
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #26 on: December 31, 2018, 07:38:00 am »

The last change to the P1 battery was the 3400 milliamperes version Li-on.

There are tons literally tons of companies that are making batteries that P1 could have approached to figure out a better solution.  It seems that the problems are both the fact that the current firmware is not reading the Li-on battery info correctly so the back is shutting off with as much as 30% of battery left, not so great for someone using the back for longer exposures.  And the current battery at 3400 millamperes is not able to carry the back for a very long period of time, if Live View is used.

Phase had plenty of time to firgure out a new battery for this back.  Sure the battery is a old Canon design, but I don’t believe the Canon designs were Li-on, but NiMh.  And yes the Canon batteries that are rated at a great milliamperes are taller.  You used to be able to use these in the old P45+ style backs, but the later IQ backs design went internal. 

The Phase battery has always been a weakness IMO.  And to bring out a back with a huge improvement in capabilities (from previous P1 quotes, it has the same processing power as a modern iPad), and then use the same old battery tech? To me very short sighted.  Firmware can only do so much to alivaite this.   And if I read correctly the IQ3 power share tech currently doesn’t work on the IQ4? 

I realize you can just get a banderalio and carry a lot of batteries in the field, like when I used to use a P45+, but it’s been over 11 years since that back was announced and shipped and P1 is still on pretty much the same battery tech Li-on. 

Everyone has their own acceptance levels.  It took P1 over 1 year to finally fix my XF’s battery door issue so change does come slowly for them. 

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

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #27 on: December 31, 2018, 10:48:11 am »

That battery is not actually "low volume European tech" - it's an old Canon camcorder battery - so old (first used in 1997, if not earlier) that Canon no longer makes them as far as I can see, although they do make thicker versions that work on camcorders that hang the battery externally. The Phase One branded batteries have a higher listed capacity than the only other options (inexpensive no-name replacements)...

Dan,

 The small company product I meant is the camera.

 New  regulations  put an end to the arms race for battery capacity in consumer camcorders, I think, which may be why there is no decent novel off the shelf solution for Phase to adopt. The advantage of off-the-shelf is that an ecosystem of contacts, chargers etc already exists for the designers to make use of - battery related issues - and especially battery contacts -  are a notorious death trap for all electronic designs, and a small company will do well to stay with a design which has proved reliable if not efficient.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Christopher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1499
    • http://www.hauser-photoart.com
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #28 on: December 31, 2018, 11:44:55 am »

My guess is 3400 is enough. Sure it’s not the top position, but as far as I know the x1d doesn’t have more not does Fuji’s gfx have or need.

I’m pretty confident that battery life will be very close to the IQ3 with XF and that has been excellent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Christopher Hauser
[email=chris@hauser-p

chrismuc

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 219
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #29 on: December 31, 2018, 04:16:29 pm »

The capacity (Wh or Ws = unit of energy, like Nm and Joule) of the PhaseOne battery is 7,2 V x 3.400 mAh = 24.480 mWh.
The capacity of the Fuji GFX battery is 10,8 V x 1.250 mAh = 13.500 mWh.
(the mAh value alone is meaningless without the operational voltage)
So, the PhaseOne battery provides nearly twice the capacity of the Fuji, but I it seams the PhaseOne backs consume 'much more' than the Fuji cameras, so the time of usage and the number of shots is less.
 
PS: European usage of <,> and <.> in numbers ;-)
Logged

Christopher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1499
    • http://www.hauser-photoart.com
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #30 on: December 31, 2018, 07:17:37 pm »

As I said it certainly not a battery problem ;) the capacity is more than enough


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Christopher Hauser
[email=chris@hauser-p

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #31 on: December 31, 2018, 11:14:42 pm »

As I said it certainly not a battery problem ;) the capacity is more than enough


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think this is a case where time will tell.

Comparing with Fuji is not so useful. The sensor doesn't eat up any juice hen it's not actually in use AFAIK as it is CMOS. The culprit is probably a powerful and power hungry off the shelf  embedded computer they  dropped in the back to "run C1". Maybe when someone does a disassembly of one of these we'll know more.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

DaveRosenthal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #32 on: January 01, 2019, 02:07:17 am »

OP here providing a bit of an update after a few days of use of the camera on the aforementioned trip.

Regarding all of the battery talk, as was pointed out, the IQ+XF system has quite a large battery already (50 watt-hours total.) The idea of Phase improving battery life by improving batteries is fairly absurd—the technology is already pushed to the limits by the entire electronics industry and I’m sure they are already sourcing the best ones they can. A 25% improvement would be unreasonable to expect and would take the 2 hour idle time to 2.5 hours—nothing. The attack must come from the power consumption side.

That said, the battery life that I first reported on hasn’t been a real issue for me so far in field usage for a few days. I carry my camera in a pack for landscape work and now just get used to hitting the power button first when taking it out of my pack and powering it down. Actually using the camera (I.e. live preview, reviewing photos, taking photos, etc.) doesn’t seem to drain battery particularly quickly.

Some other notes after a few more days of usage:
 - I *absoutely love* the ability to check focus in both live and review modes. This is a game changer for me. When I use my Phase it is because I am seeking resolution for a large print and with the XF3 there was absoutely no way to tell if you have really nailed focus/vibration until you open the file on your computer. This has already saved several shots for me as I realized, for example, that a 1/10 sec exposure on my 240mm, even in vibration delay mode, was subject to vibration blur that I wouldn’t have been able to detect on my IQ3.
 - The speed of operation is great.
 - The touch screen is slightly fidgity in terms of where you click, recognizing swipes, etc. No worse than IQ3 (or basically any other non-smartphone touch screen) but this could be improved. Part of the issue is the screen is not a modern full-stack lamination so there is a fair amount of parallax between emissive screen pixels and touch surface and you are often using a camera touch screen from a funny angle.
 - Well, this will be no surprise, but camera technique is crucial for exploiting the entire 150MP with shutter speeds < 4*focal length.
 - The exposure preview in live mode is awesome. But, it should do something smarter to emulate longer exposures than simply drop the frame rate to equal the shutter speed.
 - I did a bit of long-exposure work with and without dark frame creation. No official test, but it seems like if you are only talking exposures of <10 seconds, you can avoid dark frames. I did some much longer exposures (5 min, 15 min) and dark frame creation seemed to reduce hot pixels considerably. I still need to pull the files into C1 to see how well hot pixel NR takes care of all of the issues. I also hesitate to call this a representative test because I was working in unusually dynamic and cold temperature conditions.

And one quirk to talk to Phase about when I get home:
 - My 240BR fails to achieve infinity focus when it gets cold! I’ve been out in Wyoming and it’s been seriously cold (-15C). The lens works fine at room temp, but as it starts to cool down focus shifts. To be clear, this is not an AF issue. I can put the lens in MF mode, crank it all the way to the infinity hard stop and still be focusing on the midground! My 35BR actually seems to suffer the same fate, but the DOF at f8 is wide enough that it doesn’t matter (basically, the “infinity” hard stop is more of a hyper-focal distance.) Interestingly my 80mm seemed unaffected.

All in all, very happy to be using this amazing tool and, as I said before, I’m really excited to see where the Phase folks can take it from here.
Logged

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #33 on: January 01, 2019, 08:02:48 am »

- I did a bit of long-exposure work with and without dark frame creation. No official test, but it seems like if you are only talking exposures of <10 seconds, you can avoid dark frames. I did some much longer exposures (5 min, 15 min) and dark frame creation seemed to reduce hot pixels considerably. I still need to pull the files into C1 to see how well hot pixel NR takes care of all of the issues. I also hesitate to call this a representative test because I was working in unusually dynamic and cold temperature conditions

Please do look at the files in C1 with 3 to 5 points of single-pixel noise reduction. I think you'll be very pleasantly surprised.

Then remember that the IQ4 now runs the same Capture One processing algorithms, so once you can apply a custom style in-back (or otherwise activate single-pixel noise reduction) you can expect the same results when reviewing in-back.

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #34 on: January 01, 2019, 10:03:05 am »

Hello Dave,

I don't find the thoughts on a better battery absurd at all. It's old tech and the back took a huge tech improvement from the older IQ platform.  I agree that working on power consumption would also be a benefit. 

 The tech of the current cells way old, over 4 years, now, and in the digital world that is much longer.  The same battery that runs a P1 P45+ is the battery that is used in a P1 IQ4, which is going to take a much greater amount of battery, due to both processing for the new tech, and LiveView enhancements.  Battery tech is complex, I fully understand that, but if you look into other industries that are battery dependent, I believe you will see a much better improvement.  The Li-On cells in the P1 backs have limited intelligence, and really don't compare to most current camera batteries by other companies.  The technology is out there to create a battery with 2x the milliamperes of the current cell, and if it cost 2x the price I would gladly pay it.

It would be a nice feature if P1 could get the power sharing to work again on the IQ4 and XF and I understand this is coming sometime in the future.  Surprised it still was not available at 1st ship.

Glad you find the back to be an excellent upgrade from the XF and 100MP P1 solution. 

Paul C


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

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #35 on: January 01, 2019, 11:02:28 am »

Hello Dave,

 The technology is out there to create a battery with 2x the milliamperes of the current cell, and if it cost 2x the price I would gladly pay it.

Paul C

And there you have the issue: The performance of a $30K device is defined by a $100 accessory, and the user is prepared to pay $200 for it. But in fact Phase can get the supplementary $100 immediately with no dev cost by selling extra $100 batteries to the users as they are a crucial item. In fact it is necessary to have 3 "small" batteries to replace one hypothetical "large" one, because of the time lost in precautionary power down and power up, so Phase actually gets $300 by not supplying the larger pack..An interesting case of economics guaranteeing the opposite effect of a fault being remedied: Phase has for years had an incentive not to improve its battery life excessively as batteries provide a minor but steady sales revenue to dealers of $500 or so per back per year, and continued inconvenience to the owner who needs to care for them and keep the little things topped up, so many of them - maybe a second charger can also be sold?

The lesson of the inkjet printer cartridges has not been lost on business school graduates. Anyone notice that if you own a photo printer there is always one cartridge shouting to be replaced?

Edmund

« Last Edit: January 01, 2019, 11:37:02 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

DaveRosenthal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #36 on: January 01, 2019, 11:46:41 am »

And there you have the issue: The performance of a $30K device is defined by a $100 accessory, and the user is prepared to pay $200 for it. But in fact Phase can get the supplementary $100 immediately with no dev cost by selling extra $100 batteries to the users as they are a crucial item.
....
The lesson of the inkjet printer cartridges has not been lost on business school graduates. Anyone notice that if you own a photo printer there is always one cartridge shouting to be replaced?
Edmund

The Phase One battery is a nominal 25 watt-hours. It weighs 106 grams. That yields a power density of 230 Wh/kg. Compare this to the 250 Wh/kg for an individual cell in a modern Tesla (the pack itself is more like 170 WH/kg). If one could make batteries twice the capacity with the same size and weight, well, I hope they enjoy their billions well as they will help more than just Phase One users!

Some have suggested that Phase could have moved to a larger battery (in a different form factor) but personally I would much rather buy more and switch batteries if necessary so as to not crank the weight up any higher. Weight is my biggest challenge with the Phase—personally I would happily pay Phase at a rate of at least $5/gram to save weight from any part of the camera system. (E.g. I would buy a super-lightweight machined-magnesium XF body+finder which saved, say, 400g for a $2k premium any day of the week.)

At any rate, It’s fun to discuss the engineering tradeoffs of these systems. In a way they will never make total sense because they already trade off almost everything (especially price!) for a certain kind of performance.
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #37 on: January 01, 2019, 11:48:20 am »

Not trying to make a big deal out the battery issue.  I appears most using the new back are fine with both current issues (firmware not seeing full battery capacity, and power sharing not working).  I am sure both will get fixed with firmware updates over time.

For me, I will stay the course, as I just expected a bit more tech in the new back after almost 3 years of the IQ3100. P1 feels it's not needed, I understand and can make a decision based on what is there.  Obviously, I am very isolated in this opinion, but as a landscape shooter, never tethered, battery life is very important to me. 

The disconnect between tethered/router available and Capture Pilot working (i.e. no adhoc network for out in the field) really surprised me more than battery life.  Capture Pilot has become a pretty critical part of my workflow as with the last couple of firmware revs to IQ3100 the response time, and screen refresh time had gotten very acceptable, and it always give you the option to fire the shutter, no cabled remote.

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

DaveRosenthal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #38 on: January 01, 2019, 11:52:09 am »

Please do look at the files in C1 with 3 to 5 points of single-pixel noise reduction. I think you'll be very pleasantly surprised.

Then remember that the IQ4 now runs the same Capture One processing algorithms, so once you can apply a custom style in-back (or otherwise activate single-pixel noise reduction) you can expect the same results when reviewing in-back.

Thanks for the tip, Doug. I wasn’t sure if the single-pixel NR was part of the subset of algorithms that run in-camera but, given it is, I will certinally make a “long exposure” custom style for field use.
Logged

DaveRosenthal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)
« Reply #39 on: January 01, 2019, 12:18:46 pm »

For me, I will stay the course, as I just expected a bit more tech in the new back after almost 3 years of the IQ3100.

Paul, I get this sentiment completely. After using my IQ3 for years, I of course had dreams of of what an IQ3 successor could have been. Relative to that dream, the lack of advancement of the physical design was a bit disappointing and distracts (detracts?) from the substantial internal advancements. If the IQ4 generation was 2/3 the depth, 2/3 the weight, had a bigger, better screen, etc. it would have felt like a true next gen device.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up