Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: mamiya ZD vs FF Sony  (Read 4455 times)

adam tracksler

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« on: December 25, 2009, 03:10:37 PM »

Looking at replacing my camera, which I had to sell, so I have the luxury ogf having nothing except an empty camera bag.

I have been looking at the a850 or 900, but just found an opportunity to get a mamiya ZD camera.

Most of my work is in studio, with some architecture/landscape stuff. The studio stuff is food and product...

Thanks in advance for your advice and insight on these two...

--ad
Logged

Carsten W

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2009, 05:07:34 PM »

Check out the Pebble Place 645 blog for lots of comments on the ZD camera: http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Medium...ormat_Blog.html

You can also read lots about the A900 in the Sony forum at getdpi.com: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=45
Logged
Carsten W - Recent Photos

mcfoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
    • http://montalbetticampbell.com
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #2 on: December 25, 2009, 06:32:47 PM »

Hi
I sold my ZD camera last year & still have my Mamiya kit. Using canon at the moment. I found the Zd limiting for studio use if you are shooting people the buffer would fill up. I used the ZD mostly for shooting clouds & it was brilliant still when I go over raw files the ZD has a better DR than Canon files ( 1DSMKIII & 5DII ). The fact that you can process MEF files in C1 that is a bonus. With Phase now in control of Mamiya I would go for a Phase back or an Aptus 22 used over a ZD.
Cheers Denis
Logged
Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1861
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2009, 09:11:12 PM »

I agree with MC, as ZD is a 14bit  equal to some of the recent DSLR's, but the lack of AA filter gives the edge to the MF as they get a more 3D sharp pop and with food the contrasts and highlights are very nice and sharp with the MF.  But the phase backs are 16bit, if that makes a difference and more suited for TS(not P30).

When are DSLR's going to be available without a AA FILTER...or optional/removable!!?  This would be another big just for people in studio work. (not for the wedding or fabric shooter, I know)
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 9862
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2009, 07:14:02 AM »

Quote from: Phil Indeblanc
I agree with MC, as ZD is a 14bit  equal to some of the recent DSLR's, but the lack of AA filter gives the edge to the MF as they get a more 3D sharp pop and with food the contrasts and highlights are very nice and sharp with the MF.  But the phase backs are 16bit, if that makes a difference and more suited for TS(not P30).

When are DSLR's going to be available without a AA FILTER...or optional/removable!!?  This would be another big just for people in studio work. (not for the wedding or fabric shooter, I know)

For what it is worth, I find D3x files correctly sharpened to be just as sharp as ZD files correctly sharpened. Except that I find the D3x files to be cleaner in shadows and with less artifacts.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1861
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2009, 05:03:26 PM »

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
For what it is worth, I find D3x files correctly sharpened to be just as sharp as ZD files correctly sharpened. Except that I find the D3x files to be cleaner in shadows and with less artifacts.

Cheers,
Bernard


not too surprising.

regarding shadows
« Last Edit: December 27, 2009, 05:58:06 PM by Phil Indeblanc »
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2009, 11:58:24 AM »

Quote from: Phil Indeblanc
I agree with MC, as ZD is a 14bit  equal to some of the recent DSLR's, but the lack of AA filter gives the edge to the MF as they get a more 3D sharp pop and with food the contrasts and highlights are very nice and sharp with the MF.  But the phase backs are 16bit, if that makes a difference and more suited for TS(not P30).

When are DSLR's going to be available without a AA FILTER...or optional/removable!!?  This would be another big just for people in studio work. (not for the wedding or fabric shooter, I know)

As far as I know, all of the backs are 14 bit with two empty bits.  16 bit is really a marketing position.  I had heard this, not really believed it, but then Thierry Hagenauer stated as much.  

I've seen some zd files.  They look like Aptus files if the Aptus had some dry solder joints or some bad shielding or something, meaning that every few files or so had something odd going on.
Logged

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1861
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2009, 03:17:50 PM »

Quote from: TMARK
As far as I know, all of the backs are 14 bit with two empty bits.  16 bit is really a marketing position.  I had heard this, not really believed it, but then Thierry Hagenauer stated as much.  

I've seen some zd files.  They look like Aptus files if the Aptus had some dry solder joints or some bad shielding or something, meaning that every few files or so had something odd going on.


 I am not sure about this, but someone that I thought was knowledgable on sensors and the making of, mentioned that the MFdb sensors are the 35 sensors fused together to make a larger one.  wonder if that is true and to what degree?
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

pcunite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2009, 03:52:17 PM »

Quote from: Phil Indeblanc
I am not sure about this, but someone that I thought was knowledgable on sensors and the making of, mentioned that the MFdb sensors are the 35 sensors fused together to make a larger one.  wonder if that is true and to what degree?

I am pretty sure that is not the case. CCD and CMOS are very different.
Logged

yaya

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1206
    • http://yayapro.com
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2009, 04:15:26 PM »

Quote from: Phil Indeblanc
I am not sure about this, but someone that I thought was knowledgable on sensors and the making of, mentioned that the MFdb sensors are the 35 sensors fused together to make a larger one.  wonder if that is true and to what degree?

That someone was extremely un-knowledgable, at least when it comes to sensors  

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1861
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2009, 04:22:24 PM »

Quote from: yaya
That someone was extremely un-knowledgable, at least when it comes to sensors


just to clarify, there are and have been plenty 35mm ccd's. Nikon has(had?)  been using ccd for sensors plenty.

Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

yaya

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1206
    • http://yayapro.com
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2009, 04:29:07 PM »

Quote from: Phil Indeblanc
just to clarify, there are and have been plenty 35mm ccd's. Nikon has(had?)  been using ccd for sensors plenty.

The only 35mm CCD (meaning 24X36mm) that was ever used in a 35mm camera was the Philips 6MP in the Contax N, although it was used in several MF backs before that.

I am not aware of any digital camera (bar some scientific-space devices) that use or have used a "fused" sensor.

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1861
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #13 on: December 27, 2009, 05:11:20 PM »

Quote from: yaya
The only 35mm CCD (meaning 24X36mm) that was ever used in a 35mm camera was the Philips 6MP in the Contax N, although it was used in several MF backs before that.

I am not aware of any digital camera (bar some scientific-space devices) that use or have used a "fused" sensor.


How about some Nikons?  Wasnt the sensor CCD for some time? (ok perhaps not FF 35 sensor), but in a SLR 35 body
« Last Edit: December 27, 2009, 05:16:04 PM by Phil Indeblanc »
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1861
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #15 on: December 27, 2009, 05:19:30 PM »

Quote from: ThierryH
Me neither, I second Yair in that.

Thierry

ok, fused crop sensors? ( I had to edit my previous post) :-)
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
mamiya ZD vs FF Sony
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2009, 08:07:24 AM »

Quote from: adam tracksler
Looking at replacing my camera, which I had to sell, so I have the luxury ogf having nothing except an empty camera bag.

I have been looking at the a850 or 900, but just found an opportunity to get a mamiya ZD camera.

Most of my work is in studio, with some architecture/landscape stuff. The studio stuff is food and product...

Thanks in advance for your advice and insight on these two...

--ad


Sorry not familiar with the Sony.  When they have the support network and the ability to rent a system or lenses anywhere then we'll maybe look into them further.  My recommendation is to stay away from a ZD system.  I have sold a few and they are not worth the trouble.  You would be better off buying a used 22MP system from any of the digital back manufactures or if your budget allows a new system.  Leaf has a Leaf Aptus II-5, Phase body, and new 80mm Digital lens for $9995.00.  

Best,
Rich Andres
Foto Care
NY, NY
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up