Has every ZD / ZD back owner given up

[bcroslin]

deleted

[Frank Doorhof]

edited

[bcroslin]

deleted

[bcroslin]

deleted

[bcroslin]

deleted

[Snook]

I agree 100%.
That is NOT color noise. That is Purple BLOBS!
Let's get that straight.
This is my main concern and I too find it ridiculous that Mamiya does not have a RECALL on this.
If I were to have that happen on a job they paid me $$$$$$ I would be out of a job next time and that cannot happen.
This medium format is getting frustrating to say the least!
Where I live I cannot go and just return it.
Which ever MFDB i go I will ALWAYS have either the 1DsMII orIII or 5DMII as back up no doubt.
My worries now are also that for much of the Magazines and stuff I do, I am not even sure that MFD is much better than the 1DsMII or even the 5D. I will get heat for this, but I am in the doubting stage now and the 1DsMIII is looking like more of a better option..
Unfortunely I just invested in a AFDII 35mm and 55-110 zoom...  
From what I am reading in a lot of the forums now is that for magazine print a lot of people are stating that there is no difference in the MFDB and 1DsMII? Is that true?
I find it hard to believe but that is the vibe that is coming around.
It is mainly for guy that want 4x6FT prints in galleries?
Am I completely wrong here?
Thanks for any more information.
Snook

[Frank Doorhof]

Bob, did you calibrate your monitor for brightness ?
In the dark areas on the ISO400 shots they are seen very clearly on my monitor.
If you want to make sure, crank up your brightness about 20% and you will see what I mean.

It's not noise, noise is not bad, in the early day it was called grain (well ok it's different I know), I never have had a problem with noise, sometimes it really adds to a picture.
HOWEVER this purple wurms I'm calling them show up in skintones and in other colors, it's not noise but it's like a stamp on the pictures, for me that's a real problem, my customers want a clean image colorwise, they don't care about a little noise, that can be killed by many many plugins.

However these purple artifacts are not.

Ofcourse you don't have to shoot on ISO400 on a MF back, HOWEVER the problem I have is that when you pull shadows on an ISO100 file you can also see them, especially in skin tones which drove me nuts.
Also the strange thing was that on my first back I did not have a problem.

The main concern for me is and I'm torn between this.
Mamiya claims that it's ONE batch only with problem, now I see alot of ZD back files and on alot of them I can point the purple artifacts out.
Mamiya has always been very honest with me during my test time with the ZD back, however I'm now in doubt what is happening, it's not as bad as with my back what you show, but they are clear as day, and even on ISO400 or even ISO800 (pulled from ISO400) it should NOT happen.
Noise on ISO400 or ISO800 is quite normal, even pattern noise is normal (although irritating) but this is something else.

Maybe it's a killer test but try to shoot a dark subject on ISO400 and underexpose one stop, now get in ACR and get the exposure one stop up, it will show MUCH more clearly.
Of course people will say, you don't do that, well ok I agree but the problem is that the purple is also seen on anything above ISO125 on my last back and it got increasingly worse when I got to ISO400 where it was clear as day.

There was some talk about the 5D a while ago where people would underexpose an ISO3200 shot by 2 stops pulled it up and complained about PATTERN noise/banding in shadows.
Again that is normal and can be fixed.
This I don't know what it is must be a fault in their filter or software and I think that if more people report it they can and will fix it.

It's a killer product for a killer price, but this is something they should fix or indeed limit the back to ISO100.

[Frank Doorhof]

@Snook,
There will always be discussion about it.
I'm very picky quality wise and I think there is a huge difference in my files from the 5D or 1DsII and the ZD or Leaf Aptus22.

Some people will look at it and say I don't see it.
Same with the purple I circled for me it jumped straight out to me VERY obvious, the poster doesn't see it.

I will not say someone has bad eyes or doesn't know were to look I will never put someone down because they see things different than me, let's make that 100% clear.

Let's also make 100% clear that for ME the medium format system is much better than my DSLR in many sectors.
HOWEVER again when you look at what will do my JOB the 1DsIII will be a killer machine.

Let's make it even easier.
When you run a express service.
A simple low budget car will do just fine and bring you from A-B in the same time as a very expensive luxery car. Your customer doesn't care one bit.
So you have to make the choice for your self do I take the money and invest it in a simple car and make more money, or do I want to sit comforable and earn less money.

With MF it's a bit the same.
Your customer being a magazine or a model won't see a difference probarbly (although I think that is not true but I will let that rest) so why invest in MF ??

1. It will give you an edge over competition who still shoot DSLR's, maybe your customer is sensitive for this.
2. Because YOU PERSONALLY just want the absolute best.

I think that point 2 is maybe one of the most important things, I'm a photographer with a PASSION for what I do and I want to be excited every shot I take, the MF system gives me that, the DR, color, sharpness 3D look etc. etc.

When I was doing photography as a profession and only thought about turnover and it was WORK I would buy the 1DsIII in a heartbeat.

[samuel_js]

Here I have circled them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137497\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can see them, but just because you circled them. The other one in the arm is more obvious and disturbing ...
What gamma is the calibration of your monitor? I calibrate mine in 2.2.

[Anders_HK]

ZD users, please take a look at my test at http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=18922.

On my ZD camera I see similar as Bob Croslin;s but more bluish-purple. It shows in dark near black areas and even at ISO 50 when I look careful. At ISO 50 it is weak but still can show. At higher ISO it shows more. View your display with no reflections on the display. On mine seem different than Frank's. Frank;s was more obvious stamped and much worse than Bob;s

This does not seem like a noise. I cannot clean it with noiseware (SilkyPix, Noise Ninja).

Please post at http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=18922 or here of what you find in testing (good or bad). I have my agent test a ZD camera to see if they get on that one. Will be interesting if more people test both camera and back similar to how I did.

I do not like what I see on mine. At 50 & 100 ISO I expect it to not be present.

Regards
Anders

[Frank Doorhof]

I calibrate at D6500 gamma 2.2 CRT.

[Bernd B.]

Bob, why did you delete all your posts and sample images in this thread?

[David Blankenship]

I agree 100%.
That is NOT color noise. That is Purple BLOBS!
Let's get that straight.
This is my main concern and I too find it ridiculous that Mamiya does not have a RECALL on this.
If I were to have that happen on a job they paid me $$$$$$ I would be out of a job next time and that cannot happen.
This medium format is getting frustrating to say the least!
Where I live I cannot go and just return it.
Which ever MFDB i go I will ALWAYS have either the 1DsMII orIII or 5DMII as back up no doubt.
My worries now are also that for much of the Magazines and stuff I do, I am not even sure that MFD is much better than the 1DsMII or even the 5D. I will get heat for this, but I am in the doubting stage now and the 1DsMIII is looking like more of a better option..
Unfortunely I just invested in a AFDII 35mm and 55-110 zoom...  
From what I am reading in a lot of the forums now is that for magazine print a lot of people are stating that there is no difference in the MFDB and 1DsMII? Is that true?
I find it hard to believe but that is the vibe that is coming around.
It is mainly for guy that want 4x6FT prints in galleries?
Am I completely wrong here?
Thanks for any more information.
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137513\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Snook I feel your PAIN & Frustration on your MFDB Quest!!!!!

 Most of the people who comment about file quaility = color, sharpness  and  camera format chip sizes on this forum  are males.  A little know fact I learned from Our Big Yellow Father "KODAK" in the mid 80's at a Color Print Management Workshop  was that 60% of all males perceive color very poorly and 20% of the 60 percent  are  basicilly color blind. Women in general have a accuracy rate in viewing color at  85% or better.
  When someone makes a statement that the difference between a 16/20mp Canon file and a 39 mp Phase, Hasselblad, Sinar or Leaf file is very litlle at a A4 size they may very well be telling the truth as they SEE it.      At that  color workshop there was  75 people, 65 males and 10 women, we all took a Kodak  color perception test and 50% of the males failed the test with scores below 60 and all the women scored 80 or higher.  The two highest scores were 94 by a female  &  98 by a male,   which just so happen to be me.  Just goes to show men can get in touch with there feminine side.    
  I recently entered a print competition and printed files from a 6mp, 10 mp and 12 mp dslr cameras.
The print sizes were A4  and mounted black foam core which a 3 inch border. The subject matter was enviromental portraits of Research Engineers and Scientist  and they where photographed with the same lens but different brands of cameras.  I asked 3 co-workers to pick out the 6 megapixel file from the three A4 prints I made   My judges where  two graphic designers and one photographer and they all concluded that the six megapixel file was the most film like and had  the best image quaility.
  The 6 mp file was shot on a Fuji S2 in jpeg  fine quality mode and the other two files came from a Nikon D200 & Nikon D2X in raw mode.  I really did not believe the Fuji was the sharpest of the three files but the color was the most film like and the quality between the three files was very similar at A4,  it wasn't until I blew them  up to 24 x 30 that the D2X file started to really shine.
  So...... will the  20 mp Canon file have a similar look as the Medium format files at A4.......most likey Yes, will there  be big diffence between them  at A4,  Most likey NO....... But if your interested  in the highest quality available in a managable camera format  that you can live with and can afford then MFDB are the Cat's MEow, the Dog's HOwl and the  Cow's MOo.......................................... Keep the flaming to a moderate level please!!!    

db

[samuel_js]

Snook I feel your PAIN & Frustration on your MFDB Quest!!!!!

 Most of the people who comment about file quaility = color, sharpness  and  camera format chip sizes on this forum  are males.  A little know fact I learned from Our Big Yellow Father "KODAK" in the mid 80's at a Color Print Management Workshop  was that 60% of all males perceive color very poorly and 20% of the 60 percent  are  basicilly color blind. Women in general have a accuracy rate in viewing color at  85% or better.
  When someone makes a statement that the difference between a 16/20mp Canon file and a 39 mp Phase, Hasselblad, Sinar or Leaf file is very litlle at a A4 size they may very well be telling the truth as they SEE it.      At that  color workshop there was  75 people, 65 males and 10 women, we all took a Kodak  color perception test and 50% of the males failed the test with scores below 60 and all the women scored 80 or higher.  The two highest scores were 94 by a female  &  98 by a male,   which just so happen to be me.  Just goes to show men can get in touch with there feminine side.    
  I recently entered a print competition and printed files from a 6mp, 10 mp and 12 mp dslr cameras.
The print sizes were A4  and mounted black foam core which a 3 inch border. The subject matter was enviromental portraits of Research Engineers and Scientist  and they where photographed with the same lens but different brands of cameras.  I asked 3 co-workers to pick out the 6 megapixel file from the three A4 prints I made   My judges where  two graphic designers and one photographer and they all concluded that the six megapixel file was the most film like and had  the best image quaility.
  The 6 mp file was shot on a Fuji S2 in jpeg  fine quality mode and the other two files came from a Nikon D200 & Nikon D2X in raw mode.  I really did not believe the Fuji was the sharpest of the three files but the color was the most film like and the quality between the three files was very similar at A4,  it wasn't until I blew them  up to 24 x 30 that the D2X file started to really shine.
  So...... will the  20 mp Canon file have a similar look as the Medium format files at A4.......most likey Yes, will there  be big diffence between them  at A4,  Most likey NO....... But if your interested  in the highest quality available in a managable camera format  that you can live with and can afford then MFDB are the Cat's MEow, the Dog's HOwl and the  Cow's MOo.......................................... Keep the flaming to a moderate level please!!!    

db
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137571\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ok, here we go again...  

Could you please look at the folowing images and make a comparison. Is one of them better? Are they similar? Different formats? Same formats? Sharp? Pixelcount?
Lets see your 98 score  

[Henry Goh]

Due to the time difference, I just woke up from slumber and found that Bob has deleted his posts and so did Frank on a few of his.  I'm quite saddened because I had started this thread hoping to see more images, good or bad.  I guess the exchanges must have gotten too hot.  I hope no one got ruffled but nonetheless, I like to thank Bob and Frank for contributing to this thread.  I only wish I had been able to see those images for myself since I really want to make a decision in the near future on the ZD / ZD back.

Sometimes, people get a bit rough in their replies, whether unintentionally or because of being "lost in translation" due to the language differences of such an international community. I guess we need to be sensitive as I'm sure everyone here participates with the intention of sharing or receiving good information.

Hope to hear from more users still.  May I suggest a possible (remotely possible?) reason for some of these discolorations - temperature.  If people with purplish / magenta / green issues could try this.  Leave your camera or back off and unused.  Switch on, take a few shots quickly so that the camera is working from a cool state.  Next, just keep the camera on and shoot at various ISOs for say 50 or 60 frames and then shoot a few of the same setup as the cooled first few frames.  Now examine the first few frames and the last few frames.  Are there any differences?  Are there any color fringing or discoloration?  Please share with us.

I almost bought the Kodak 14n a few years ago but there were so many "Italian" flag issues, high ISO noise issues, red blob issues that I stopped after waiting for fixes over a year.  However, the Kodak forum at dpreview.com was a very helpful and willing one.  Although people had paid good money and found they had issues with their cameras, they were willing to share and together they did push Kodak to provide many firmware fixes.  If they had kept quiet, I'm sure that Kodak would not have worked as hard on those firmware fixes. Unfortunately, Kodak gave up on themselves.  My worry is if we don't push for fixes from Mamiya on issues, then it won't get better for anyone here.  Not to forget also, Kodak is a financially stronger company than Mamiya (is right now) and if Kodak can give up what are the chances of Mamiya giving up completely???  So, we should get Mamiya to do this quickly and hopefully, overcome any issues with their cameras.  Sales should then go up and they will have a better reason to stay in this business.  We on the other hand will have an alternative to the otherwise "hog-your-wife" / "sell-your-right-kidney" club of MFDB users.

Hope people will continue sharing .....please......

Henry

[Frank Doorhof]

@Samual,
I think the first picture show a good deal of 3D, the second picture looks flat.

HOWEVER the light in the first picture contributes for 90% of the 3D look as does the DOF.

It's always difficult to say 123.
As mentioned in the other thread it's best to shoot a Canon and MF next to each other.

[eronald]

David,

 Thanks to you, finally, some inconvenient facts surface.

 PHOTOGRAPHERS OFTEN HAVE MEDIOCRE COLOR VISION. BUT THEIR CLIENTS USUALLY DO HAVE GOOD COLOR VISION.
 THE FASHION RETOUCHERS, PICTURE EDITORS AND ***READERS*** ARE MOSTLY FEMALE.
 IF YOUR COLOR IS BAD, YOUR CLIENTS WILL KNOW BEFORE YOU DO.


Edmund

Snook I feel your PAIN & Frustration on your MFDB Quest!!!!!

 Most of the people who comment about file quaility = color, sharpness  and  camera format chip sizes on this forum  are males.  A little know fact I learned from Our Big Yellow Father "KODAK" in the mid 80's at a Color Print Management Workshop  was that 60% of all males perceive color very poorly and 20% of the 60 percent  are  basicilly color blind. Women in general have a accuracy rate in viewing color at  85% or better.

db
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137571\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[thsinar]

... the light .... and the viewcamera for the selective plane of sharpness (tilt)?: sharpness is running from the upper top (curtains) through the sofa and down the flooor.

Thierry

@Samual,
I think the first picture show a good deal of 3D, the second picture looks flat.

HOWEVER the light in the first picture contributes for 90% of the 3D look as does the DOF.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137638\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Henry Goh]

I'm sure we can start another thread on 3D looks of various cameras and format but can we kindly get back to the ZD camera and ZD back.  Thank you.

Henry

[mcfoto]

Hi
I have spent the last 5 days going into Sydney shooting APEC as a photo journalist would with the ZD. It is a brilliant camera & this one is 16 months old ( no upgrade). My Canon 5D sits idle at the moment. It is light weight & easy to use......... BUT for some reason I feel & maybe there are pixel peepers out there or Mamiya haters.........SORRY.............BUT this is becoming stupid!!!!!!!!!I am getting great results & if we loose Mamiya that is it for AFFORDABLE MFD PERIOD. If you don't like the ZD format buy something else! Yes Leaf is better but that ZD camera is brilliant!!!! It truly is a MFD SLR camera. I have been using RD on a MAC..........I don't know what else to say!!!!!!
Denis