IQ4 150 first thoughts (and about that battery life!)

[BernardLanguillier]

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.

And the same applies to the XF as far as I am concerned.

Cheers,
Bernard

[DaveRosenthal]

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.

Doug, I finally got the files back on a computer with some time to look at them. You were right--the previews on the back show give the impression that the "create" dark frame outperforms "prerecorded" dark frame. But, back in C1, long exposures with no darkframe creation (i.e. "prerecorded" in the menu) are perfect as far as I can tell with the 3-5 points of single pixel NR.

I was about to go out for a perfect dark sky photo op a few nights ago when the clouds rolled in... So, it turned into an impromptu testing session of stars against light clouds.

For anyone interested, attached is 100% crop of a 15 minute exposure with no dark frame creation (ISO 50, +1.5 stops exposure in C1) on the IQ4 150.

[cgarnerhome]

I received my IQ4 yesterday so I took it out this AM to make sure it worked!  Below are a couple of images that were quickly processed so excuse the flaws but it’s sometimes good to see real images.  My testing is very superficial so take it for what’s worth.  Dave provided a real initial review.

My observations are as follows –
•   A significant step up in the user interface.  Easier and faster to use in the field.
•   Much easier to ensure your images are sharp.
•   Battery life is a definitely an item that needs to be improved.  I took about 80 images over about 1.5 hours with an average exposure of around 3 seconds.  When I got home to charge the batteries they were almost completely drained.  I normally don’t take that many images but it does use more battery power than the IQ100.  I did not use live view.
•   Both lenses (40-80 & 75-150) performed well in terms of sharpness.  My hit rate was as good as the IQ100 (almost 100%).  So as long as your technique is good and you have good lenses the extra MPs are a significant benefit.
•   I experienced no bugs this morning.  I had installed the latest firmware (1.01.18) before I took it out. Again, this was a very limited test.
•   I did check the boot time and it was 17 seconds.  Slower than I would like but not a real issue for me.

[narikin]

And the same applies to the XF as far as I am concerned.

Oh, no it applies FAR more to the XF.
That camera is an ugly overweight beast, that has no place in the 21C, imho. 
Sure it has some party tricks, like Focus stacking, etc. But that does not redeem it from mirror slap, slowness, single point focus, no EVF option, etc. (Yes I own one)

Best suggestion to breath life into it - an EVF WLF screen - so you can look down and shoot with ES, for silent vibration free images.

Phase are going to fade away unless they can release a mirrorless body in the next year.
Fuji GFX-100, with IBS, is going to annihilate them. Period.

Tech cameras are their only secure foothold, imho
I'm saying this as someone with a lot of $ invested in Phase and tech cameras.

[Paul2660]

Still waiting to hear if P1 will enable Adhoc with future firmware, to allow Capture Pilot to connect in the field.  No word on this as of yet.  Not an EVF, (and I agree that one needs to happen for the XF somehow as the chip in the IQ4 surely has some type of phase detect focus capability.  If not what a shame.

But not being able to use Capture Pilot to frame a shot, especially when the camera is low down (where I would normally using a tilting screen) is disconcerting for me.  Just have gotten to used to using it both to trip the shutter on the XF and frame the shot.

Paul C

[Doug Peterson]

Still waiting to hear if P1 will enable Adhoc with future firmware, to allow Capture Pilot to connect in the field.  No word on this as of yet.

Not sure who you asked, but if you had asked me it would have been a right quick response...

Yes, the IQ4 wifi will be available via Adhoc.  This was one of the obvious items that simply didn't get done in time for version 1.0 firmware, but will come via future firmware update.

[Paul2660]

Good to know, thanks Doug,

Paul C

[BernardLanguillier]

Best suggestion to breath life into it - an EVF WLF screen - so you can look down and shoot with ES, for silent vibration free images.

Phase are going to fade away unless they can release a mirrorless body in the next year.
Fuji GFX-100, with IBS, is going to annihilate them. Period.

Tech cameras are their only secure foothold, imho
I'm saying this as someone with a lot of $ invested in Phase and tech cameras.

As a H6D-100c owner I feel exactly the same about the Hasselblad large sensor offering.

The X1D puts them overall in a better position but they appear to be moving much slower than Fuji also.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Christopher]

Actually the gfx100 won’t be mich smaller. Probably a lot lighter, but here Phase could do a lot by an evf instead of the super heavy viewfinder.

It still leaves the big mirror box, but it think the XF will be around for a while.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul2660]

Hopefully, the GFX100MP camera will get a few updates before it's finally released.  Has to be one of the strangest looking bodies I have seen in years.  As a GFX user, I prefer the body style without a built in grip/battery pack. 

Late 2019 will be interesting for Fuji.

Paul C

[cgarnerhome]

I would much rather have the 100MP in the GFX50R body!

[Christopher]

Ibis doesn’t fit in such a body. The GFX isn’t that strange it’s just like a 1D or Nikon Pro Level body. The final version will have the same shape, but certainly refined optics.

For me the GFX 50s shape in general is fantastic. Much better than the 50R or the new FF mirrorless cameras.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eronald]

Hopefully, the GFX100MP camera will get a few updates before it's finally released.  Has to be one of the strangest looking bodies I have seen in years.  As a GFX user, I prefer the body style without a built in grip/battery pack. 

Late 2019 will be interesting for Fuji.

Paul C

IBIS for a large sensor apparently needs a large battery. I would expect a 100R to follow at $5K with no IBIS, maybe a year or 18 months later.

Edmund

[hubell]

Hopefully, the GFX100MP camera will get a few updates before it's finally released.  Has to be one of the strangest looking bodies I have seen in years.  As a GFX user, I prefer the body style without a built in grip/battery pack. 

Late 2019 will be interesting for Fuji.

Paul C

Just hope that the GFX 100S shown at Photokina was a prototype that was quickly thrown together to make a statement of intent. I cannot imagine that is what Fuji intends to sell. It looks like something that was designed by a third grader whose experience designing cameras was derived from his use of building blocks. Hey, let's make it taller by adding another block!

[Christopher]

You will be surprised how similar the final version will look.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eronald]

You will be surprised how similar the final version will look.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The pro Nikon and Canon cameras are very good to hold vertically. This is reflected in the Fuji design. I think Hassy users have complained about vertical holdability in the past

Edmund

[hubell]

The pro Nikon and Canon cameras are very good to hold vertically. This is reflected in the Fuji design. I think Hassy users have complained about vertical holdability in the past

Edmund

Very cool design philosophy.  It's sort of like designing a car so that it looks/works best when you drive it in reverse, because occasionally you drive the car in reverse.

[eronald]

Very cool design philosophy.  It's sort of like designing a car so that it looks/works best when you drive it in reverse, because occasionally you drive the car in reverse.

The booster-SLR design is intended to be used horizontally by default, but easily rotated.  When covering the Paris fashion shows I was part of a crowd of photographers who shot hundreds of images every hour, always holding the camera vertical. Most had "pro" Nikon or Canon models with booster handle designs.

Nikon and Canon are decent at pro camera design - not stellar but decent. And there's a reason they've all adopted that strange shape, it allows the "booster" part to act as a vertical handle while containing hefty batteries that can move the AF motors faster, and incidentally keeps the warming batteries well away from the sensor. It's a halfway functional design, albeit not a pretty one. Halfway only because as soon as you want to look at top-plate lcd or twiddle a mode knob you need to rotate the camera back to landscape.

Designs can change. Old commercial airplanes had column yokes, by convention, but when Airbus moved to fly-by-wire they decluttered the cockpit and put in sidesticks. Windows PCs have mice, phones have touchscreens. It may be time to move away from  the booster-SLR design, but until someone innovates properly it's still the best we've got. One possible innovation would be to have a square sensor, another would be an internal sensor rotation mechanism, both have been tried 


Edmund

[narikin]

We are derailing this topic into Fuji body types, so let's stop, and get back O.T.

(but not till I've had my turn in saying that I much prefer the 50R body form (with better grip), and want 100Mp too! Yes I'll be ordering the IBIS GFX100 as soon as possible, despite my preferences. I also have no doubt that a GFR-100 will follow in due course)

[narikin]

Back on topic:

Was out with my IQ4 today, and still suffering from the Beta firmware. SO much is missing, it's really ridiculous.
Working tethered on XF,  couldn't find the power options (slow/fast charge from laptop USB-C) that were on the nicely evolved IQ3 firmware.
Anyone?

It's beyond me how Phase could try to change so much in one go, and end up with something that looks completely unchanged!

Basically feeling like I should hibernate for 3-5 months till firmware 2.0 comes out, and this thing is actually functioning like an IQ3.

In better news: Alpa has an IQ4 now, and are working hard on patching/hacking firmware that will work with their tech cams, especially the sync needed for FPS and Silex users.