Comparison EOS 1DS & Phase One H20 Digiback

After much reading and research, looks like I will be joining the digital revolution this week big time, just sold my car and will be buying and EOS 1DS, and Apple power Mac G4 and 20 LCD this week, with no previous Mac experience!
Talk about in at the deep end!

I shoot stock, so I need large files, and colour management is better on aMac I've been told, and might aswell get something pretty fast, don't want to be constantly waiting for it.

Anyway, came across this site, it's a comparison between the EOS 1DS and the Phase One H20 digital Back.
I was all for getting a digital back until last week.

Had a test done between the Kodak 645 Plus and the EOS 1DS and the EOS looked out of focus in comparison.........untill someone told me that's because some cameras have in built sharpening and others it's in the software, so there could be very little in it.

http://www.ampimage.com/H20%20image/Test003.html

Well as you will see, there is not alot in it, considering how much more the Phase-One H20 is, about $20000, compared to $8000 for the Canon.

Would be interested to hear from any EOS 1ds owners, I think there is a steep learning curve ahead of me!

The 1Ds is as good as any 35mm film camera and as good as many medium format film stocks. However, you are not comparing apple to apples, as the H20 digital back is wonderful - problem is that it is nowhere near as verstile as the 1Ds. Given that the difference in quality is not as large as you would think, and that the 1Ds is an amazing camera, even up to 30x40 print sizes, you couldn't go wrong with it - I love mine.

As for the other issue, Macintosh. Let me assure you that Color Management on the PC is as robust as it is on the Mac. The major difference is that there are FAR MORE application, tools, utilities, and freeware of significant use to the digital photographer on the Windows platform than there are under the Mac.

I used to be a Mac owner, in fact I was one of the first, but even though the interface on the Mac appeals to the artsy/graphic-designer type, the current version of Windows (XP) is more capable and stable. Given this, along with much more plentiful and free software options, I would hesitate before buying a Mac for digital photography, unless of course you were already a Mac user.

Now, I don't want to get flamed by all the Mac users on this board, but I do consulting for digital photography for a living, and other than the religious war arguements, the Windows platform does have some significant advantages.

Good Luck

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

phardy said:

After much reading and research, looks like I will be joining the
digital revolution this week big time, just sold my car and will be
buying and EOS 1DS, and Apple power Mac G4 and 20 LCD this week,
with no previous Mac experience!
Talk about in at the deep end!
I shoot stock, so I need large files, and colour management is
better on aMac I've been told, and might aswell get something
pretty fast, don't want to be constantly waiting for it.

Anyway, came across this site, it's a comparison between the EOS
1DS and the Phase One H20 digital Back.
I was all for getting a digital back until last week.
Had a test done between the Kodak 645 Plus and the EOS 1DS and the
EOS looked out of focus in comparison.........untill someone told
me that's because some cameras have in built sharpening and others
it's in the software, so there could be very little in it.

http://www.ampimage.com/H20%20image/Test003.html

Well as you will see, there is not alot in it, considering how much
more the Phase-One H20 is, about $20000, compared to $8000 for the
Canon.

Would be interested to hear from any EOS 1ds owners, I think there
is a steep learning curve ahead of me!

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

I am also a Canon 1Ds owner, and it is truly a very good camera. As Peter says, the comparison with the Phase one medium format digital back is not really comparing apples with apples. A more realistic comparison is to compare other medium format digital backs with the Phase One.

There seems to be no information about how the 1Ds images were processed, which of course can make or break the final result. It appears they have been taken straight out of the camera with little or no further work done on the files. When 1Ds images are processed using the Capture One software, the final results can certainly be very high quality indeed. If the images had been processed in this way, then I am sure the difference between the Phase One back and the 1Ds images wouldn't be so great. As it is, there is a fairly large difference in favour of the Phase One back. Again, as Peter pointed out, the Canon 1Ds has a great deal more flexibilty in terms of use, and it is this flexibility that carries a huge advantage over many of the current medium format backs. Also the fact of being full-frame is a definite advantage when shooting with wide lenses.

I also concur with Peter about the debate of windows based computers versus Mac. I have both, and for me it is primarily the much greater range of software and cataloguing programs that is the advantage for PCs when working with photographic images. Also at the top end, PCs definitely have the edge in speed, but not cheap either! The colour management arguement is not relevant any longer, and I would not base my choice upon that criteria if I was you. Pcs & Macs have very different file management systems, and one can argue forever which is better, but it really is a matter of which you have become familiar with.

If you haven't already made firm committments in buying any of the gear you have mentioned , then I would delve into the pros and cons very carefully, as it is quite a large financial outlay to setup as you are intending to do, and it is better to have no regrets after you have bought it all. For instance, if you intend to shoot primarily in the studio, then the flexibility advantage that the 1Ds has in the field is somewhat negated in the studio, when comparing to medium format backs. Medium format backs will have a superior end result, and if money isn't a huge issue, and studio work is your prime workload, then you should try and get some hands-on comparisons yourself using both systems.

I hope this might help in some way.

Regards,
Geoff

phardy said:

After much reading and research, looks like I will be joining the
digital revolution this week big time, just sold my car and will be
buying and EOS 1DS, and Apple power Mac G4 and 20 LCD this week,
with no previous Mac experience!
Talk about in at the deep end!
I shoot stock, so I need large files, and colour management is
better on aMac I've been told, and might aswell get something
pretty fast, don't want to be constantly waiting for it.

Click to expand...

We use Macs for all our digital work and a PC for Quickbooks accouting. Never looked back or even wanted to. Obviously, as previously advised, you need to research and get what is best for you. I have never regretted it. Good luck.

Feel free to drop me a line if you need any more information. I currently shoot with the 1Ds and am very happy with it. I use Windows XP for my development environment, and have used Macs in the past.

Let me know if I can help in any way.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

phardy said:

After much reading and research, looks like I will be joining the
digital revolution this week big time, just sold my car and will be
buying and EOS 1DS, and Apple power Mac G4 and 20 LCD this week,
with no previous Mac experience!
Talk about in at the deep end!
I shoot stock, so I need large files, and colour management is
better on aMac I've been told, and might aswell get something
pretty fast, don't want to be constantly waiting for it.

Anyway, came across this site, it's a comparison between the EOS
1DS and the Phase One H20 digital Back.
I was all for getting a digital back until last week.
Had a test done between the Kodak 645 Plus and the EOS 1DS and the
EOS looked out of focus in comparison.........untill someone told
me that's because some cameras have in built sharpening and others
it's in the software, so there could be very little in it.

http://www.ampimage.com/H20%20image/Test003.html

Well as you will see, there is not alot in it, considering how much
more the Phase-One H20 is, about $20000, compared to $8000 for the
Canon.

Would be interested to hear from any EOS 1ds owners, I think there
is a steep learning curve ahead of me!

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Not trying to start a flame but.....

I can agree that both a PC or Mac will work well with digital shooters. The one arguement I always hea,r but never agree with, is that the Windows platform will let you use 'more programs'. PLEASE tell me, from a digital photography or artisitic/creative viewpoint, what programs are only available for Windows. Or ANY really 'needed' program is only available for the Windows program. Games? Who cares?

As a professional digital photographer, with both platforms, I have never seen a program I needed for my work that wasn't available for a Mac.

My biggest issue with Mac at present is that they are in the process of switching OS's from OS 9.x to OS X.

Some software doesn't work, some has yet to be ported (Quark), and some doesn't work and never will be ported (Hypercard).

Most studio management software (customer tracking, invoicing, billing) runs on the PC, as well.

Some programs which I find are essential on the Windows platform:

Irfanview
QImage
Profile Prism
Archive Creator
YARCPlus
A Variety of Plug-Ins for Photoshop
ThumbsPlus+
Misc. Utilities
A Lot of Shareware...

Yes, you could argue that you could cover some of these features on the Mac with other software - however, I have never found programs that do what all of these can do. Additionally, you will pay A LOT for similar capabilities on the Mac if you can even find them. QImage alone is an amazing piece of PC software and at $35 is a true steal. This is just one of many examples I could use, though I am not going to go through my library right now t pull them all out.

Once again, I am also very familiar with the Mac platform and its use in graphic arts, where it has become a standard. However, in the digital photography arena it has already fallen a bit behind.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Miike Collins said:

Not trying to start a flame but.....

I can agree that both a PC or Mac will work well with digital
shooters. The one arguement I always hea,r but never agree with,
is that the Windows platform will let you use 'more programs'.
PLEASE tell me, from a digital photography or artisitic/creative
viewpoint, what programs are only available for Windows. Or ANY
really 'needed' program is only available for the Windows program.
Games? Who cares?

As a professional digital photographer, with both platforms, I have
never seen a program I needed for my work that wasn't available for
a Mac.

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Peter Sills said:

Irfanview
QImage
Profile Prism
Archive Creator
YARCPlus
A Variety of Plug-Ins for Photoshop
ThumbsPlus+
Misc. Utilities
A Lot of Shareware...

Yes, you could argue that you could cover some of these features on
the Mac with other software - however, I have never found programs
that do what all of these can do. Additionally, you will pay A LOT
for similar capabilities on the Mac if you can even find them.
QImage alone is an amazing piece of PC software and at $35 is a
true steal. This is just one of many examples I could use, though
I am not going to go through my library right now t pull them all
out.

Once again, I am also very familiar with the Mac platform and its
use in graphic arts, where it has become a standard. However, in
the digital photography arena it has already fallen a bit behind.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Miike Collins said:

Not trying to start a flame but.....

I can agree that both a PC or Mac will work well with digital
shooters. The one arguement I always hea,r but never agree with,
is that the Windows platform will let you use 'more programs'.
PLEASE tell me, from a digital photography or artisitic/creative
viewpoint, what programs are only available for Windows. Or ANY
really 'needed' program is only available for the Windows program.
Games? Who cares?

As a professional digital photographer, with both platforms, I have
never seen a program I needed for my work that wasn't available for
a Mac.

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Click to expand...

--The above mentioned programs are surely very good and most certenly serve anyone. I am an advertising photographer and in my studio G4 Mac

the four (and only) programs I use areS 7, PhotoRetouchPro, Bryce 5.0 and Phase One DSLR. In this bunch the PhotoRetouchPro is a Mac only program and it is alone a good reason to use the Mac platform.

Also here in Europe Mac is the standard prepress platform. Not to mention the G4´s digital monitor connections which you can probably find only in the more expensive PC machines.

Best regards
Mikael

I agree that the Mac is currently the standard in pre-press and graphic design. However, that is not true of the digital photography industry, where PCs currently have a distinct advantage.

I should also point out that the Mac standard in these industries is not due to any inherent ability of the Mac over Windows. It is strictly due to the preferences of the people working in that industry for the more "artistic" connotations of the Mac platform. This is also true in the video and film industries.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Mikael Kaplar said:

Peter Sills said:

Irfanview
QImage
Profile Prism
Archive Creator
YARCPlus
A Variety of Plug-Ins for Photoshop
ThumbsPlus+
Misc. Utilities
A Lot of Shareware...

Yes, you could argue that you could cover some of these features on
the Mac with other software - however, I have never found programs
that do what all of these can do. Additionally, you will pay A LOT
for similar capabilities on the Mac if you can even find them.
QImage alone is an amazing piece of PC software and at $35 is a
true steal. This is just one of many examples I could use, though
I am not going to go through my library right now t pull them all
out.

Once again, I am also very familiar with the Mac platform and its
use in graphic arts, where it has become a standard. However, in
the digital photography arena it has already fallen a bit behind.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Miike Collins said:

Not trying to start a flame but.....

I can agree that both a PC or Mac will work well with digital
shooters. The one arguement I always hea,r but never agree with,
is that the Windows platform will let you use 'more programs'.
PLEASE tell me, from a digital photography or artisitic/creative
viewpoint, what programs are only available for Windows. Or ANY
really 'needed' program is only available for the Windows program.
Games? Who cares?

As a professional digital photographer, with both platforms, I have
never seen a program I needed for my work that wasn't available for
a Mac.

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Click to expand...

--The above mentioned programs are surely very good and most
certenly serve anyone. I am an advertising photographer and in my
studio G4 Mac
the four (and only) programs I use areS 7, PhotoRetouchPro, Bryce
5.0 and Phase One DSLR. In this bunch the PhotoRetouchPro is a Mac
only program and it is alone a good reason to use the Mac platform.
Also here in Europe Mac is the standard prepress platform. Not to
mention the G4´s digital monitor connections which you can probably
find only in the more expensive PC machines.

Best regards
Mikael

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Peter Sills wrote:
...the current version of Windows (XP) is

Member said:

more capable and stable.

Click to expand...

Hard to imagine, as OSX just doesn't crash. If anything does happen, it's in the realm of an internet browser having trouble with some page's coding or somesuch. Then, all you have to do is quit the application and start it again. I doubt anything on Windows is as stable as the Linux-based OSX.

As far as PC-users having more options relative to software choices.... What do you need? There isn't anything available for PC that i'd want/need that i can't get for Mac. And, i use my system for graphic design, digital photography, illustration, and music: digital audio, sequencing, processing. If we're going to reasonably discuss versatility and flexibility, the discussion should be kept to practical matters, and not just a list of garbage/toy programs a serious professional wouldn't use.

Other than attempting to dispel some falsities, i don't feel it's important to have Mac versus PC arguments. Whatever you're comfortable with. I will continue to choose Macs because they're innovative, and elegant. PCs may be faster, but that's Today, and with the speeds either are available with, it's rather a moot point, unless you're planning to upgrade every other week. I'm 'still' running a Dual 500 G4. I won't feel a need to upgrade for another year.

Regarding the 1Ds vs Phase One test and the relative comment about the Canon shots being potentially out of critical focus- I don't think that's the issue. The shots were made at a small enough aperture that the entire scene should be sharp. The enlarged samples were made from different planes of focus. The H20 just resolves better. That's not a slight on the Canon. Photographers will continue to shoot with 6x7 film even though they could choose 8x10 view cameras. They're just different. The funny thing is, looking at the unenlarged views, the Canon's look sharper and/or show more contrast. But, the blow-ups show the opposite. Interesting phenomenon, and i wonder if it's a web-only thing. The important thing is how the real-life-sized prints will appear to the viewer, and from these online samples, i couldn't make that conclusion.

The other issue is - what do you shoot? If it's product-based, you may certainly want the best resolution you can get. If you shoot people, that may not be true. How you work is the other major consideration. I've gone through four medium format camera systems in the last six years. I would shoot fashion, but always doubled-up, shooting both MF and 35mm. But, i would almost invariably prefer the 35mm images, either because of composition, or 'attitude' or some other abstract rationalization. So, i went from a Mamiya RZ67 to a Pentax 67 to a Mamiya 645AF, all in the efforts to get something that worked more like a 35mm camera. I guess if i could have had MF quality in a 35mm package, i would have been 'home' from the beginning. But, that stuff wasn't available then.

Good luck deciphering all of this....

Zp

Your characterization of the mac as made for "artsy" folks or for the "more 'artistic' connotations" is certainly only a personal assessment. There's nothing empirically true about those comments.

Macs are/have been more popular for the design, music, video and pre-press industries because, for a long time, they worked better, faster, and more elegantly than PCs. No one in any profit-related business would intentionally choose an 'unpopular,' less efficient platform. Macs, at that time, were simply the best choice. Of course, the gap has now closed. Now, it's just a matter of personal choice and comfort.

This entire argument is reminiscent of the VHS/Betamax situation. If we recall, Beta was better, but VHS gained a larger following. PCs were only able to saturate and maintain market share because general industry used them, and home/personal buyers needed to maintain compatibility with whatever they were familiar. Or, you could look at it, as i do: PCs are like modern Ford Mustangs. Yah, they can keep cramming more horsepower into the them, but that doesn't really change the nature of the thing. It's still a Mustang. Even though it may be faster than a more expensive BMW, Porsche Boxster, etc., it's still just a crude automobile. For a lot of people, faster and cheaper is all they need to know. And, maybe Daddy drove a Ford, so it just makes sense.

We shouldn't forget, though, that Windows is only an emulation of a Mac OS, and it's really only a copy-cat shell over line-level coding.

Let the attacks begin. I'm already running the other way....

Zp

Peter Sills said:

I should also point out that the Mac standard in these industries
is not due to any inherent ability of the Mac over Windows. It is
strictly due to the preferences of the people working in that
industry for the more "artistic" connotations of the Mac platform.
This is also true in the video and film industries.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Mikael Kaplar said:

Peter Sills said:

Irfanview
QImage
Profile Prism
Archive Creator
YARCPlus
A Variety of Plug-Ins for Photoshop
ThumbsPlus+
Misc. Utilities
A Lot of Shareware...

Yes, you could argue that you could cover some of these features on
the Mac with other software - however, I have never found programs
that do what all of these can do. Additionally, you will pay A LOT
for similar capabilities on the Mac if you can even find them.
QImage alone is an amazing piece of PC software and at $35 is a
true steal. This is just one of many examples I could use, though
I am not going to go through my library right now t pull them all
out.

Once again, I am also very familiar with the Mac platform and its
use in graphic arts, where it has become a standard. However, in
the digital photography arena it has already fallen a bit behind.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Miike Collins said:

Not trying to start a flame but.....

I can agree that both a PC or Mac will work well with digital
shooters. The one arguement I always hea,r but never agree with,
is that the Windows platform will let you use 'more programs'.
PLEASE tell me, from a digital photography or artisitic/creative
viewpoint, what programs are only available for Windows. Or ANY
really 'needed' program is only available for the Windows program.
Games? Who cares?

As a professional digital photographer, with both platforms, I have
never seen a program I needed for my work that wasn't available for
a Mac.

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Click to expand...

--The above mentioned programs are surely very good and most
certenly serve anyone. I am an advertising photographer and in my
studio G4 Mac
the four (and only) programs I use areS 7, PhotoRetouchPro, Bryce
5.0 and Phase One DSLR. In this bunch the PhotoRetouchPro is a Mac
only program and it is alone a good reason to use the Mac platform.
Also here in Europe Mac is the standard prepress platform. Not to
mention the G4´s digital monitor connections which you can probably
find only in the more expensive PC machines.

Best regards
Mikael

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Click to expand...

I love these apple vs pc arguments even better than the nikon vs canon strings.

seriously though, I wonder if mac using the linux core will eventually give linux some market share. competition is always good

oh, and please keep these flame wars going, I love watching people make fools of themselves.....

Ze Pequeno said:

Macs are/have been more popular for the design, music, video and
pre-press industries because, for a long time, they worked better,
faster, and more elegantly than PCs. No one in any profit-related
business would intentionally choose an 'unpopular,' less efficient
platform. Macs, at that time, were simply the best choice. Of
course, the gap has now closed. Now, it's just a matter of personal
choice and comfort.

This entire argument is reminiscent of the VHS/Betamax situation.
If we recall, Beta was better, but VHS gained a larger following.
PCs were only able to saturate and maintain market share because
general industry used them, and home/personal buyers needed to
maintain compatibility with whatever they were familiar. Or, you
could look at it, as i do: PCs are like modern Ford Mustangs. Yah,
they can keep cramming more horsepower into the them, but that
doesn't really change the nature of the thing. It's still a
Mustang. Even though it may be faster than a more expensive BMW,
Porsche Boxster, etc., it's still just a crude automobile. For a
lot of people, faster and cheaper is all they need to know. And,
maybe Daddy drove a Ford, so it just makes sense.

We shouldn't forget, though, that Windows is only an emulation of a
Mac OS, and it's really only a copy-cat shell over line-level
coding.

Let the attacks begin. I'm already running the other way....

Zp

Peter Sills said:

I should also point out that the Mac standard in these industries
is not due to any inherent ability of the Mac over Windows. It is
strictly due to the preferences of the people working in that
industry for the more "artistic" connotations of the Mac platform.
This is also true in the video and film industries.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Mikael Kaplar said:

Peter Sills said:

Irfanview
QImage
Profile Prism
Archive Creator
YARCPlus
A Variety of Plug-Ins for Photoshop
ThumbsPlus+
Misc. Utilities
A Lot of Shareware...

Yes, you could argue that you could cover some of these features on
the Mac with other software - however, I have never found programs
that do what all of these can do. Additionally, you will pay A LOT
for similar capabilities on the Mac if you can even find them.
QImage alone is an amazing piece of PC software and at $35 is a
true steal. This is just one of many examples I could use, though
I am not going to go through my library right now t pull them all
out.

Once again, I am also very familiar with the Mac platform and its
use in graphic arts, where it has become a standard. However, in
the digital photography arena it has already fallen a bit behind.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

Miike Collins said:

Not trying to start a flame but.....

I can agree that both a PC or Mac will work well with digital
shooters. The one arguement I always hea,r but never agree with,
is that the Windows platform will let you use 'more programs'.
PLEASE tell me, from a digital photography or artisitic/creative
viewpoint, what programs are only available for Windows. Or ANY
really 'needed' program is only available for the Windows program.
Games? Who cares?

As a professional digital photographer, with both platforms, I have
never seen a program I needed for my work that wasn't available for
a Mac.

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Click to expand...

--The above mentioned programs are surely very good and most
certenly serve anyone. I am an advertising photographer and in my
studio G4 Mac
the four (and only) programs I use areS 7, PhotoRetouchPro, Bryce
5.0 and Phase One DSLR. In this bunch the PhotoRetouchPro is a Mac
only program and it is alone a good reason to use the Mac platform.
Also here in Europe Mac is the standard prepress platform. Not to
mention the G4´s digital monitor connections which you can probably
find only in the more expensive PC machines.

Best regards
Mikael

Click to expand...

--
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have both systems and have switched back and forth based on a new Windows software solution that been hyped as the second comming.

I have finally settled in on OSX because I find the Windows OS awkward and unintuitive. All of the labs and high end services that I interface with use Mac so I have given up on the all of the supposed Windows superiority.

Yeah I know about the speed. Problem is I can't think that fast.

Most important I know OSX has not adversly affected my work, it in fact made my life and my ability to realize my vision easier.

http://www.sokolsky.com/

--
jrisc

graphius said:

I love these apple vs pc arguments even better than the nikon vs
canon strings.
seriously though, I wonder if mac using the linux core will
eventually give linux some market share. competition is always good

oh, and please keep these flame wars going, I love watching people
make fools of themselves.....

Click to expand...

If you are going to be that smug.

Show us your photographs!

http://www.sokolsky.com/
--
jrisc

as a photographer using Blads for the last 12 years the thought of using anything else never seriously crossed my mind. However........ & to cut a long story short,in the last 14 months I purchased a D30 followed by a D60 & now an Eos 1Ds. My studio no longer shoots film.

With regard to the comparison being made between the Canon & the Blad......I think that it is sensational that one compare the Canon against such a hefty competitor & HOLD IT"S OWN. Make no mistake, image quality out of this sucker rocks baby. I also run a mac & 20" studio display. Nice combo.
Paul B.
http://www.studio58.com.au

I'm sorry, I've used, supported, and written software for both platforms. Points to clarify:

1. OSX and WinXP are BOTH pre-emptive multi-tasking OSes. They will BOTH support the restart of an "ill-behaved" application. Fact, this feature was on the desktop in Win2000 prior to OSX on the Mac.

2. Where WinXP is no longer a shell on an OS, while OSX is IN FACT now a shell running on top of a Unix variant.

3. Windows has been consistent in its coding of APIs through to the current version of Windows XP. As such Windows apps from version 1.0 onward should indeed still work under Windows XP and most do. The change from various OSes in the Mac world has invalidated much of the older Mac software from previous versions of the OS. An example of this is the "compatibility layer" of OS9 in OSX.

4. Windows XP is a true "object-oriented" shell on the OS. OSX is not. If you think OSX is an object oriented shell, then you do not understand the term or the implementation.

5. Windows XP is NOT a copy of the Mac OS any more than the Mac was/is a copy of the work done at Xerox Parc. Also, Windows and the Mac are contemporaries. I first saw Windows running in 1983, while the Mac was also in development. Windows 1.0 shipped a few months after the Mac hit the market, but less than a year later.

6. The Macintosh has been at the forefront of hardware innovations, such as Firewire (developed by Sony). Though the current Macs borrow heavily from the PC (PCI bus, EIDE drives, USB ports, etc.)

The point I am making is that the argument comes down to personal preference. I have 8 Windows XP systems at home which run 24 hours a day 7 days a week for the last several years, and have only been brought down by me to add or remove hardware.

Truth be told that the argument that "I have a Mac and it does all I will ever need" is a falacious one, as you do not have the opportunity to try anything else on the platform to see if you would use it. If you were to see many of these programs available for the professional photographer under Windows, you would see the difference.

Again, if you are a Mac user, and that is what you know and love, then I have no argument as you are making an informed decision. However, if you are new to digital photography and computers, I am strongly recommending Windows XP systems to all of my clients for the following reasons.

1. Vastly greater universe of software, support, shareware, hardware.
2. Vastly greater speed opportunites.
3. Vastly greater connectivity options, drivers, cameras, printer support.
4. Much cheaper for "bang for the buck".

Comments such as the Mac is better for color management are nonsense, since it was Microsoft and Intel which established the sRGB (standard RGB) colorspace which is used in almost all digital photography devices, printers and monitors.

While it may seem like I am a Windows "bigot" I am not. I am, however, against misinformation, disinformation, and out and out falsehoods which lead to someone making a multi-thousand dollar purchase.

Peter Sills
Digital Focus

So Peter are you saying that the 1Ds gives you the best of both worlds, 35mm vs. 6x4.5?

Is the weight of the 1Ds a problem for you? (I handhold a lot probably for the same reasons you end up liking a lot of your 35mm images over the MFormat ones).

At this juncture, using it the way you do in business, what are the disadvantages of the 1Ds?

Tks in advance for your reply.

Ze Pequeno said:

Ze Pequeno said:

more capable and stable.

Click to expand...

Hard to imagine, as OSX just doesn't crash. If anything does
happen, it's in the realm of an internet browser having trouble
with some page's coding or somesuch. Then, all you have to do is
quit the application and start it again. I doubt anything on
Windows is as stable as the Linux-based OSX.

As far as PC-users having more options relative to software
choices.... What do you need? There isn't anything available for PC
that i'd want/need that i can't get for Mac. And, i use my system
for graphic design, digital photography, illustration, and music:
digital audio, sequencing, processing. If we're going to reasonably
discuss versatility and flexibility, the discussion should be kept
to practical matters, and not just a list of garbage/toy programs a
serious professional wouldn't use.

Other than attempting to dispel some falsities, i don't feel it's
important to have Mac versus PC arguments. Whatever you're
comfortable with. I will continue to choose Macs because they're
innovative, and elegant. PCs may be faster, but that's Today, and
with the speeds either are available with, it's rather a moot
point, unless you're planning to upgrade every other week. I'm
'still' running a Dual 500 G4. I won't feel a need to upgrade for
another year.

Regarding the 1Ds vs Phase One test and the relative comment about
the Canon shots being potentially out of critical focus- I don't
think that's the issue. The shots were made at a small enough
aperture that the entire scene should be sharp. The enlarged
samples were made from different planes of focus. The H20 just
resolves better. That's not a slight on the Canon. Photographers
will continue to shoot with 6x7 film even though they could choose
8x10 view cameras. They're just different. The funny thing is,
looking at the unenlarged views, the Canon's look sharper and/or
show more contrast. But, the blow-ups show the opposite.
Interesting phenomenon, and i wonder if it's a web-only thing. The
important thing is how the real-life-sized prints will appear to
the viewer, and from these online samples, i couldn't make that
conclusion.

The other issue is - what do you shoot? If it's product-based, you
may certainly want the best resolution you can get. If you shoot
people, that may not be true. How you work is the other major
consideration. I've gone through four medium format camera systems
in the last six years. I would shoot fashion, but always
doubled-up, shooting both MF and 35mm. But, i would almost
invariably prefer the 35mm images, either because of composition,
or 'attitude' or some other abstract rationalization. So, i went
from a Mamiya RZ67 to a Pentax 67 to a Mamiya 645AF, all in the
efforts to get something that worked more like a 35mm camera. I
guess if i could have had MF quality in a 35mm package, i would
have been 'home' from the beginning. But, that stuff wasn't
available then.

Good luck deciphering all of this....

Zp

Click to expand...

--
rirapp

Ze Pequeno said:

Ze Pequeno said:

more capable and stable.

Click to expand...

Hard to imagine, as OSX just doesn't crash. If anything does
happen, it's in the realm of an internet browser having trouble
with some page's coding or somesuch. Then, all you have to do is
quit the application and start it again. I doubt anything on
Windows is as stable as the Linux-based OSX.

Click to expand...

I don't really care to get into the argument per se, but I did want to correct an error.

OS-X is not based on Linux. It's based on the Free-BSD variation of Unix. The basic design and architecture of Linux and Free-BSD is similar, since they are both Unix clones, but underneath each has its own codebase.

Linux is a Unix clone created by Linus Torvalds in the early 90's. The Free BSD project was an entirely separate project that was derived from the BSD UNIX developed at the University of California at Berkeley at roughly the same time.

Mike

Peter Sills said:

6. The Macintosh has been at the forefront of hardware innovations,
such as Firewire (developed by Sony). Though the current Macs
borrow heavily from the PC (PCI bus, EIDE drives, USB ports, etc.)

Click to expand...

One point of correction. The Firewire standard was actually first created by Apple, then later developed and ratified by the IEEE 1394 commitee.

However, despite having created it, Apple didn't actually do anything with it right away, and Sony was the first company to actually incorporate it into shipping products, as part of their MiniDV camcorders

With regards to computers, Firewire interfaces came out for both Mac and PC at about the same time, but it became popular first on the Mac platform because Apple made it a standard built-in interface starting with the blue G3 towers in early '99.

Firewire didn't really start to become popular on the PC until after Windows 2000 and Windows ME shipped with native Firewire support.

Mike