Phase IQ series Live View

[vjbelle]

Your review is dead on the money and doesn't need much further comment.  I also have all of the equipment that you have reviewed and totally agree that a Disto and HPF rings AND an accurately aligned lens/body will be much faster and less frustrating for accurate focusing. 

Victor

[Schewe]

While I've yet to get my IQ 180, the big dividing line for me is whether or not the just released live view would enable me to shoot with a tech camera without either a sliding back adapter or swapping the ground glass with the back. That is a line in the sand regarding tech camera use.

In the studio I can put my back on a Sinar camera and shoot tethered. I've tried the previous C1 live view option and found it unworkable...but in the studio I really don't care about the sliding back adapter which I use cause it works for still life images fine.

The question then becomes can the IQ 180 live view option eliminate the need for a sliding back adapter or ground glass in the field?

I don't mind using alternative methods of rough focus and framing...and I don't mind firing off a capture to "see" what I got. But, if live view as just recently released allows one to go into the field with the ability to fine tune framing and focus, then I see that as a benefit (combined with traditional viewfinders).

When shooting with the 645 camera, I don't think the live view will offer me too much. The focus mask is more useful. It's really a question of usability with tech cameras.

[vjbelle]

Jeff,

For sure you will not need a ground glass or sliding back in the field.  Whether or not live view eliminates that would be something you would have to decide.  I have found that the use of a Disto and HPF rings is extremely fast and extraordinarily accurate in the field.  I shoot with longer lenses 60, 100, 150 where focus accuracy is critical and I can nail focus with the Disto.  The few quick images I took using just live view didn't save me any time but I was able to get into accurate focus.  The IQ180 is really a leap forward as far as usability that you should truly consider. 

Victor

[marcmccalmont]

While I've yet to get my IQ 180, the big dividing line for me is whether or not the just released live view would enable me to shoot with a tech camera without either a sliding back adapter or swapping the ground glass with the back. That is a line in the sand regarding tech camera use.

In the studio I can put my back on a Sinar camera and shoot tethered. I've tried the previous C1 live view option and found it unworkable...but in the studio I really don't care about the sliding back adapter which I use cause it works for still life images fine.

The question then becomes can the IQ 180 live view option eliminate the need for a sliding back adapter or ground glass in the field?

I don't mind using alternative methods of rough focus and framing...and I don't mind firing off a capture to "see" what I got. But, if live view as just recently released allows one to go into the field with the ability to fine tune framing and focus, then I see that as a benefit (combined with traditional viewfinders).

When shooting with the 645 camera, I don't think the live view will offer me too much. The focus mask is more useful. It's really a question of usability with tech cameras.

That is the precise reason I went for the IQ180 I sure hope after the investment live view lives up to the price tag
if not I would have been better off investing in the LS lenses for the DF camera vs Cambo wrs + Rodenstocks
Marc

[ErikKaffehr]

Jeff,

Two questions that come to my mind and you may be in the position to answer:

1) It seems that it matters that lens and back is aligned within 10 microns with today's sensors, how well is the ground glass in a sliding back aligned with the sensor surface?

2) How exact is the focusing mask?

The 10 microns are coming from Mark's demo of the effects of shimming and also from Joseph Holmes discussions of accuracy in the MF world.

Best regards
Erik

While I've yet to get my IQ 180, the big dividing line for me is whether or not the just released live view would enable me to shoot with a tech camera without either a sliding back adapter or swapping the ground glass with the back. That is a line in the sand regarding tech camera use.

In the studio I can put my back on a Sinar camera and shoot tethered. I've tried the previous C1 live view option and found it unworkable...but in the studio I really don't care about the sliding back adapter which I use cause it works for still life images fine.

The question then becomes can the IQ 180 live view option eliminate the need for a sliding back adapter or ground glass in the field?

I don't mind using alternative methods of rough focus and framing...and I don't mind firing off a capture to "see" what I got. But, if live view as just recently released allows one to go into the field with the ability to fine tune framing and focus, then I see that as a benefit (combined with traditional viewfinders).

When shooting with the 645 camera, I don't think the live view will offer me too much. The focus mask is more useful. It's really a question of usability with tech cameras.

[marcmccalmont]

Jeff,

Two questions that come to my mind and you may be in the position to answer:

1) It seems that it matters that lens and back is aligned within 10 microns with today's sensors, how well is the ground glass in a sliding back aligned with the sensor surface?

2) How exact is the focusing mask?

The 10 microns are coming from Mark's demo of the effects of shimming and also from Joseph Holmes discussions of accuracy in the MF world.

Best regards
Erik

This is the reason I want liveview focusing to work, nothing like focusing @ 100% right off the sensor! no need for shimming or calibration
Marc

[Schewe]

1) It seems that it matters that lens and back is aligned within 10 microns with today's sensors, how well is the ground glass in a sliding back aligned with the sensor surface?

That's for four corner accuracy at infinity. When I work in the studio, I'm usually 1/10 to 1/1 and using swings & tilts with shifts which means shimming the back isn't so critical. My sliding back adapter has decent accuracy to the point where the ground glass and the sensor are pretty darn close to being on the same plane. And, shooting tethered it's easy to confirm sharpness with a 1:1 preview in C1.

As far as the focus mask in C1, it's pretty good...how it is in the IQ 180, I don't know...I don't have mine yet and I've only played around a bit with Michael's.

[vjbelle]

As far as the focus mask in C1, it's pretty good...how it is in the IQ 180, I don't know...I don't have mine yet and I've only played around a bit with Michael's.

You will be pleasantly surprised at how well the focus mask works.... but it can be fooled just as in C1.  The entire system must be calibrated and that requires more than just setting a lens to infinity.  Longer lenses are much better for calibration because of their limited depth of field.  However, most users limit their tech cameras for wide lenses which, even at f5.6, have such a deep DOF that accurate calibration is limiting.  Anyway you will be very happy with your IQ180..... lots for you to look forward to.

Victor

[Schewe]

Anyway you will be very happy with your IQ180..... lots for you to look forward to.

Yeah...when it finally gets here!!!

I've been promised I'll get mine at least a week before the Palouse PODUS...but I won't yet have a tech camera to test. I'll try borrowing Mark's :~)