Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: gmerrell on October 07, 2007, 10:16:39 pm
-
[attachment=3502:attachment][attachment=3503:attachment]Attached are two (1meg) JPEGS taken with a ZD back in western Oklahoma this week end. I have had the back for about one week and so far I am mildly impressed. I purchased the back for landscape work and some studio. My normal use is Nikon D2X and Mamiya 645 film. I have not seen evidence of the (purple worms). I also have shot with all ISO settings up to 200 and don't see the noise some people are talking about. The back demands that the exposure be correct. It likes exposure as far right as you can with out clipping highlights.
The two attached files are jpegs shot in raw and converted with CS3 with little work done to them. One file is asa50 and the other is asa200 both F11.
I think they compare very well.
-
Hi
From my understanding here in Sydney from the Mamiya agent they have dealt with the purple worms. I am very impressed with the asa 200. What you will find is the DR of the ZD will be better than your Nikon.
-
Hi
From my understanding here in Sydney from the Mamiya agent they have dealt with the purple worms. I am very impressed with the asa 200. What you will find is the DR of the ZD will be better than your Nikon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144513\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes,
I have done some side by side shots with the D2X and the DR is higher with the ZD. It's hard to describe, but it is a prettier file than the D2X. I know prettier is not a technical term but it describes what I see.
-
Can you post the same daylight scene from both the ZD back and the D2x for comparison?
Marc
-
[attachment=3512:attachment][attachment=3513:attachment]
Can you post the same daylight scene from both the ZD back and the D2x for comparison?
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144522\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Marc
I don't have any comparison D2X from this scene. I will see if I have some others. I have deleted most of them. Aside from the DR, the most striking thing is the noise in the D2X file at large image size compared to the low noise of the ZD at the same image size.
Attached are a couple of files. The first is a D2X nef converted to JPG and the second a ZD converted to JPG. These are not anything special just comparison shots on a very bright high contrast day. The noise is what I was looking at.
Hope this helps some.
Greg
-
[attachment=3512:attachment][attachment=3513:attachment]
Marc
I don't have any comparison D2X from this scene. I will see if I have some others. I have deleted most of them. Aside from the DR, the most striking thing is the noise in the D2X file at large image size compared to the low noise of the ZD at the same image size.
Attached are a couple of files. The first is a D2X nef converted to JPG and the second a ZD converted to JPG. These are not anything special just comparison shots on a very bright high contrast day. The noise is what I was looking at.
Hope this helps some.
Greg
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144690\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Greg,
A bright scene will not show up as much noise as a dark one. It is when it is dark scene and I really need the extra ISO to be able to capture an image that it gets noisy.
It would be interesting to see your examples of such a scene. The information that I have from my agent is that my ZD camera has latest firmware and that image quality is same as ZD back. There is updated firmware available for the ZD camera since it is older, but not yet for the ZD back.
I had D200 before. That one was noisy indeed and shallow DR in comparison, but... with ZD I seek even higher image quality same time. I agree with your experience that the files are plain wonderful to work with from the ZD. It is possiblt to do more with them, such as +1.5 in PP and still beautiful image (given good light).
Regards
Anders
-
when I look close the trees look like trees from the ZD, the trees look like drawings from the D2x. Good enough comparison for me.
Marc