More Than Megapixels - An IQ180 Field Review

[wolfnowl]

Looking forward to reading more about your trip and this back!  At the risk of being picky, is the minimum ISO 32 or 35?  Seems to bounce back and forth... but I've never heard of ISO 35.

Mike.

[EricWHiss]

A slight difference in sensors between Aptus 12 and IQ180 was mentioned in the article.  I'm really curious to know what differences are and how the image quality compares between the Leaf and Phase backs.

[Christopher]

I don't think there is one. The actual sensor is the same. However, i am not sure. I would guess everything else is different.

[EricWHiss]

Here's the quote from the article that prompted my question, "What I see from the IQ180 is resolution that, with the exception of the Leaf Aprus II-12, is the highest in the world. (Leaf is owned by Phase One and a similar (though not identical) Dalsa sensor is used in that back))"

If not identical, then what are the differences?   I realize that Phase adds their own circuits after the sensor and may handle the images different in RAW conversion.  Just curious to know how much difference in the final image quality there will be?

[BernardLanguillier]

If not identical, then what are the differences?   I realize that Phase adds their own circuits after the sensor and may handle the images different in RAW conversion.  Just curious to know how much difference in the final image quality there will be?

The phase has sensor plus, right? It is unclear to me whether this is only signal treatment of whether there an actual difference to the sensor involved.

Cheers,
Bernard

[A.Garcia]

Sensor + may need some different output shift registers architecture.

[Anders_HK]

The phase has sensor plus, right? It is unclear to me whether this is only signal treatment of whether there an actual difference to the sensor involved.
 

I believe that Sensor+ is pixel binning, while Aptus-II 12 has Sensorflex which seems to enable crop of actual pixels to reduced size raw file. Can someone please confirm?

If not identical, then what are the differences?   I realize that Phase adds their own circuits after the sensor and may handle the images different in RAW conversion.  Just curious to know how much difference in the final image quality there will be?

Indeed it would be interesting to hear of actual differences both technical of IQ 180 and Aptus 12 sensor implementation and image quality. Is it only that IQ 180 cost so much more for the user interface that is mere added electronics and inside computer parts?

“Back in February when I had a brief two days with a pre-production IQ180 in Mexico, my initial response on seeing the files was that yes, having the extra resolution (over my 60MP P65+) was nice, but it paled in comparison with the other advances of the IQ180. Now, with a full production back in-hand, and the bulk of its features fully implemented (with more coming soon), its possible to start to take the full measure of this remarkable device.”

Was this not at same time as looking at Aptus-II 12?? ? ??

Would above quoted  statement not mean that Aptus-II 12 is the more remarkable tool of the two, since arguably it may not be realistic to justify the extra $$ for the IQ for the sake of what the user interface actually brings to the images after capture, and perhaps not in reality brings that much more to the capture process if one really thinks about it?

Regardless of the sidebar disclaimer the article seem to me to come across as biased, with special delivery and all. Per memory the two other articles that were originally published of Aptus-II 12 and IQ180 were published in a row at time for the IQ series launch, whereas the Aptus-II 12 had been announced several months earlier. Thus should one perhaps question a fan boy advertising and favoring of one brand with much too glaring eyes? Internet publishing should in my opinion be neutral, since same as other publishing it should exhibit a responsibility towards the readers. Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business . BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

Regards
Anders

[Robcat]

Is it reasonable to assume that the IQ140 and 160 will have similar image quality (apart from resolution), and the same features/functionality?

[Anders_HK]

IQ 180 is one generation newer sensor than IQ 140 and 160, same as Leaf Aptus-II 12 is one newer generation than Aptus-II 8 and 10.

[DaFu]

Michael left a note at the end of the article:

Please note that the images included with this article are not intended for pixel peeping.
There is nothing that can be determined about a 500MB 16 bit image file from viewing on an 8 bit 100ppi monitor.
At least a 20X24" print is what's needed.

An appropriate warning . . . but here's something odd—nearly every one of those pictures seemed "right" in a way I can't really describe.

Fascinating.

Dave

[barryfitzgerald]

Interesting article I would like to see some debate about tonality though this always seems to get passed over. Very subjective of course but still.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Just some points. There are some differences between systems using the same sensor technology. Differences may be in CGA (Color Grid Array) and electronic paths, like preamps and cooling.

A very major source of potential differences is the postprocessing pipeline. Ther seems to be a broad agreement that manufacturers software gives best image quality, even if Jeff Schewe may argue that the same results can be achieved in Lightroom/ACR. My guess that the different profiles in programs like Capture One represent different looks, and that is a major factor in perceived image quality.

Best regards
Erik

I believe that Sensor+ is pixel binning, while Aptus-II 12 has Sensorflex which seems to enable crop of actual pixels to reduced size raw file. Can someone please confirm?

Indeed it would be interesting to hear of actual differences both technical of IQ 180 and Aptus 12 sensor implementation and image quality. Is it only that IQ 180 cost so much more for the user interface that is mere added electronics and inside computer parts?

“Back in February when I had a brief two days with a pre-production IQ180 in Mexico, my initial response on seeing the files was that yes, having the extra resolution (over my 60MP P65+) was nice, but it paled in comparison with the other advances of the IQ180. Now, with a full production back in-hand, and the bulk of its features fully implemented (with more coming soon), its possible to start to take the full measure of this remarkable device.”

Was this not at same time as looking at Aptus-II 12?? ? ??

Would above quoted  statement not mean that Aptus-II 12 is the more remarkable tool of the two, since arguably it may not be realistic to justify the extra $$ for the IQ for the sake of what the user interface actually brings to the images after capture, and perhaps not in reality brings that much more to the capture process if one really thinks about it?

Regardless of the sidebar disclaimer the article seem to me to come across as biased, with special delivery and all. Per memory the two other articles that were originally published of Aptus-II 12 and IQ180 were published in a row at time for the IQ series launch, whereas the Aptus-II 12 had been announced several months earlier. Thus should one perhaps question a fan boy advertising and favoring of one brand with much too glaring eyes? Internet publishing should in my opinion be neutral, since same as other publishing it should exhibit a responsibility towards the readers. Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business . BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

Regards
Anders

[Steve Hendrix]

I believe that Sensor+ is pixel binning, while Aptus-II 12 has Sensorflex which seems to enable crop of actual pixels to reduced size raw file. Can someone please confirm?

Indeed it would be interesting to hear of actual differences both technical of IQ 180 and Aptus 12 sensor implementation and image quality. Is it only that IQ 180 cost so much more for the user interface that is mere added electronics and inside computer parts?

“Back in February when I had a brief two days with a pre-production IQ180 in Mexico, my initial response on seeing the files was that yes, having the extra resolution (over my 60MP P65+) was nice, but it paled in comparison with the other advances of the IQ180. Now, with a full production back in-hand, and the bulk of its features fully implemented (with more coming soon), its possible to start to take the full measure of this remarkable device.”

Was this not at same time as looking at Aptus-II 12?? ? ??

Would above quoted  statement not mean that Aptus-II 12 is the more remarkable tool of the two, since arguably it may not be realistic to justify the extra $$ for the IQ for the sake of what the user interface actually brings to the images after capture, and perhaps not in reality brings that much more to the capture process if one really thinks about it?

Regardless of the sidebar disclaimer the article seem to me to come across as biased, with special delivery and all. Per memory the two other articles that were originally published of Aptus-II 12 and IQ180 were published in a row at time for the IQ series launch, whereas the Aptus-II 12 had been announced several months earlier. Thus should one perhaps question a fan boy advertising and favoring of one brand with much too glaring eyes? Internet publishing should in my opinion be neutral, since same as other publishing it should exhibit a responsibility towards the readers. Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business . BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

Regards
Anders

Yes, the IQ series (and the P65+/40+) all perform an innovative method of pixel binning with no crop of the sensor. But the IQ also can do a similar function to the SensoFlex function in the Aptus-II 12 (not sure if it's implemented yet).

I would say that the user interface is far more than just mere added electronics and computer parts. That would be like saying a MacBook Pro is just electronics and computer parts. There's much more involved, and similarly to a Mac product, I would say the interface, and the development of the interface, the implementation of the interface, the reliability and the operability of the interface with the components is quite a significant entity in itself and probably involved far more cost than the hardware components that are utilized.

That said, I also have always felt the interface of the Leaf Aptus series was and is a great achievement - logical, intuitive, and highly functional. And Leaf is prepping a complete interface update as well.

I feel both products have their own respective merits. One of the merits of the Leaf Aptus-II 12 is producing an 80MP capture device that is $12,000 less than the IQ180. Whether the additional $12,000 is justified for the IQ180 is very much a subjective perspective. Our clients are saying yes in dramatic numbers.

With that said, Leaf Aptus-II 12's are selling well.
http://www.captureintegration.com/category/news/

I don't see the issue over product neutrality. Michael goes to great lengths to clarify his position and relationship with vendors. The fact that he owns a Phase One product and has for years been a Phase One user should be enough full disclosure. I don't expect complete neutrality from him, and if there is some fan-boyness, I don't really blame him. I don't think he has ever committed that he will always be completely neutral (and who really is?). Considering he's a user of the product, I don't mind some fan-boyness because - at a not inconsiderable sum - he transparently has acknowledged that he has chosen this product for his personal use.


Steve Hendrix

[michael]

I have to say, I really hate the phrase "Fan Boy". It implies some sort of blind product admiration regardless of a product's merits.

As someone who has spent a significant part of his own money to buy a succession of Phase backs over the years, and who has also roundly criticized the company when they have screwed up, I suggest that it might not be the most appropriate phrase.

Special treatment? Yes – I suppose so. As someone who publishes a large widely read web site (the largest apparently covering medium format digital), it makes total sense for companies to get new products into my hands as soon as possible. Leaf has done this in the past, and quite a few other companies do as well...Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Epson, Olympus, etc, etc.

So, what else is new?

Michael

[Steve Hendrix]

I have to say, I really hate the phrase "Fan Boy". It implies some sort of blind product admiration regardless of a product's merits.

As someone who has spent a significant part of his own money to buy a succession of Phase backs over the years, and who has also roundly criticized the company when they have screwed up, I suggest that it might not be the most appropriate phrase.

Special treatment? Yes – I suppose so. As someone who publishes a large widely read web site (the largest apparently covering medium format digital), it makes total sense for companies to get new products into my hands as soon as possible. Leaf has done this in the past, and quite a few other companies do as well...Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Epson, Olympus, etc, etc.

So, what else is new?

Michael

Just for the record Michael, in my defense of you, I was only using the term "fanboy" in reference to Anders post. I don't appreciate the term fanboy either. I do actually know some who might fit the description, but you would not be one of them, and you're 100% correct, generally speaking, it is not a complimentary term.


Steve Hendrix

[Anders_HK]

Michael,

Thanks for your added explanations. It can of course be a fine line to write neutral and it is appreciated that this forum permits open discussion on matters. The new article by Mark is interesting as well and comes across per my impression more neutral. However, I would like to again point out that the quote used likewise in that new article "There is no question in my mind that in terms of image quality, the IQ 180 is currently the "King of the Hill" of  single shot digital capture devices." is not proven or necessarily correct and the Aptus/Afi-II 12 should be mentioned in comparison. It seems to beg for an article that I suggested in above:

A neutral article analyzing the differences and similarities of the Aptus-II 12 and IQ 180 would be welcome. The interface is different yes, but what else? Leaf still has the largest screen in the business . BUT the most important is image quality, is it not??? Leaf has more history of implementing Dalsa sensors, thus perhaps and indeed it is not warranted that IQ180 is in top of image quality???

May I suggest an article "Aptus-II 12 Field Review" on the matter?

Are articles also edited after comments and corrections notified and made in this forum?

In e.g. forum comments to the recent article on Alpa STC, myself and others pointed out that "To my knowledge no MF camera has this adjustment capability, and the Alpa is the only MF technical camera to offer a shimming solution for MF backs." was not a correct assessment. The Hy6, Pentax 645 apparent both have these features. Are articles updated per comments and corrections made by members in the forum?

Thank you.

Regards
Anders

[EricWHiss]

Michael or anyone else - can you address the question I had about the differences in image quality between the Aptus 12 and the IQ 180, and also about the differences in the sensors?   

[marcmccalmont]

I'm going to assume that liveview focusing will alleviate the need to shim the back? Comments
Marc

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

No comments on 'Fan Boy"-ism...

The reviews on this site are based on user experience that Michael Reichmann and other contributors use for their picture taking. The reviews are not comparative tests. Sometimes it happens that Michael compares stuff, but that is not usually the case. The idea is more about sharing the experience.

No one in this world is unbiased, not even me! We have certain expectations, previous experience. Meeting with the people developing and building the stuff certainly can create a positive relation to the equipment.

The way I see it, Michael and Mark write about equipment they actually bought. That is a real investment and a well informed one for sure. Both gentlemen can do an unbiased review of some different equipment, like the Aptus, but they probably prefer the equipment originally chosen.

Probably not much difference between the two. Phase controls both companies and I'd suggest that both share R&D.

I'd really expect that what matters most is not the back, but what is in front of it (subject, lens), under it (tripod) and behind it (photographer).

Best regards
Erik

I have to say, I really hate the phrase "Fan Boy". It implies some sort of blind product admiration regardless of a product's merits.

As someone who has spent a significant part of his own money to buy a succession of Phase backs over the years, and who has also roundly criticized the company when they have screwed up, I suggest that it might not be the most appropriate phrase.

Special treatment? Yes – I suppose so. As someone who publishes a large widely read web site (the largest apparently covering medium format digital), it makes total sense for companies to get new products into my hands as soon as possible. Leaf has done this in the past, and quite a few other companies do as well...Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Epson, Olympus, etc, etc.

So, what else is new?

Michael

[michael]

Frankly, comparing image quality between the Aptus II 12 and Phase IQ180 is a bit like counting the hairs on the beards on the angels sitting on a pin. It would be the worst case of pixel peeping.

At this level of performance there are so many small variables that such a comparison would be fraught with difficulty.

The real differences aren't so much in the image quality as in the operational side of things. The Phase is hands-down the better back when it comes to features. But the Aptus provides similar image quality for many thousands less.

Michael