The MOST EXPENSIVE Camera We've Ever Reviewed! Phase One XC
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 พ.ค. 2024
- When Chris had an opportunity to spend a day with one of the most expensive cameras on the market, he jumped at the chance! The Phase One XC camera has a fixed ultrawide lens and a staggering 150-megapixel back. It also costs $62,400: petapixel.com/2023/06/27/the-...
Find out how the camera performed in the Canadian mountains!
Read Chris's full review and check out his photos on PetaPixel: petapixel.com/2023/12/02/phas...
Rental equipment provided by The Camera Store
www.thecamerastore.com
0:00 - Intro
1:08 - Sample images
1:42 - Design
4:32 - Interface
6:31 - Frame averaging
7:50 - Battery life
9:14 - Image quality
11:04 - Who is it for? - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![TREASURE - 'KING KONG' COMEBACK SPECIAL [THE TREASURE SHOW]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jx1wyMaQzf0/mqdefault.jpg)
$65k camera and they didn't even let them have it at golden hour
lol!
And that starts at 3pm this time of year!
Golden Hour just wasn’t very golden that day
@@niccollsvideoHow she dare!
At $62,000, there's no gold left for the hour.
A lagging touchscreen seems absolutely unforgivable at this price. Seems like a bit of a mess.
sad to inform that those hyper expensive cameras were all laggy
The problem with these is: you have a 150mp raw readout while also Processing live view and focus peaking while it also runs full capture one pro.
Even the apple m3 has difficulties with that.
I guess that camera is meant to be owned by some *** who doesnt use it for photography but as a display of wealth
It's counterintuitive, but in some aspects, cheaper mass produced products have higher quality. Nowhere is that as true as in software and electronics. Why? Because one the main ways to get high software quality is to test the hell out of it, and the only possible way to do that is to have a huge user base.
This is also why Leica cameras often seem to be a bit buggy. It's not that Leica engineers are bad (I'm sure they're really good), but it's close to impossible to get high quality when you have so few users.
For similar reasons, the car computers on hyper cars for the flithy rich have *terrible* car computers and car infotainment systems. Few customers, close to impossible to have high quality software.
So, sometimes cheaper stuff really is the better! :)
It is not easy to source LCD panels in small quantities (I mean less than 100k units).
Phase One introduces the ultimate "flex" camera for all those retired orthopedic surgeons.
A real doctor wouldn't get this camera This is more of a dentist camera.
@@aristotle_4532 Your prob right. Dentists already know how to wield an x-ray camera....
I doubt most successful doctors are willing to spend 1/10th of their gross income on a camera. Most would probably just go for a GFX. Tge only people who should buy this are those looking to turn a profit from the images.
@@shikcheese3234 Of course. I meant plumbers...
😂😂😂
At this price you expect some level of perfection, not a lot of compromises and "in its use case a terrible battery life is ok".
i love watching people reviewing unobtainium
This is more like unwantanium.
@@jaimeduncan6167basically, there is no reason to buy that camera.
@@monsieurgolem3392 No reason, you say?? How better to photograph your new Tesla Cybertruck??
@@jimjimgl3 sure.
It's a real shame that Phase One acquired Mamiya, a brand renowned for great value medium format cameras, and shelved it; while they continue to release absurd cameras at completely insane price points.
Capitalism baybee
@@gateway833so you want only low-end cheap cameras commies did produce?
that's how you get rid of competition 101. Buy them out and burry them.
phase One needed to buy a medium format camera maker as they made backs but had no camera.
So Phase One started with rebranding the Mamiya 645 AFD.
Mamiya wasnt worth a coin when bought by phase one
I know of commercial photographers who use Phase One for high end commercial shoots but they tend to rent. So I guess the customer for them is the rental houses who can rent them out constantly to make their money back.
"And sir, would you like the insurance with your rental"
This might be the only reasonable take I’ve read here about this (still insane) camera.
I think you nailed it.
Gee.... If I had that sort of money I'd get a Fuji GFX, A Tesla Model 3 and still pocket 20 grand.
If you are ok with crop MF, you must be ok with crop FF? So you shouldn't need more than an APS-C camera right?
@@michaelbell75 isn't this XC camera basically "accepting crop" based? with its fixed 14mm, to get a 28mm view you've already halfed the sensor. I'd just go with a GFX and a few good lenses...
@@michaelbell75I have no idea what you are talking about but I can safely say you can get 90% of the camera for 90% less money
Hard to imagine where all that $62K has gone to. No AF, no IBIS, laggy screen, no video, etc. With more and more cameras offering pixel shift, the 150mp is not really compelling anyways. Even the $2500K Panasonic S1R can give you more resolution via pixel shift and even compensate for small motion. My own preference would be the Sigma SD Quattro or DP Merrill series cameras. I've printed 60x40 images from these and they look stunning!
Manufacturing sensors comes with a lot of overhead cost, if you make only a few of them their price quickly becomes much more expensive. We have a bunch of cameras at work for industrial and scientific use, and they are all round this pricepoint. Also, consumer sensors usually have bunch of defective pixels which are simply interpolated in firmware before they ever hit the raw file. If you want a big sensor without defects you pay much more.
but have you use the IQ4 and Rodents lens
Its all economies of scale.
It all goes to a few exects, let’s not act like we don’t know. This thing probably costs $2k to manufacture tops and the rest of for “development” , “marketing” and of course the top dogs
@@iransirijillo listen i'm not going to disagree with the sentiment of corporate greed, but i can imagine this camera costs significantly more than $2000 to manufacture
I have owned 2 Phase One Cameras. They used to be better value as the quality difference used to justify the price difference but now they have just become a company that has bloated their prices way beyond what they give you! A Fuji GFX100ii with its better shaped body, ibis, better auto focus and realistic price are a way way way better option, you really would be throwing money away buying this camera.
You deserve the Diplomat of the Year award Chris for your success in teasing out the positive aspects of this ridiculous camera. And you refrained from pointing out that the market for this paperweight is ultra rich people who want to give the impression that they are serious about photography by buying the most expensive camera out there. Well done!
I'm just "amazed" even with this crazy price of a camera and it's fixed lens can't even fix the vignetting LOL
because of this you have Capture One and its rodenstock lens profiles.
The pahse One is just a scam, a disgraceful scam!
@ meh, its like you pay for nomeone to develope a camera for you. I think a R3 would be cost as twice as much.
Rich people dont know that.
He's standing on top of a pile of rocks over a frozen stream holding a $62,000 camera... and no strap. Big props to Chris for being true to his principles!
They didn’t give us one. And I wasn’t about to add one JL. You know me.
I tried a Phase One when I was living in Paris and was terrified I was going to get mugged.
Chris did not do his trademark flip the camera from right to left hand?
And what principles would those be? Recklessness, lack of self-preservation and idiocy?
Bro urgently needs a Status Anxiety strap
Saw someone recently change from Phase One to Fuji GFX 100 ii and was happier with it. Seems like a hard sell, but would love to see a comparison.
$50 G's in "savings" would make a lot of ppl happier 😅
I did that! Happy GFX100 user now. I really think if you're not a super rich cosmetic surgeon/dentist with a passing interest in photography the XC is pointless. Phase One should go into the room with the mirrors, have a good hard look at itself, do the right thing and leave the camera market. Stick with industrial imaging. Private equity was a mistake.
The GFX II is absolutely amazing! I have the GFX 100 and can't justify going to the II, I did go to the unveiling of the GFX 100 II and I believe it is the best camera for the money in the medium format range. The GFX lenses are also masterpieces.
What I understand is these systems are leased and traded in towards upgrades as they get released.
With the 400 MP PixelShift mode, it runs circles around the Phase One, also worlds better AF. DSLR like. The Phase One XC is simply a so called "Halo" product - the message is clear "Heyho, we're still here! We do have the *biggest* MF Sensor!" Message from our convoy craft - it doesn't matter! Other things are way more important, a camera is so much more, than just the sum of its parts. And into this territory, a slightly bigger Sensor doesn't make sense, for *that* asking price.
It's a fixed lens medium format camera which comes with a fixed lens, this is *really* being insane, no interchangleable lenses, but PhaseOne did more than once such kind of publicity stand. And no EVF anyway. Crazy, for that amount of money, i'd buy the GFX-100 II, 2 or 3 lenses, and then a film M Leica rangefinder, and a digital M, say monochrome, and 2-3 lenses, and still have a lot of money *left*, if i'd be a millionaire. 🙂
probably great for vlogging
Especially with a camera that does not do video. Vlogging, one picture frame at a time.
@@heiner71 let the picture do the talking
@@akhyarrayhka4048worth a thousand words 😂
Perfect example of diminishing returns the higher you go up in price
Does it have Bluetooth?
It has a tooth, bites your wallet
@@RishabhSharma-lq1idis it blue though
At an extra 100k.
FWIW, I’ve seen two of these out in the wild, so there is some kind of market for it. First time I saw it, guy was also carrying a sparkly, brand-spanking new M11 + Noctilux to give you an idea of what this consumer looks like.
I once did an engineering project and I was sent some beautiful pictures of components and equipment and they were from a phase one. OMG the images were incredible. The bokeh was nuts, the clarity of what was in focus was exquisite. Obviously this is their X100V Giganticus!
no drop test?
Now, in the interest of fairness, get Jordan an Alexa LF to test.
And a bunch of Cooke zooms and Zeiss master primes that Chris could juggle in the background while Jordan reviews the camera.
Loved his twisted sense of humor where he put the camera in very precarious situations. I’m sure the folks at Phase One had a heart attack in each one of those scenes.
Says it all hey, even ignoring the features it’s lacking, you’d also be advised not to take it out to where it’s best used because it might get damaged.
Advertising photographer here. Most people don't buy a camera like this. In the same way, a film crew doesn't buy the cameras they use (like a Arri LF). You simply rent the equipment from rental companies if the job or customer requires such equipment. This is absolutely common in advertising production.
This combo makes no sense to me. I used to have the interchangeable version of this (the same back and separate 23mm lens), along with other Rodenstock lenses. Fantastic quality and the frame averaging feature is awesome. But it was a bit cumbersome to use, and I am now a happy user of the much cheaper Hasselblad X2D. One of the people from Capture Integration said something in a forum that resonated with me (I am paraphrasing) - his best quality photos were from the Phase One back, but his favorite photos were from other systems. That's how I felt.
Do you see a huge image quality difference between P1 and X2D? Thank you
@@tjmanou6422 a little in terms of absolute detail - the 150mp sensor on the Phase One is incredible in the detail it provides, so if you print huge landscape prints and can afford it, Phase One may be worth renting to try it out.
BTW I never did a side by side comparison - just based on my impressions from using both systems.
@@petermendelson5839I guess if nothing jumped at you or was obvious after switching I’m guessing it would be a minor difference (there always is with any system). I just can’t see it being 9k to 62k difference in quality either way. Crazy price.
You know… strangely… the photos… look like photos… for over $60,000 I could buy a Sony A7R5 complete with lenses and buy a Toyota 4Runner to take me to a lot of cool places to take photos!
And a Dog, you could get a Dog too! :-)
@@stevehageman6785yes!
You touched on something, if you know what, where and how to photograph you dont need this camera, its almost as though this camera is marketed to rich people who think the camera will do everything at the push of a button. An RB67 would probably give you better results of you know your stuff.
Great to see you reviewing rare and interesting gear; would love to see more like this!
I guess unless you personally have had a use case where you needed this camera, probably quite hard for us normal photographers to understand what that use case could be…
Your final assessment is exactly what I thought as soon as you said that the lenses aren't interchangeable and it's not even a particularly versatile lens in the first place. Obviously there's subjective value in the extra dynamic range and so on over something like a GFX 100 II, but in practical terms, spending 7 or 8 times the price of one of those plus a lens or two on a competing system that is really limited to only one type of photography just seems like lunacy to me.
😊
Great summary as usual After watching many of your vidéos, i find pour presentations almost flawless, pertinent, concise, thé ones I turn to when short on time or as an introductory notion to decide whether thé topic. at hand IS worth deeper investigation, That's one of your talents !
See if you ever get to play with a $62,500 camera again! Thanks for the honest review.
62.000 and it still has that digital look like any other camera! The big dynamic range make photos look cartoonish, overprocessed and cheesy... Typical highlights -100, shadows +100, "render" look. Moreover, Sony had unveiled this sensor back in 2014 if I remember correctly, so the price is unrealistically high for a relatively old tech.
In my view - Mamiya 7 II with Fuji Velvia or Provia produces much "better" landscape/nature photographs. And with film, you 'll certainly stand out in digital crowd. Also, in digital world, sensor size doesn't necessarily mean "different look". From smartphones, to crop, full frame and medium format cameras, in most cases you just gain more resolution, whilst photos look quite similar.
Exactly, if you know what you're doing with an RB/RZ or a Hasselblad 500c you can probably get much better results. It seem like Its overpriced to mimic what a good photography can do.
Would have been funny if they had given you a prop camera to drop every now and then throughout the video 😁
This is a fascinating piece of kit though. It is so far out of the budget of regular photographers it would even make aging birders with 600mm primes blush.
And the image quality is there, but I also struggle to figure out who this is even for. It is pretty big and not as ergonomic as a regular mirrorless camera, no IBIS, mirrorless cameras are known for inferior AF capabilities and it is prohibitively expensive.
If you want a camera with a nice vibe to it and with a boatload of modern features just go for a Nikon Zf and get a short prime for it. Way smaller, great image quality, 45mp is more than enough for pretty much everything and you get all modern features that current mirrorles cameras offer. And all of that while staying well under 5000 bucks. Or go for a Z7II or Z8 if you want the high resolution and a non-retro camera. Even the Z8 seems like a budget camera to the Phase One! XD
It's the sensor size. The ZF is far better than a cell phone because of the sensor size, and by the same measure, the XC is far better than the ZF. It's like arguing that a 32" tv can replace an IMAX movie theater.
its for landscaping and area mapping or something of a fine art and probably archival stuff, the photographer that uses this phaseone that i know works in commercial advertising and company/factory corporate portofolio
Just as an fyi, the Nikon Zf has 24 megapixels...
@@PiTdeLyX Same order of magnitude, that's basically the same ;D
You are right though! For some reason I thought it has 45 as well.
Great Video!
I have been a P1 shooter for over 20 years, since back in the days of the P30, and was also an ambassador for many years, back before the XF when they had just acquired Mamiya and had to work with the horrible DF+ body or the H3/H4/H5 bodies. I just bought the new GFX 100 II as a supplement to the system I've come to trust for so long. I'm an architectural shooter and also use a Cambo with multiple Rodenstocks for stitching. I bought the new GFX after testing it for the last couple jobs, specifically for the new 20-35 lens (which is amazing for a zoom, super sharp corners across the full focal range if you stick to f8-f11). I agree that the XC is dumb, but mostly because a fixed lens this wide has such limited applications - it's just WAYYY too wide to be a fixed system (sorry Phase, you stopped working with me because of my constructive criticism and honesty). And I honestly don't know who could justify this camera over an XT, a Cambo, or any other technical camera system that allows for the same exact Rodenstock 23 to be used along with all the other other focal lengths (not to mention older/newer backs, rental backs, etc). If anyone's interested - I can tell you that IQ4 and IQ3 files are still superior to the GFX 100 II files in a couple critical ways, especially if your workflow is with Capture One. GFX highlights have nowhere near the recovery compared to Phase files. I can normally pull down P1 highlights as far as -75 without any noticeable compromise or degradation, and GFX files generate a strong cyan cast if you pull down past -15 or -20. Our workflow involves a lot of PS compositing to bring down/maintain extreme highlights in interior lighting fixtures that we have no control over in the real world, so for me the practical difference between GFX and P1 files is that I have to capture 4-6 MORE under-exposed shots in the bracket, and spend more time in post compositing those, to get clipped fixtures back down to show detail. I can achieve the same result with only 2 (or 3 at most) P1 files with highlights pulled down to -75, and there's absolutely no severe gain/shift towards cyan. The cyan gain/shift is specific to LED bulbs. Note that if you shoot landscapes you're not likely to see such a huge dynamic range demand, so this is probably irrelevant for most workflows. There's lots of other features that Phase has that the Fuji just can't match, like frame averaging among other features - but that's another conversation. I'm just happy to have a wide zoom on a MF sensor with the new GFX, so I can retire my P1 28mm lens (doorstop? Paper weight? Can't even sell it on Ebay for $200). Phase files still win hands down because they have more practical dynamic range to both left AND right, but I also love the GFX files I've seen so far... if they're properly exposed and don't need significant highlight recovery. I'm so excited to see that Fuji has become a real contender in the MF market, and at a price point that's realistic for more shooters!
If the whole selling point is to crop, a full frame more compact camera with a zoom lens always getting ~50mp would be just as effective resolution wise yet better ergonomics and insanely less expensive. Not going to pretend like I can afford this but I don't see the point in it even if I could.
I'm wondering why there was no nightscapes? It would be interesting to see how such large sensor camera performs in the darkness.
My main bodies for work are MFT, an E-M5.iii and G9, but I also have a large collection of Pentax 645 lenses and a 645Z for if I need more sensor for a shoot. Ironically, most of the time you would use the 645Z would be either in controlled lighting or where's there's plenty of light... which make the image quality in low light "issues" moot for my MFT bodies. That said, the 645Z can make a scene look almost painted with how well the lenses perform. I've also used it in plenty of natural light shoots, with or without reflectors.
These Phase One cameras are extremely special use case or for rich people like the TH-camrs walking around with Hasselblads taking snapshots. My 645Z isn't anywhere near as sharp and is "only" 51 megapixels, but it handles my larger sensor needs just fine for probably the cost of that wobbly grip. I had a Fuji GFX system before with a 50R and sold it for a solid profit since I never used it. I only have the 645Z because I love collecting Pentax lenses, new and old, along with Olympus and MInolta, ranging from 35mm lenses, half frame lenses, and the 645 lenses.
Thanks a lot for the video! Love that you also review less mainstream cameras from time to time. Love your PePi („peepee“) podcast, as well.
That is crazy you can't switch out digital backs or lens! I'm in the market to update my ALPA 12tc & IQ PhaseOne digital back setup, but this isn't it if I'm stuck with no other options than a wide angle lens. Thank you for the review, very helpful.
For people that need it I'm glad something like that exists at the very least. 😄
I'm impressed by the quality of this video you have recorded with your Panasonic G9 II, wonderful colours and definition.
It is always fun to read about gear that I’ll never be able to afford. I certainly agree that if I had the wherewithal to buy that camera, I would have more fun with the Fujifilm GFX 100 II, and with the leftover cash buy the SUV to drive to your stunning Kananaskis Country. And Chris, you really need to pick up a pair of Trail Crampons by the Canadian company, Hillsound. Walk those icy paths with confidence. 😎
Great to see what one of these looks like and see it in action, but not much value to me in a camera I would be too afraid to take out of the box. You guys must have great insurance.
I can see how this makes sense. If you want the IQ4 back you buy this. Then you can flipsell the body with the lens as new (with a nice mark up) to someone who already has the back but wants the 14mm, since PO doesn't do it :D
Nice way to get a discount on your new IQ4!
Does it float?
I did like their monochrome sensor version :) Nice & Thanks :)
appreciate the review and demonstration of this crazy god level camera system, although 99% of us will never own one in our lifetime, it is really lovely to know more about it
Do you REALLY think 1% of the people here will own one in their lifetime? Or did you mean to say "99% of us will never own one in our lifetime. And the other 1% won't either!" 🙂
@@christaylor8410 haha, i’d hate to get into debating the decimal places lol!
This camera might be seen as a descendant of the Hasselblad SWC, which had a fixed 38mmF4.5 Zeiss Biogon (about 21mm on full frame)(stellar lens) and an optical viewfinder in the cold shoe. A viewfinder on this would make it easier to rough-compose landscapes, and save battery life. Perhaps the XC would be a good choice for aerial photography ...? In my dreams, if I ever needed to rent a Phase One camera for a job, I would want to make use of the full width of the sensor :)
with the speed of the Fuji GFX 100 ii, this camera look pre-historic!
Same with FF vs APS-C sensors. Plus, APS-C can do all its video with no crop while most FF cameras have crop at 4K 60p and 120p is only a dream.
A Leica Q equivalent! For much more. That larger sensor is a landscape photog's dream. Maybe Macro too. What is the dynamic range & the actual size of the sensor? Personally, couldn't see spending that much for a set-up where one couldn't swap out lenses. Even then, does Phase One make a 100, 200, 400 mm lens?
I got a Hasselblad H , it’s absolutely amazing like the phase. I love it for portraits and landscaping but the point is simple, those files shine when printed out.
Wow sana all.
Does that vignetting not cause issues when stitching vertical landscape series?
As often with Phase One the camera is just a copy of a Hasselblad product, in this case, the 907 series. It does, the advantage is that the sensor is bigger and the resolution better, It's basically the same concept, but the Hasselblad is far less expensive and can use all the lenses of the X series, and the H series via adapters. One can also adapt Leica lenses etc. 63K for a fixed lens seems like too much, but there is a niche for it. The bad stuff does not stop there: max Shutter speed is just 1/1000 .
But with Hasselblad you have the hassle with that crappy Phocus software…
@@SD_Aliasphocus software is great I think your problem is the user
@@RS-Amsterdam No i use phocus for a long time next to CaptureOne and LR etc. Because my clients provide me with files from different cameras and i have to edit them with the manufacturers software. I think that Phocus is the least mature software...
"but there is a niche for it" and that niche is...?
@@yusrabrock Rentservice…
Phase One is not a traditional camera manufacturer - their original key competence was on digital backs and raw editing software. I think they later bought the Mamiya medium frame technology to have a camera to put their backs on, and they named them Phase One. If you follow the community on YT around the Capture One Pro raw editor, you will meet a number of brand freaks that actually buy these insanely expensive cameras. Apparently some people think that owning a Porsche makes you a better driver. Hasselblad has made their own supermodel - naked too - for pure showoff.
When "quirky" is the nicest thing you can say, you know the company came up short. Quirky sounds fine for a $620 camera, but not for $62,400.
Not even for a $620 camera - we're so spoiler for choice in the low/mid range. This camera definitely isn't for me so I shouldn't comment but it seems a bit ordinary honestly
True.
Thanks for the vid -- fair to say that I cannot see the value for the XC when the XT exists for not much more and you can buy the XT with the same back and a range of Rodenstock lenses with the X shutter.
My understanding is the XC may have slightly better weather sealing and is a wee bit smaller/lighter -- but the fixed single focal length they chose is really limiting.
The best other single lens HQ cameras like this landed on ~28mm in 35mm/FF equivalent [Leica Q3 with its Summilux 28 f/1.7 ASPH], whereas the RODENSTOCK HR DIGARON-S 23MM F/5.6 on the IQ4 back has a 112° angle of view - ~15mm FL on 35mm FF camera. Whereas for me the better lens would have been either the XT 32mm f/4.0 Tilt (107° angle of view ~ roughly equivalent to a 20 mm on 35mm/FF sensor) or the XT 40mm (with 94° ~angle of view roughly equivalent to a 26 mm on 35mm/FF sensor).
One other option to look at is the Mono-Chrome IQ4 back which is truly extraordinary and to my eyes beyond the color version. The Backs are 35-40k out of the price the lens 8-12k and the body 5-7k.
I guess this could be an ideal companion of an XF if someone is looking for a reasonable high resolution super-wide lens (wider than the SK BR 35mm).
And the Achromatic doesn't produce any chroma, not a single one. Hence the name is Achromatic, not Mono-Chrome. ;)
I would love to see if these videos had faster zooming/panning when showing a closeup of an image and then have a still closeup for a bit longer, so we can really see the details without stopping the video. The problem is the stuttering with 30 fps, it becomes really distracting even on good displays. Other than that, amazing video as always ☺
Thanks
Amazing how honest reviews become when there is no possibility of the equipment in question being given to the channel!
This video is a great advertisement for the Panasonic G9 II.
There are few professional photographers who need this camera, it is a small market so the unit price will be very high because the R&D expenses must be earned on much fewer units. In my line of business, audio, the tool also costs exceptionally more than I would pay for a piece of consumer electronics that I enjoy in my spare time, but nevertheless I need to have the right equipment to solve the needs of the customers, which are those who ultimately pay for the equipment.
Got to love a good point-and-shoot. I still love my RX1 to bits...
Love these reviews as much as the attainable ones. This doesn’t fit my photography style, and more importantly my wallet, but it’s fascinating to see a ‘budget is no limit’ very specific tool. Thanks for the video.
yes, that raw histogram is a great idea, but also consider that this back can go on a sliding back for 4x5 for eg, cambo actus xl-DB or an Ultima 23D, linhof M679, Alpha TC, etc. all of which have NO internal metering, so this is what it is for, esp. to test if ND or Polarising filters are needed, and to test the effect.
what i don't understand in this one lens and big sensor concept, so you can crop in if you need "longer" focal lenghts: you still get the distortions of a 14mm ultra-wide lens, no matter how far you crop in. or do i misunderstand something?
Used to love phase 1 raw workflow software
About a year and a half ago, I made a trip to Death Valley, California. I was taking photos with my Canon R5 from Dante's View in the morning light. I came across an older gentleman that had a Phase One mounted on a tripod. That was the first time I'd heard of Phase One. It's curious form factor caused me to ask him about it. I can't remember exactly what he called it - something like a reference camera. He was very polite, but I kept the conversation brief as I could tell he was concentrating on his work, and I didn't want to disturb him. I decided to make a point to check it out. I wish I got a name or something. I'd love to see the images he came up with. It was a beautiful morning overlooking Death Valley. I'd love to play with a Phase One just to check out the images. I'm not entirely sure what I'd do with one if I owned one, but yeah, I'd like to play with one if only for a short while. Nice vid!
Most of you don't realize what is required to manufacture a sensor of this size and resolution. As an example, for Leica to make it's B/W sensor, the company that makes it (CMOSIS), has to shut down it's normal production line, switch out multiple machines, create Leica's sensor, shutdown the line again, and then reassemble the line with their regular machines. That process costs a lot of $$$$ for Leica, which is then passed down to you.
Looks (and sounds) absolutely freezing cold and unpleasant out there. Hats off to you for (literally) going the distance for what seems like an extremely rare use case. Doing the math, I'd buy 6 Leicas or a few Hasselblads - or, while we're at it, a trip into space. 🙂
What size of pixel does it have. Is it bigger than in Hasellblad
I wish PhaseOne would actually use their technology to make a good camera. What they have in my opinion are good image sensors that can take a photo. There is a difference. Also, there is no excuse for any sort of slowness when paying 62K for a camera. That sensor better read quick and the screen... it should be so far from "lag" that people complain it's TOO fast.
I finally have the money to get a Phase One, but sadly now I do not really have the time to use one. I would like the monochrome version probably if I ever got one, but definitely not with fixed lens.
Although I see the allure of this cameras sensor. The lack of autofocus and interchangeable lenses makes me wonder, why would someone choose this camera over the Fuji GFX 100S II or Hasselblad X2D. The Phase one is just not as flexible. The minute you need to shoot 85mms away, need quick focus on a subject, or require a more ergonomic shooting experience you would especially find yourself out of luck. Plus, ~64k is a lot of money. A three lens kit with all the needed accessories for the Fuji or Hasselblad would cost half (on the high end).
Cool, man. What's about colour? XC vs X2D or Fuji 100 - what is your opinion.
The images look over processed or over sharpened to me. Maybe something about inserting such a high resolution image into the video…
Color comparison between IQ4150, trichromatic IQ3100 or IQ4100, generic bayer mirrorless will be nice. In both natural light and low CRI indoor light
I haven't tried the newer Phase One, but the older Phase One DF/DF+ has amazing lenses and pop to their images that no other camera system I have tried have been able to match, but they are difficult to use. I think a lot of people think that Phase One = the look from i.e. Fuji GFX which it doesn't
have you ever taken a blind test on images from that camera vs the gfx? I bet you $20 you couldnt tell the dif
@@MoreData-hz8hm The sensor in this camera comes straight off the IQ4, which has a 50 percent larger sensor area than the GFX 100 ii. At large print sizes that's definitely visible.
Definitely a niche camera. Very narrow, small niche! Thanks for the review!
meanwhile you have amazing contemporary photographic artists like Mario Basner shooting on a $1500 Nikon 810 and the results are something else!
....a fool and his money soon part.
I would imagine there are some modern day Ansel Adams types with deep pockets out there. Could be perfect for those that specialize in shooting State and National Park parks.
Leica Q3 sells fixed lens camera for 6k. Someone from PhaseOne: “Hold my bear, I have an idea…”
Would have wanted to see a portrait or slightly dynamic subject test. Manual focus with that third-rate touch screen looks like it would be a showstopper. But could make a fun tiktok video!
I wanna see a modern Death Wish remake where Paul Kersey takes his Phase One XC out on the street while casually eating some ice cream
WILDEY'S HERE!
bronson: "fires a.475 wildey magnum. real stopping power."
is that like a.44 magnum?
bronson: "no, a.44 magnum is a pistol cartridge.
a.475 wildey magnum is a shorter version
of the african big-game cartridge.
makes a real mess."
The "hot shoe" is used to attach the black cloth to cover the display!?
Looks great, I'll take three!
Lol
Thanks. I will buy one for my mom!
Lol
For a camera that is nearly $100k and not offer video, IBIS, an EVF at a fixed focal length is the epitome of self indulgent. Even for those in the market for medium format, there doesn’t appear to enough reasons why you would pick this camera over a plethora of others. Cameras with a more practical use case win out over this.
one thing to keep in mind, this XC is akin to Hasselblads v system super wide, with it's fixed 38mm lens; this is what your 'user' \ use case is, for those who want the widest the x system can go, but a compact body, like architecture, environmental portraiture, where time is NOT important, think of it in terms of a small LF view camera, you are after the image quality, and sharpness, nothing else.
I would love to see an in the field interview with one of the 10 people on the planet that would genuinely seek out the camera for their day job.
I've been a phase one user since 2005, the fuji gfx arrived, I moved on. It was never easy dealing with such an arrogant Danish company I was pleased to see the back of them (pun intended). They could have been truly special, but curiously never thought about photography the way a photographer might.
I have a 14mm EF L lens for my Canon 5Ds. It's great fun at first, but after one day it's more and more boring. Normally, I don't even carry it unless I want an unusual look. Similarly, I have a infrared converted camera. Great fun for one day or that special look, but the novelty wears off. I think the single ultra-wide fixed lens is a very, very strange choice. For instance, portraits are right out. I guess they didn't want to compete with their mainline cameras and cut into those sales. After they sell one to three oil barons, I guess their sales team will have an uphill climb.
Think I'll wait for the Phase Two.
I enjoyed all the humorous "what if I dropped it" lines... but seriously, if you had, did you have to take out an insurance policy to use this for the day?
Now the good news... since you did use it, it'll probably be sold as "open box/refurbished" making it easily affordable no doubt!
Talked to a lot of people using P1, Haven't seen any use case that makes this camera superior.
I am a long-time PhaseOne XF user, and the PhaseOne XC is the most tone-deaf product PhaseOne produced. In the past 5-years, both CaptureOne & PhaseOne have focused (no pun intended) on company internal pet projects without significant market place needs. An updated XF would have more professional market use than the XC will ever have.
great video on camera i would never want!
Chris, what type of memory card does it use ? Don't think you mentioned that. Thanks.
It uses a compact flash type B or XQD and has an as slot as well.
I’d imagine most of these are going to rental houses. Very few people would buy one outright, but some might rent it for a specific project that it fits.
So it is a digital Hasselblad SWC?
I would like to see review of this camera for street and portrait photography
Phase vs pedestrian digital format aka. Hasselblad and Fujifilm would be very interesting. Hell, throw a Pentax 645Z in there as well just for fun. And then compare for studio, action, landscape ... That would be great video!
This fixed lens camera specifically makes no sense to me at all. But even the XF system seems outdated and clumsy compared to Fuji and even more compared to Hasselblad's current XCD stuff.