I have to agree that the IQ260 is very disappointing in low light. I had the P45+ and it excelled once the sun went down or before it came up. Saturated colours, low noise at ISO50, even on long exposures. The IQ260 basically sucks in that situation - weak colours, terrible shadow noise - to the point of destroying details in an image even at ISO140. And ISO200 and above are basically unusable. In good light, it's amazing, but even then I've noticed a greenish cast on many images that needs 2-4 points of magenta correction to look right. [It could be C1 v8 doing this as the daylight shots from other cameras (D800e, A7r, 1DsIII) have shown something similar when using Daylight WB.] So, I, for one, am really missing my P45+. I haven't fallen for the IQ260: it feels like a re-hash of a P65+ rather than new tech. A full-frame IQ250 might be the answer but only if it does low light well!
voidshatter:
Your dissatisfaction with the IQ260 is well known. Does not mean it is a bad product or that it has low Dynamic Range (it has MAYBE a stop less than the D810) in most dawn till dusk situations. It is just not for you I guess. Maybe digital backs are not for you either. The beauty of it all is that nowadays there are lot's of amazing choices out there, and now with the 5DS/R there will be even more. Can't wait for some real testing of those cameras.
Btw, where are you from?
These is a lot to consider these days. I am currently a 260 user but would rather have the DR of the 150/250/Credo 50. From my work, the 260 at base iso 50 (some consider it 100 I am still not sure) will do an OK job on most shooting situations, as long as you don't need a fast shutter speed, say 1/60 or higher. I use the 28 HR, 40 HR-W and 60XL mainly and use the CF on the 28mm and 60mm so this cuts between 2.0 and 2.5 stops of light. I also use a Heliopan CF on the 40mm in low light situations as I feel it helps on noise in the shifts (12mm to 15mm). However I still have situations where I missed a shift exposure and thus the shadows suffer. I also can confirm that CCD love light. It's just that simple so on a normal exposure where you have bright and shadow areas, the 260 will NOT pull in the details as well in the shadows. C1 8 does help a lot over C1 7, but there are still times where I am looking at a shot and when I pull up the shadow areas, there is just mush. Where as with a 250, you can pull up 2.5 stops almost black and still see useable details. I have seen this with the DT Library testing and many test shots from different forums, manly from 50c shots.
If you have no wind, and can live with around 1/8th to 1/30th max of a shutter speed, you can do wonderful work with a 260. However if you push it to 200 iso to get to 1/125 or 1/250, then all bets tend to be off, in regards to shadows. If you push the iso to 400, you will start to see pretty harsh overall loss in image quality, at least I do. So, its not a great solution, as most tech Schneiders prefer to be in the F11 to F16 range and I find the Rrodenstocks I use do best in the F8 to F11 range, so you can't just open up the lens, you can but you start to suffer in overall DOF, again much more so with the Schneiders.
Yes, sensor plus, will give you great 400 and 800, but at a 3/4 loss in resolution, so I to me that's a trigger I rarely pull. You just don't invest in that much back to only get 15MP.
Where the 260 suffers, is long exposure, and for Phase One to say it will get 1 hour to me is a bit excessive. You can shoot it 1 hour but you won't be using the image for very much as the total noise and stuck pixels are way off the scale. This is not the way the P45+ worked as I have hundreds of 30 and 50 minute shots with it from night work and 30 to 40 10 to 15 minute shots and they are extremely clean, when taken at be iso of 50. From my testing taking a 260 much past 10 minutes is going to cause a very hard push in noise and overall stuck pixels. Phase may have made some internal non published changes, similar to how they fixed early P45+ cameras (mine was one of them), but so far I have not seen anything published.
I am sure a new back will be announced this year from Phase, CCD or CMOS is anyone's guess. If CMOS and full frame then even more issues may come out to the current lineup of tech lenses.
From Void's testing with the 250, I feel that in most situations, the 12mm shifts are fine, and in many cases, 15mm is totally OK. The extra DR in the shots is just amazing and in fact discouraging at the same time for a 260 owner, as currently there is no attractive way to move to a 250 without taking a huge loss. I have pretty much realized I can live with the 1:3 crop and 50MP output.
I also take a bit different tack to the CCD MF or CMOS MF vs a D810 with a good lens. I am picky and spend a lot of time on my work, and a D810 with a 14-24 at 14mm F 8 will do a darn fine job corner to corner. NO you will not be able to get to the same size as the output from the IQ180 or IQ260, but this is 80/60 MP vs 36MP. That is just basic. If you have to interpolate you always lose, always. However the D810 output I print stands up very well to around 30 x 40 which is about the largest print I tend to make. It totally compares with my MF in print sizes 12 x 18, 16 x 20, 18 x 24 and 20 x 30. I just don't see much difference. Any folks, it's only a print where this would matter as if you feel it makes a difference on webwork I don't agree. The web is 72 dpi, net. No two people have the same setup on their monitors, so you have no real idea what they are seeing. This obviously may not be true if you are working with a graphic artist that understands how to view such work on the web, but the vast majority of folks don't, and don't want to take the time to learn.
Paul
