Any Advantage? Phase or Multi shot

[Bill12]

I am a product/ advertising photographer. I only shoot in the studio and I only shoot tethered.
I currently shoot on a 11 megapixel Jenoptix multishot back. I am looking at getting a second system.
I like the Software for Phase One, but I don't like that it is just single shot and now geared towards the mobile shooter. I am considering purchasing a new P45 system with a new P2 and some more lenses. Or I am considering purchasing a Jenoptik or Sinarback 54H. My concern is that the P45 is going to have lots of Moire and is not going to be as sharp as a good 4 shot. I have friends that own both, and they each praise thier system. If there is any other opinions on this , I would love to hear it. In the past it has been a real pain to get rid of Moire and apply those filters after the fact.

[Stefan1]

Hi Bill,

this question is difficult to answer. I dont know whether there is someone
who uses both, sinar an Phase One ore someone who switched from one
system to the other so that you can compare in working conditions.

From my experience (only P1 one shot) I only have moire problems in
situations where I couldnt have used four shot: people with clothes.
I do a lot of studio shooting tethered too, but I dont shoot often furniture with
draprey e.g. In other static sets I mostly could avoid moire by changing
position or aperture a little.

I tested Eyelike 11 MP 4 shot before buying PhaseOne in 2003. I was not
satisfied with grey balance. In gradation of lights I had a hard breakaway
from 240 on. In one shot mode I had blooming and less sharpness.
After that I bought H20 and had so much better results.

A friend uses Sinar 54. He complaines about slow improoving of software and
some strange new features. Live preview was one big reason to go for Sinar.
In version 5 live preview doesnt work anymore with 1/30\" only with 1/8\".
So you better buy big curtains for your studio.

There is still one thing to consider. Sinar was short before wash-out.
From my experience Jenoptic is a little bit inertial and digital imaging
is only a little part of there business. My faith in Phase One is much higher
(even when I complained about interaction of P25 and my iBook)

Just my 2 cents
Hope this helps..

[Joris1]

Bill,

I shoot virtually everything in the studio and tethered too, and find that I had problems with moire on perhaps one or two items out of thousands (and they were solved by slightly changing camera position). As long as you're not a fashion photographer I see no problems.

I have not yet decided to upgrade to the P45 (I use the P25), because I have hardly ever encountered size problems, even though a lot of my shots are used very, very large. I first want to see some initial reports from people who did upgrade: I am happy with the combination I work with and don't want to spoil the magic quite yet.

On occasions where I have to increase files after all I find that interpolating (I use Genuine Fractals, which does a better job than Photoshop) and adding subtle grain afterwards looks better at A1/300dpi than a ditto scan from a 4x5\" slide.
I have considered multi-shot cameras, but find that on so many occasions you can't use them: outdoors, precarious wobbly positions, steam, water, people...
And whatever subtle gain there might be in sharpness surely doesn't show in offset printing?

[NN247001UL]

Hi Bill,

I use a P25 on a Rollie Xact II and on a Hassy 555 ELD - mostly tethered in studio.

The bulk of my work is laydown of soft goods for catalog but I also do a fair amount of product shots on location.

Having used the Leaf volare tiple pass for years and then the Leaf Valeo 11 as well, I can say that the P25 provides and excellent, sharp and well color balanced image. I've never seen better.

That said, I do have a huge issue with moire when shooting laydown clothing. I do not agree that a simole adjustment of f-stop or angle is an exceptable solution and in fact I have yet to find it effective unless the angle change is dramatic (and yes, for those of you who know about this, I have tried other focal lengths as well).

This is usually only an issue when shooting laydown and only on certain colors and fabrics. My location work is beautiful and I am very happy with the back.

My hope is that the P45 improves the moire issue and digital will final be \"there\".

Hope this helps,

Brion McCarthy

[Bill12]

Thanks for the good info. I am considering purchasing an X act II, can you tell me about your experience with it. Is it a good body?

Thanks
Bill

[Stefan1]

Hi Bill,

I tested several bodies in combination with several digital backs
because every dealer had another combination.

I was was not so much satisfied with x-act. As far as I remember shift and tilt
is small and mechanical solidity coud be better. I had an offer of a nearly
new one for a small amount and I did not take it.
If I would buy a new system my choice woud be Plaubel PL69D
(www.plaubel.com)

[Bill12]

Thanks for the info.
I was actually given one of those Plaubels with my last digital camera purchase and don't like it very much. I soon switched back to the P2.

[juan1]

I have owned the P20 for about 18months now. Like many others I love and appreciate the quality that the back gives for most of my assignments. However pattern moire is still an issue for some subjects that I have photographed. Over the past few months I have been photographing a lot paintings for artists for giclee reproductions on the phase back (Previously I would shoot on 4x5 or 8x10 and drum scan the images myself). Every now and then I get pattern moire on some of the paintings. This prompted me to try a 4 shot capture back from Imacon/hasselblad. While I still prefer the workflow of Capture One and the quality build of the P20; I did like the sharp and rich colours from the Imacon (and the moire dissappeared too). However upon inspection at 300 percent the images did diplay kind of cross hatch pattern. Imacon still hasn't given me reason why this happens.

To my point now. I started thinking that imacons 4 shot capture is really driven via firmware of the back and flexcolor software. Both companies Phase and Imacon are using the same chip. Is there any reason why Phase could not incorporate this into capture one software? Any thoughts? Is this possible? Or are there legal and patent considerations?

There may be more to it. But to my simple way of thinking......


Juan Houston