Topic: Mamiya ZD Back - first impressions (Read 13473 times)

johnE · « **Reply #20 on:** August 16, 2007, 02:39:10 am »

Quote

John,

In all respect, yours (and Snook;s) reply makes me wanna do one thing: simply forget forums and do what I like: photography .

I explained the factory image above and see no reason to post more on its regards. Only state what I said above, in same situation my D200 would have been much much worse. If you have any questions on other counts please feel free to ask or drop me a private email

Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133567\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Anders,

I am really not sure why you are so sensitive about this - the comment from snook did not appear to be a personal attack on you - just a question about why 1 of the 3 images you posted was so different from the others. Your other two images are great.

Anders_HK · « **Reply #21 on:** August 16, 2007, 05:06:49 am »

Quote

Anders,

I am really not sure why you are so sensitive about this - the comment from snook did not appear to be a personal attack on you - just a question about why 1 of the 3 images you posted was so different from the others. Your other two images are great.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133568\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

John, Lets stick to facts (although most repeat...) ;

These are my first 2 shootings with the ZD CAMERA and use on one business trip.

Shot 1 - Waterfall
ISO50. Tripod. Strong light. +1.5 in PP.
DR & expsore latitude impressive.

Shot 2 - Tea Plantation
ISO50. Tripod. Light not perfect.
DR & exposure latitude impressive.

Shot 3 - Factory in KOREA (business trip)
ISO400. Dark. Hand held.
Complete useable for business trip photo.

Alll significant better than D200

I feel like back to photography!

Regards
Anders

Snook · « **Reply #22 on:** August 16, 2007, 09:20:10 am »

Yes Anders indeed do not get upset it was just an observation.
I am seriuosly thinking about getting a AFDII and either trying the P+30 or trying a ZD if I see better results.
I know the camera has been out for 18 months. But in that time there has been about 2 reviews on it that just have been posted recently.
Where are all those others that have had it for 18 months?
One from Frank Doorh(sp) and a couple now popping in here in this forum.
Which I find really strange for a camera that has been out for 18 months.. Don't you?
Also Not to be be smart but My (dslr) 1DsMII would SMOKE that ZD 400ASA picture handheld at whatever speed, especially with the 24-105 IS.
So please do not use that analogy as it is not correct..:+} Not sure about the Nikon!
From my reading in the last several months the ZD should not go above 100ASA unlesss an emergency?
May I ask why you posted that image of the steel workers?
You should have posted what you shot it at so people would not get confused like myself.
In any case thanks for posting and keep posting if you can we all appreciate it I am sure!
Again no offense but you have to see why I stated that.

Anders_HK · « **Reply #23 on:** August 16, 2007, 09:44:07 am »

Quote

Yes Anders indeed do not get upset it was just an observation.
I am seriuosly thinking about getting a AFDII and either trying the P+30 or trying a ZD if I see better results.
I know the camera has been out for 18 months. But in that time there has been about 2 reviews on it that just have been posted recently.
Where are all those others that have had it for 18 months?
One from Frank Doorh(sp) and a couple now popping in here in this forum.
Which I find really strange for a camera that has been out for 18 months.. Don't you?
Also Not to be be smart but My (dslr) 1DsMII would SMOKE that ZD 400ASA picture handheld at whatever speed, especially with the 24-105 IS.
So please do not use that analogy as it is not correct..:+} Not sure about the Nikon!
From my reading in the last several months the ZD should not go above 100ASA unlesss an emergency?
May I ask why you posted that image of the steel workers?
You should have posted what you shot it at so people would not get confused like myself.
In any case thanks for posting and keep posting if you can we all appreciate it I am sure!
Again no offense but you have to see why I stated that.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Snook,

Just point of reference, not steel workers. Visiting engineers. That is concrete formwork for about 50m span precast segements, approaches for an 850m span long bridge. No, D200 would not have handled that situation. Canon is said to be better at high ISO. D200 is noisy.

For ZD, I think I have found pretty much all available on internet, check here [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17333&hl=]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....topic=17333&hl=[/url] One of the Japanese are very good, although they only shot JPG.

Do bear in mind when reading what is said of the ZD that many that write are used at medium format backs at a different price level that do have some advantages to the ZD including perhaps noise at same situation as my factory photo. The 1Ds MkII is respectable, but it is not capable of as much DR or exposure latitude, etc... . Did you consider the ZD Camera? It is DSLR handling, still medium format camera. I am used to DSLRs and found the ZD camera to feel better in hands than the AFDII with back.

Yes, it has been said not to use ZD over 100 ASA, but... depending on situation and use it can, but what are we comparing to? DSLR Nikon or Canon, or Hassy? If very dark the ZD does not do competely well at ISO 400 as you can see. But... for the situation and results I needed it worked fine and was another excuse to get to use the camera more! Else I will keep it off such areas and into landscapes and people living traditional lives on travel .

Regards
Anders

Snook · « **Reply #24 on:** August 16, 2007, 09:56:01 am »

Thanks anders..
No I would NEVER even consider the ZD camera.. Only the Back.
I would not want to be stuck with 3-4 year old technology today.
Atleast with the AFDII camera and Back you have the option of using a different back in the future.
The camera with built in back would not be a wise investment at all.
Also on a side note.. It seems nobody cares that this camera is 3-4 years behind in design and technology...
Just a queston , but was wondering how many are concerned.?
Thanks again Anders
Snook

Anders_HK · « **Reply #25 on:** August 16, 2007, 10:21:19 am »

Quote

Thanks anders..
No I would NEVER even consider the ZD camera.. Only the Back.
I would not want to be stuck with 3-4 year old technology today.
Atleast with the AFDII camera and Back you have the option of using a different back in the future.
The camera with built in back would not be a wise investment at all.
Also on a side note.. It seems nobody cares that this camera is 3-4 years behind in design and technology...
Just a queston , but was wondering how many are concerned.?
Thanks again Anders
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133629\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Snook,

I have read same opion of others about the ZD camera versus back, but do consider that mediumformat digital IS different from DSLRs. It seems they are not replaced so very often (it is expensive to develop them!). The AFDII is how much? It is still small price compared to the ZD back that you will replace, or in comparison to the ZD camera. Those are just some thoughts to consider... more important are the lenses. Mamiya's are lots cheaper than Hassy as example, except for the new 28mm and 75-150mm which I cannot figure out why they so $$$.

Yes, the ZD camera and back were in development long time, but seems there are also very few reported problems with them unlike Nikon and Canon. The ZD camera is NOT old technology compared to the ZD back. I am told by Mamiya's agent in Hong Kong that image quality and spec wise there is no difference, provided the camera has the latest firmware.

My choice for the ZD camera over back was becuse I intend to keep it for 5-10 years (or if my salary go up significant within 5 years, who knows...). My ZD will even in 10 years help produce very nice large prints, while todays DSLRs will be lagging to newer techology and that is what I look for in my photography (the ZD should I assume outlast 1Ds Mk IV and D4x). Medium format such as the ZD already have quality of equal to drum scanned medium format film it is said. It is question of how much more do we need? The 39MP backs have been said to push into 4x5 territory...

If you are looking at C1 and other backs, I recommend doing the research thourough to make sure that you do get enough in image quality for your needs compared to the ZD back to be worth the $$.

Also consider that much of internet is written from USA and the USA agent only imports the ZD back... and ZD back is also new... so that is what all recent writings are stemming from, compared to what is available on the ZD camera.

Regards
Anders

mcfoto · « **Reply #26 on:** August 17, 2007, 03:42:12 am »

Hi
I was at L&P in Sydney and saw the 75-150 lens for the first time. Very impressive and you can focus it closer than the 150 mm. The 28 mm is a serious piece of glass & doesn't need software correction. This is a stand alone lens that will work with any digital back that will attach to the Mamiya 645 AFD or AFDII body. Cost wise yes they are expensive but have you compared how much Canon glass costs these days?
Denis

Henry Goh · « **Reply #27 on:** August 17, 2007, 04:26:32 am »

Quote

John,

In all respect, yours (and Snook;s) reply makes me wanna do one thing: simply forget forums and do what I like: photography .

I explained the factory image above and see no reason to post more on its regards. Only state what I said above, in same situation my D200 would have been much much worse. If you have any questions on other counts please feel free to ask or drop me a private email

Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133567\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was fortunate enough to have the MEF file of the said Korean factory shot. I think for ISO400 and the huge difference between the outside light level and the deepest shadows, I would have expected even more noise. Also, although Anders may be an experienced photographer, I think anyone using a new camera under such lighting condition (and on a business trip as that) would not have produced a cleaner file. The shot was number 200+ . I still normally go through about 4,000 plus shots with any new camera before I'm fully conversant with it.

Just be grateful that someone is willing to share his experience and files.

Henry

Anders_HK · « **Reply #28 on:** August 17, 2007, 04:31:19 pm »

Quote

I was fortunate enough to have the MEF file of the said Korean factory shot. I think for ISO400 and the huge difference between the outside light level and the deepest shadows, I would have expected even more noise. Also, although Anders may be an experienced photographer, I think anyone using a new camera under such lighting condition (and on a business trip as that) would not have produced a cleaner file. The shot was number 200+ . I still normally go through about 4,000 plus shots with any new camera before I'm fully conversant with it.

Just be grateful that someone is willing to share his experience and files.

Henry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Henry,

Much sincere thanks for your words. It was pleasure to share that and other files with you. Indeed you showed me that that particular shot could be made more noise less! Perhaps we should say in humbleness that at such few shots it speaks more of the Mamiya than me...

Indeed you showed me that that particular shot could be much more clean due to noise using Imagenomic. I have that photo but I do respect your copyright of the work you did on my photo. Would you mind posting it or if I do so? Just to show what can be obtained out of the Mamiya in such situation...

Regards
Anders

johnE · « **Reply #29 on:** August 17, 2007, 04:43:27 pm »

Quote

Just be grateful that someone is willing to share his experience and files.

Henry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I shot the ZD back about 10 days ago and am somewhat familiar with its capability. Although, thank you for reminding me to be grateful - I forget sometimes.

Henry Goh · « **Reply #30 on:** August 17, 2007, 08:22:16 pm »

Quote

Henry,

Much sincere thanks for your words. It was pleasure to share that and other files with you. Indeed you showed me that that particular shot could be made more noise less! Perhaps we should say in humbleness that at such few shots it speaks more of the Mamiya than me...

Indeed you showed me that that particular shot could be much more clean due to noise using Imagenomic. I have that photo but I do respect your copyright of the work you did on my photo. Would you mind posting it or if I do so? Just to show what can be obtained out of the Mamiya in such situation...

Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133893\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dear Anders,

Please do whatever seems fit to you and again thanks for your generosity.

Anders_HK · « **Reply #31 on:** August 17, 2007, 09:37:43 pm »

Quote

Dear Anders,

Please do whatever seems fit to you and again thanks for your generosity.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133924\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Attached are Henry's two versions along with a full size JPG of my original PP, NR in Silkypix at 25%. Bear in mind that this not a perfect shot, hand held at dark conditions at ISO 400. Also that any camera has limitations and this is to show highest ISO on ZD at dark condition, hand held. Oh, my PP was +1.4 stops...

Regards
Anders

Anders_HK · « **Reply #32 on:** August 17, 2007, 09:38:50 pm »

Mmm... indeed this site does not like me upload my fullsize....

Here we go with my 2400 pixels wide and a 100% crop (by CS2 from fullsize jpg). Again bear in mind the conditions for the photo. It is not to show the ZD at its best but at its outer limits and use also outside my normal photography (landscape, people living traditional lives) or OUTSIDE what ZD is best for. This was occassional shot not complete lost and actual useful

Above two were Henry's versions.

Recalling my original posted images, at least the factory was a 1200pixel wide that I resized in MS Resizer... and also the others had been through MS Resizer to reduce upload volume... perhaps not best for peeping

Regards
Anders

Snook · « **Reply #33 on:** August 18, 2007, 10:00:58 pm »

Sure looks like a lot of Purple Blotches just like several are posting on other threads..
Yours looks like it has the same problem.
I just looked at your 100% crops and they are Not only really noisy they have the Blotchy syndrome if you ask me..
Who ever said they thought it would be worse has got to be kidding....
Even my Point and shoot nikon from 5 years ago has less noise.
I see streaks also mixed in there also...
Thanks for posting
Snook

mcfoto · « **Reply #34 on:** August 18, 2007, 11:43:19 pm »

Hi Anders
Seems like Silkypix does a better job than CS2. Compared to my ZD they are very useable in Silkypix. Have you tried RD ( only works on a MAC )?

Anders_HK · « **Reply #35 on:** August 19, 2007, 01:05:22 am »

Quote

Hi Anders
Seems like Silkypix does a better job than CS2. Compared to my ZD they are very useable in Silkypix. Have you tried RD ( only works on a MAC )?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Denis,

Interesting what you say compared to your ZD. I recall this thread ; [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=18159&hl=firmware]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....159&hl=firmware[/url]

where you mentioned "The ZD camera has had a firm ware upgrade to the one I own. You can do longer exposures up to a minute and it was clean. The higher iso seems to have improved also. "

What firmware version was this? When you spoke of longer exposures was that at ISO50 and on manual mode? I can only use shutter of max 30seconds int Tv mode.

Henry used LR1.1 / CS2 (or was it CS3) for the versions he did of my photos and Imagenomic's Noiseware.

As an engineer I am unfortunate stuck on PCs. MACs are less problems with, courtesy of no MS Windows...

Regards
Anders

mcfoto · « **Reply #36 on:** August 19, 2007, 02:01:00 am »

Quote

Hi Denis,

Interesting what you say compared to your ZD. I recall this thread ; http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....159&hl=firmware

where you mentioned "The ZD camera has had a firm ware upgrade to the one I own. You can do longer exposures up to a minute and it was clean. The higher iso seems to have improved also. "

What firmware version was this? When you spoke of longer exposures was that at ISO50 and on manual mode? I can only use shutter of max 30seconds int Tv mode.
Henry used LR1.1 / CS2 (or was it CS3) for the versions he did of my photos and Imagenomic's Noiseware.

As an engineer I am unfortunate stuck on PCs. MACs are less problems with, courtesy of no MS Windows...

Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134065\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi
My ZD has never had an upgrade (March 2006 purchase ). I will send it to Japan in a few weeks via L&P here in Sydney. I use my ZD in the 50-100 iso range all the time, an improvement in iso would be welcome.
Denis

mcfoto · « **Reply #37 on:** August 19, 2007, 02:20:37 am »

Hi
When I was in L&P the other day they said my ZD camera would need a firmware upgrade to use the 75-150 zoom.

Brent Madison · « **Reply #38 on:** August 20, 2007, 06:23:13 am »

Hi All,

Just back to this posting after a week's 'break'.

Wondering if anyone has used a Polarizing filter yet with this ZD back.

Having shot more with it in the past week, (and having another pro photog here in town with a P-25), I'm STILL impressed with the image quality - and STILL not happy with the screen/histo.

The P-25 will PROCESS zooms for those who are checking sharpness (as opposed to the ZD which doesn't) - so do be aware of that fact when making choices to buy. At the price however, I think the $15,000 difference is a big investment for a good zoom feature.

Looking forward to continued feedback on this great tool.

Sincerely,

Brent Madison

www.madisonimages.com

Anders_HK · « **Reply #39 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:23:01 am »

Quote

Sure looks like a lot of Purple Blotches just like several are posting on other threads..
Yours looks like it has the same problem.
I just looked at your 100% crops and they are Not only really noisy they have the Blotchy syndrome if you ask me..
Who ever said they thought it would be worse has got to be kidding....
Even my Point and shoot nikon from 5 years ago has less noise.
I see streaks also mixed in there also...
Thanks for posting
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134059\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Snook, Sure beats the D200 hands down.Trust me. Yet bear in mind this is not my prime use (or anyones) of the ZD!

Rgds
Anders

Author Topic: Mamiya ZD Back - first impressions (Read 13473 times)

Snook

Snook

Snook