Medium format multispectral imaging with a Phase One IQ4 Achromatic

[JMC]

I've just had a very geeky few days evaluating a Phase One IQ4 Achromatic camera. Medium format BSI sensor (53.4 mm x 40.0 mm), 151Mp, black and white. Thanks to Teamwork Digital Ltd in the UK for making this possible and sending it to me along with an adapter to use my Hasselblad lenses and a really solid tripod.

 

This was one that really interested me, as it should be good for UV as well as visible and IR, and I could try out my Zeiss UV Sonnar on it, as that was made for the Hasselblad 6x6 cameras.

 

First impressions, it is very solidly built, and very well made. Here's a couple of pictures of the camera with some of the lenses I was trying out (El Nikkor 80mm f5.6, and the Zeiss UV Sonnar).

 

 

Was able to take some images in UV, visible and IR and thought I'd share a few here.

 

Landscape - Chobham Common in the UK in the IR and visible. Natural light in the evening.

IR (Zeiss UV Sonnar, Hoya R72)

 

Visible (Zeiss UV Sonnar, Schott S8612 1.5mm plus 420nm long pass)

 

IR (Zeiss UV Sonnar, Hoya R72)

 

Product shot in visible light using a big softbox. Single Bowens GM500 flash.

 

Flower shots (from local flower shop - Tangerine and Green, Englefield Green, UK), in visible and UV. Single Bowens GM500 flash with quartz tube.

Sunflower in UV (El Nikkor 80mm f5.6, Baader U)

 

Not sure on this one - Dahlia perhaps - anyway, a white flower in UV and visible.

Visible (Schott S8612 1.5mm plus 420nm long pass)

 

UV (Baader U)

 

These images have obviously all been reduced in resolution for sharing. As an example of the resolution of the original images, below is the image of the Sunflower in the UV along with a region marked in red.

 

That little red square is 1000 pixels by 1000 pixels, and this is what it looks like in the original image.

 

Working with the files is certainly challenging for the computer - a full size image in high quality jpeg is around 60Mb and the raw files are pushing 200Mb. You need a lot of storage with a camera like this.

 

Not seen much UV imaging done with medium format, so thought it would be interesting to share. Unfortunately with only 3 days with it, I barely even learned how to use it, but it certainly impressed me in that short time. It has now sadly gone back to the dealer, and if I want to buy one I'll need to get buying those lottery tickets.....

[Andy Perrin]

Dang, Jonathan! That is one heck of a camera. I wonder how a pinhole photo would come out on that.

[Stefano]

151 MP is a lot of megapixels! That sunflower zoom is impressive.

[dabateman]

Jonathan did you test its range in UV?

How deep can it see?

 

[lukaszgryglicki]

Wow, was dreamin' about IQ4 (actually any of them) + monochrome.

Why? I still have Pentax 6x7 and love its frame size, nothing that I can get from digital, or Fuji 6x9 - this is *the* size... still have film bodies and some scans from 6x9 - they were scanned just on about 100 Mpix and sharp till the last pixel, I can find scans if needed.... but they weren't UV - they were just Fuji Velvia 50.

[colinbm]

Fantastic Jonathan

[JMC]

Thanks all. Yes it was a bit of an experience using it. Every time I picked it up I had to try and not think about how much it was worth (don't drop it, don't drop it, don't drop it).

 

I suppose one thing to keep in mind, with newer lenses and the ones designed for it, there is probably even more resolution in there to be got from it.

 

David. I did test it's range, but at the moment am not at liberty to share the spectral response I measured. This is something that went in my report to Phase One, and I hope to be able to share it more widely later. If and when I can, I'll put it on here of course.

 

Andy. Actually I didn't think about pinhole with it. I do have one, but not in a mount that would have gone on it. If I ever get the opportunity to borrow one again, I'll have to see if I can rig something up to try it out.

[lukaszgryglicki]

Actually, I would *really* like to get an MF sensor that is 12 Mpix. Really. All I want is to have a 6x7 or 6x9 sensor with just 12 Mpix JPEG output. From all the photo gear I had, I love Pentax 67 max. It has a lot of disadvantages, like a huge mirror which causes sharpness problems, etc. but this gives photos a soul - an individuality...

Recently I'm even trying lenses that are known to have really bad problems - if a lens is too "ideal" it's boring. By "problems" I mean non-typical aberrations, vignetting, etc - not just being simply non-sharp.

On eexample:

Nikkor 55/1.2 Ai - it's not that sharp wide open, but photos have its own "signature" - I like to use it, how it shouldn't be used - in full daylight. I shoot wide open f=1.2, ISO 50, 1/8000s - photos are actually "bad" - but I like them.

[dabateman]

Well there is large sense if you want low resolution large sensor

http://largesense.com/index.php/products/4x5-large-format-digital-back-ls45

[lukaszgryglicki]

Saw that many times - the price is killing. 4x5 LF like a view camera, a bit "bigger" than I was thinking... just 6x7 film size would be enough, can even be 4 MPix, not 12, whatever - just a digital image with MF sensor but not 54x40 or 44x33 advertised everywhere as "medium format" but just 70x56 mm (like a film), can even be CCD, ISO max 800.

Or a sensor like film frame from this rangefinder: https://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/03/15/vintage-camera-review-fujifilm-gw690-iii-6x9-medium-format/

[dabateman]

You should contact them. They do have a LS6x7 as one of their dream cameras. But the currently listed dream one is 190Mpixels. They are getting there sensors custom made, stiched together.

 

http://largesense.com/index.php/products/4x5-mega-pixel-monster-large-format-digital

[lukaszgryglicki]

Indeed "LSX67 67x56mm" - at the planning phase... I wonder about the price.

[photoni]

You should contact them. They do have a LS6x7 as one of their dream cameras. But the currently listed dream one is 190Mpixels. They are getting there sensors custom made, stiched together.

 

http://largesense.co...-format-digital

 

I have worked 25 years with the 4x5 and 8x10 "format it would be a dream to have at least the little one

 

probably the best and cheapest thing is to get 8x10inch orthochromatic glass

 

https://www.freestyl...O-2-8x10-5-Pack

 

or make yourself a wet plate :)

[photoni]

I've just had a very geeky few days evaluating a Phase One IQ4 Achromatic camera. Medium format BSI sensor (53.4 mm x 40.0 mm), 151Mp, black and white. Thanks to Teamwork Digital Ltd in the UK for making this possible and sending it to me along with an adapter to use my Hasselblad lenses and a really solid tripod.

 

This was one that really interested me, as it should be good for UV as well as visible and IR, and I could try out my Zeiss UV Sonnar on it, as that was made for the Hasselblad 6x6 cameras.

 

First impressions, it is very solidly built, and very well made. Here's a couple of pictures of the camera with some of the lenses I was trying out (El Nikkor 80mm f5.6, and the Zeiss UV Sonnar).

 

 

Was able to take some images in UV, visible and IR and thought I'd share a few here.

 

Landscape - Chobham Common in the UK in the IR and visible. Natural light in the evening.

IR (Zeiss UV Sonnar, Hoya R72)

 

Visible (Zeiss UV Sonnar, Schott S8612 1.5mm plus 420nm long pass)

 

IR (Zeiss UV Sonnar, Hoya R72)

 

Product shot in visible light using a big softbox. Single Bowens GM500 flash.

 

Flower shots (from local flower shop - Tangerine and Green, Englefield Green, UK), in visible and UV. Single Bowens GM500 flash with quartz tube.

Sunflower in UV (El Nikkor 80mm f5.6, Baader U)

 

Not sure on this one - Dahlia perhaps - anyway, a white flower in UV and visible.

Visible (Schott S8612 1.5mm plus 420nm long pass)

 

UV (Baader U)

 

These images have obviously all been reduced in resolution for sharing. As an example of the resolution of the original images, below is the image of the Sunflower in the UV along with a region marked in red.

 

That little red square is 1000 pixels by 1000 pixels, and this is what it looks like in the original image.

 

Working with the files is certainly challenging for the computer - a full size image in high quality jpeg is around 60Mb and the raw files are pushing 200Mb. You need a lot of storage with a camera like this.

 

Not seen much UV imaging done with medium format, so thought it would be interesting to share. Unfortunately with only 3 days with it, I barely even learned how to use it, but it certainly impressed me in that short time. It has now sadly gone back to the dealer, and if I want to buy one I'll need to get buying those lottery tickets.....

 

being monochrome I thought it was sharper.

(I've seen much nicer Leica files)

maybe the cause is the lens. it's an old lens not designed for such high resolution.

.

Again this confirms my choice,

I am selling all body and lens old :

Nikon D series ... Mamija RZ 6x7 ... etc,

For the best classic photography I took the Z7 and in 105mm macro

now I am waiting for the 24-105; lenses capable of 100Mpx resolution for the 24x36 format

[Andy Perrin]

Are you judging by the crop, photoni? The crop looks sharp to me but I don’t know what the Leica pics you saw looked like.

[JMC]

Just written up the next set of testing on Phase One IQ4 Achromatic camera.

 

This time imaging from UV through to the IR with a range of different filters - https://jmcscientificconsulting.com/phase-one-iq4-achromatic-multispectral-imaging/

[Andy Perrin]

Coool! Will you try UVB and shorter UVA? Also, do you have comparison photos from a more typical sensor? I can see you get images at all those wavelengths but with nothing to compare to, it’s hard to judge how it compares to (eg) your debayered cams.

[JMC]

Unfortunately no more comparison work this time Andy, I only had the camera for a couple of days, and it is long gone now. What you see is what you get at the moment. If I get one again, it'd hopefully be for a bit longer and I'd be able to do more checks against other cameras.

[bobfriedman]

must be nice to have a MF camera + digital back that cost more than some automobiles.

[JMC]

It was scary Bob. Ever time I picked it up I remembered what it was worth. But certainly a fun experience to try it.

[dabateman]

The important question is can it see down to UVc like your other cameras?

[lukaszgryglicki]

Just a quick question - UVC is really really far away from 400nm - will monochrome Nikon D600 see it? I mean sensor. Then the problem would be a lens (only dedicated in that case?) and finally light source (sun gives very little UVC and that little UVC is stopped by ozone layer completely AFAIK). You need artificial light source, right? That would be mercury lamp (low vapor) for example or UV-C diode? And that light is literally deadly?

[Stefano]

Yes, that's correct. A monochrome camera with a fused silica coverglass should easily see UVC. You need a lens that passes UVC (common glass lenses won't work) and an artificial UVC light source, as below ~280-290 nm UV light is undetectable on Earth. That can be a low-pressure mercury bulb or a UVC LED (if you want more power and efficiency you should use the mercury bulb). UVC damages DNA and can give you nasty sunburns, you need to protect your eyes and skin. David (dabateman) knows well how to protect yourself.

[lukaszgryglicki]

Out of my reach :) IQ4 too out of rich - I would love to just have IQ4 mono sensor mounted inside Pentax 67 body (stop dreamin')

[dabateman]

Yes highly dangerous and hard to image in UVC. You must cover up better than my profile picture, my new mask is much better.

 

Also the lights are artificial and very dangerous. With us on lockdown for last 18 months, I haven't done enough imaging.