p.1 #1 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
I'm sure the comparison probably isn't much of a surprise to the people in here, but lets just say, it's amazing... And if I actually had something worth taking a picture of nearby, it would have been even more amazing.
Needless to say, I did a pretty long writeup on my thoughts and some comparisons to my current 12mp Nikon and such on my blog post here:
p.1 #2 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
a Better comparrison would be between say a 5DII and the 645 with a 22mp back. I have seen some comparisons and the one thing that Medium format has an advantage is the 16 bit as opposed to 14 bit for the 5D. If I can get my business growing some more then I might just switch to Medium Format.
p.1 #3 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
That would no doubt be a more "fair" comparison. But I wasn't about to complain about getting to toy with an 80mp medium format back. I've worked with medium and even large format film before, including high-resolution scans from transparencies, but this was beautiful right from the start.
I agree, if I was making a lot more money, I would go straight to something like this (probably not an 80mp back though) just for the quality of files it produces for the type of work I typically shoot.
p.1 #4 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
I just helped my friend Benny Chan evaluate files from the IQ80, which is, indeed, very very good and no doubt, the best quality digital camera back available today. He used it on an Alpa technical camera with Schneider Digitars, which is the most precisely aligned way to shoot a MFDB. What we found, is that while the IQ80 is excellent, it's only just a bit better than the P45+ back he's currently using, but not $25K+ better - the cost of upgrading from the P45+ from Phase. The difference was incremental and not overwhelming. Things like fine type in a sign in the background were slightly better defined with fewer Bayer pattern artifacts, but these were the types of things you would only see in prints larger than five or six feet wide on a vertical image. Still, if you must have the best, have the discipline to use it to its potential, and have deep deep pockets, why not.
p.1 #5 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
Peter Figen wrote:
I just helped my friend Benny Chan evaluate files from the IQ80, which is, indeed, very very good and no doubt, the best quality digital camera back available today. He used it on an Alpa technical camera with Schneider Digitars, which is the most precisely aligned way to shoot a MFDB. What we found, is that while the IQ80 is excellent, it's only just a bit better than the P45+ back he's currently using, but not $25K+ better - the cost of upgrading from the P45+ from Phase. The difference was incremental and not overwhelming. Things like fine type in a sign in the background were slightly better defined with fewer Bayer pattern artifacts, but these were the types of things you would only see in prints larger than five or six feet wide on a vertical image. Still, if you must have the best, have the discipline to use it to its potential, and have deep deep pockets, why not....Show more →
Good summary. I agree that it would be difficult to justify buying unless you had deep pockets and nothing better to spend it on or for some reason needed files of that size. Considering I've printed images nearly 4 feet on the long side from 12mp files with "good" results, having 80mp files would be overkill for nearly any situation.
p.1 #6 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
What I DO really like about this system is the fact that as a photographer, it *SLOWS YOU DOWN* to think about your capture two or three times before you even reach for the shutter release.
I find there is nothing that significantly slows you down with MF digital. Yes a slower frame rate, but that's about it.
You can do exactly the same slower approach to shooting with any format.
I will do a shoot with just as many frames with a 35mm, MF or even large format.
p.1 #7 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
FredBGG wrote:
I find there is nothing that significantly slows you down with MF digital. Yes a slower frame rate, but that's about it.
You can do exactly the same slower approach to shooting with any format.
I will do a shoot with just as many frames with a 35mm, MF or even large format.
I generally do not shoot many shots.
Of course, that doesn't mean you COULDN'T go shooting willy-nilly with it, but if you are using a setup like that, odds are you aren't out shooting for the fun of it anyway. You would either be shooting landscape, and hopefully have some measure of patience for your shots, or likely have multiple helpers, models, a defined set and so on. Thus slowing you down anyhow. But I still felt that despite the "familiarity" of the camera compared to a DSLR, I felt the need to work slower so that the image captured was "perfect" the first shot.
He does workshops all over the world for customers interested in the product. Surprisingly he says most of the buyers are people just like you and me that have enough disposable income to spend $50,000 on some fun photography gear. It's not hardcore pros like you might think for the most part.
p.1 #9 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
FredBGG wrote:
I find there is nothing that significantly slows you down with MF digital. Yes a slower frame rate, but that's about it.
You can do exactly the same slower approach to shooting with any format.
I will do a shoot with just as many frames with a 35mm, MF or even large format.
I generally do not shoot many shots.
Before digital I used to shoot 35mm and 6X7 cm. Whenever I took the medium format out EVERY shot took longer. First it was on a tripod - every time. 35mm was too easy to hold & I hardly ever usd a tripod with it.
Every shot with the 6X7 was metered with a separate spot meter and I took great pains to crop carefully - either zooming with my feet or changing lenses. 35mm was too easy to be sloppy with. I do agree 100% that I took a lot fewer images when shooting with the 6X7
p.1 #10 · Took an 80 megapixel Phase One for a spin...
The economies are so much different shooting film that you almost always would shoot far less than you would today shooting digital. I think the most number of 120 rolls I ever shot in a shoot - over about three hours - was 53 rolls. Five hundred thirty shots. I recently shot 750 in an hour in a classroom at UCLA and never had to change film. Different tools. Different times.
He does workshops all over the world for customers interested in the product. Surprisingly he says most of the buyers are people just like you and me that have enough disposable income to spend $50,000 on some fun photography gear. It's not hardcore pros like you might think for the most part.
Actually, that doesn't surprise me at all. When I was working at a lab in Phoenix, one of our regular customers was a cosmetic dentist who happened to shoot medium format film and was a Leica collector, and quite a good photographer as well. Another frequent person in the lab frequently picked up his prints in one of his Ferrari's (yes, multiple Ferrari), but he was a Canon shooter. Did I mention he was a heart surgeon? Clearly these people are the target market for this sort of system, beyond the typical high-end studios or photographers.
