Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: Brent Madison on August 11, 2007, 11:36:13 pm
-
I thought I'd share a few initial thoughts on Mamiya's ZD digital back on a AFD 645 body. This is the first digital back I've owned, but I have used the P25 digital back from Phase One on the Fuji 680 system (with adapter).
I bought the ZD back in Bangkok about a week ago for about $8000, and used it for a hotel shoot in Phuket as a replacement to 6x4.5 film and as a suppliment to the d200 gear I've been using more and more (as film gets hard to source here in Asia).
Having used digital Nikons since they started producing them, the first thing you'll immediately notice when using the ZD back is that this is obviously a first-generation piece of equipment. The many menu, button and user-interface improvements refined over time in the current crop of Nikons doesn't exist in the ZD - menus and options are very basic, multiple-button operations are needed to do basic functions like showing image information, and review/viewing screens are slow to appear.
As others have said, and I agree, the screen is useless at 1.8 inches. I only used it to check the histogram as the review looks fuzzy all the time, and image zoom only makes you wonder if anything in the shot is sharp at all. I know the lenses and focus well from film-based days, so ended up treating the back much like film by ignoring the image review (but having the bonus of a histogram!).
In favor of the back's layout, the image information itself - ISO, Image Quality and remaining shots is very easy to see and easy to change.
Switching the camera on, there is a lag while the system boots. Once on, the power-saver mode will shut the back down after a few seconds of inactivity. This was very frustrating as the timing seemed to shut down precisely after I'd called new instructions to models or moved a piece of furniture and needed to shoot again. The camera itself then needs to be switched off, turned back on and the back needs to reboot. I eventually found the power-saver in the menu and switched it off which sped up battery use but saved countless missed shots.
Shooting golf courses, hotel interiors and exteriors and food/still-lifes the back worked wonderfully - and felt much like film. The back seems balanced perfectly to the system and I forgot at times I wasn't shooting film. The user still gets the 'ka-chunk' of the camera - all the lenses of the AFD system work, including a 645 50mm manual shift lens and I could shoot about 250-300 images before needing to find a plug to charge. I get about 110 images per 4 Gig card. Shooting models (and I'm assuming the same would apply to wildlife) there is only a 1-shot-per-second maximum and the buffer fills quickly. I repeatedly found myself waiting (as well as did the clients/models) for the 10-shot buffer to write, so it makes sense to buy the fastest cards on the market to help the process along.
TWO major concerns however -
The first: there were occassional, unexplained write/shoot errors (which the Mamiya rep in BKK said was due to a needed firmware upgrade in my AFD). These happened without warning and were 'cured' by shutting down the camera and turning it on again - and a few times by popping open the (somewhat overly easy-to-open) battery door in the bottom of the back which resets it.
The second: I found very quickly that using a polarizer (on three of my lenses) severely degrades/ruins image quality. It's something I'd rarely seen before on a CCD (in fact, I regularly use PL filters without a problem on my D200 system). I'd love to hear some explainations/work-arounds by those with experience on this. This is a major drawback for me as much of my work involves water/glass/grass/etc... that requires some sort of PL filtration.
I found image quality, color and sharpness wonderful - and it's why I bought this affordable back in the first place. It's wonderful to shoot on a Medium Format system directly to digital avoiding both the grain, wait and expense of scanning. I have an affinity to the frame ratio of this system that the much wider 35mm systems, and the image quality and "look" of MF system can't be beaten. I shoot almost entirely at ISO 100 as that was the film I've always used - very little noise and a bigger dynamic range than the D200, for sure. Where I would have to use a split ND filter to keep skies with the D200, I quickly discovered the ZD back kept image highlights very well - surprisingly well, in fact. I found ISO 400 quite noisy - but no noiser than the D200. While highlights are captured very well, I found from this initial shoot, that there is very little (almost none) to underexposure. Slightly underexposed images start to blockup badly in a non-uniform way (so maybe certain channels are more/less sensitive than others??). Most of my underexposed images were almost un-useable, where as there is some 'forgiveness' with a little underexposure with the D200. I tended to expose towards the burn for most situations, which resulted in very usable files.
Final impressions are that Bridge, Lightroom and the Mamiya software all deliver drastically different previews and processing of the MEF (Raw) files. This is more disconcerting to clients looking at roughs than to me, but the difference is so profound it's impossible to judge if the White Balance settings of the back are totally off or just being interpreted strangely. Daylight WB seemed to be passable using all softward but at this point, I'm leaning towards the look (and ease) of Lightroom's previews (strangely I thought Bridge and Lightroom would look the same, but not). The Mamiya software seems to have been created by someone who has never used image-processing software, especially the now-sleek Bridge and Lightroom, and the layout, controls and image controls of the Mamiya software reminded me of programs I'd used from the 1980s.
All in all, I'm very pleased to have bought the ZD back and will post some image samples soon. The system definitely needs faster buffers, a bigger screen with decent playback quality and speeds, and better user-menus - but for the price and the quality of 22megapixels (now comparible with buying high-end digital SLRs) along with the freedom of using the 645 AFD again heavily, the investment was totally worth it.
Looking forward to your feedback -
Sincerely,
Brent Madison
www.madisonimages.com[attachment=2987:attachment]
-
I totally agree on the display on the back, it's laughable, you can't even look at the composition because it crops totally wrong.
When you think you have included the feet in the shot, the display will tell you you shot the ankles only, seeing the raw there is even space on the bottom of the feet.
Histogram is the only use indeed, however the histogram is taken from the JPEG, so when it says it's blowing out highlights it isn't on the RAW.
Get the firmware upgrade, I shot a while with an older back and the lockups were frequent. I now got the firware upgraded version and it's doesn't hang anymore
-
Brent:
What does the polarizer do to your images? I can't imagine how it could destroy them - sounds very odd.
-
I'm considering a ZD back also, I like the look of your posted image.
What RAW converter did you use and what post processing was applied?
Marc
-
Hi
If you are using the ZD & are on a MAC use Iridient Raw Developer. It is very fast & does an excellent job with the ZD files.
Take a look at this review & since then RD has been updated several times.
http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photograph...article027.html (http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photography/articles/photoarticle027.html)
Denis
-
I totally agree on the display on the back, it's laughable, you can't even look at the composition because it crops totally wrong.
When you think you have included the feet in the shot, the display will tell you you shot the ankles only, seeing the raw there is even space on the bottom of the feet.
Histogram is the only use indeed, however the histogram is taken from the JPEG, so when it says it's blowing out highlights it isn't on the RAW.
Get the firmware upgrade, I shot a while with an older back and the lockups were frequent. I now got the firware upgraded version and it's doesn't hang anymore
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132769\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Frank,
First of all, I just wanted to say that your review was a major contributor for me springing when I did to get the digital back. I shoot lots of travel/lifestyle and the models glow on your site - great work.
I'd been called about two weeks earlier from the Mamiya distributor in Bangkok (also Nikon's only distributor in Thailand), and they started saying they'd discount the back/payments were available, etc... I was really thinking about it - when I saw your samples and review I thought - right choice for the gear! Thanks!
I'll be getting the firmware update as soon as I'm back to Bangkok. The Mamiya dealer there is quite helpful and said he'd send a loner-body in the meantime while the firmware was being upgraded - very glad to hear that the upgrade fixes the problems however. I was starting to worry that I'd be stuck with the problems permanently. I missed quite a few shots waiting for the back to reboot during this last assignment so really need it to perform.
BTW - I don't remember what software you're using to unstuff your MEFs. I find the Mamiya software almost un-useable though it's the program I used to post the sample. I prefer Lightroom myself but still don't find white balance as I'm used to seeing it from Nikon files.
-
Brent
I am also new to the ZD, with the ZD camera (not back). Coming from D200 myself I agree with much you say but not with your comment of underexposure not being useful. On contrary it blows the D200 away on this. Using SilkyPix I found my undexposed waterfall (attached) to be fully useful and to print very nicely. I adjusted it +1.5 stops in SilkyPix! That print is next to an HDR from D200 in my office and the ZD image is far superior even though not same subject or size of print, simply just the impression. I tried a couple of HDRs from the ZD, but I have so far found I get better results adjusting curves in SilkyPix. The DR and great latitude is impressive from the ZD.
So far I have done two landscape shoots and the camera and system definently makes me feel as being back to photography again . I grew into photography with the F100 and Velvia 50 and I never liked the D200. My subjects are landscapes, scenery and people living tradition lives on many travels and living in foreign countries.
The controls of the ZD camera are truly excellent. I like the simplicity. They are different from the computer jungle I felt on the D200, and pretty much exactly where most should be, what I need and with ease to use them. Last Saturday I woke up 4am and drove 3 hours to a green tea field here in Korea (sigh... I have to drive about 3 hours to any beautiful scenery from where I live... ). Light was so so, but after near an hour of wait some sun shined through an opening between the clouds during a few minutes (not perfect condition... but right place right time is most difficult in photography... ). See attached. Green is the color I have found most difficult to get appealing in digital (whereas Velvia was magic ). It took some time adjusting the photos, but overall the colors from the ZD are much better compared to D200. I also do not find the noise much issue. It is usually rather easy to remove in SilkyPix and whenever present it renders the images more film like. The D200 was terrible in noise. Third attached photo is from a business factory visit here in Korea. I shot 400 ASA, compensated +1.4 stops in SilkyPix, noise cleaned in SilkyPix. Ah yah. Propably some noise still, but pleasant looking and better results than I expected. The noise from D200 was not nice. ZD blows the D200 away.
The ZD is a loooooong time keeper.
Regards
Anders
-
Get the firmware upgrade, I shot a while with an older back and the lockups were frequent. I now got the firware upgraded version and it's doesn't hang anymore
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132769\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Greetings. I too will soon be a ZD back owner to use with my AFD. I'm confused though; I thought I had read that it is the 645 AF needs the firmware upgrade (free by Mamiya to make it an AFD) not the AFD. I thought I had read that the AFD works fine with the ZD back.
Is there a definitive answer to this? Thanks in advance.
-Josh
-
Brent:
What does the polarizer do to your images? I can't imagine how it could destroy them - sounds very odd.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132782\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There was a weird posterization of the sky that happened. While I've shot in Phuket many times with Nikon digital SLRs with PL, I only noticed this phenomenon once with the system (in the form of un-natural color shifts that were virtually not correctable).
With the ZD back it seems the PL shifted color in an un-natural way, AND posterized the sky. (See attachments - titled 'polar-... (with PL) and no_polar (no PL) - the "slices" are from the full-frame image, saved with the Mamiya software.
Another strange thing I've noticed while making these samples - both images were displayed dark and underexposed by one stop when opened with the Mamiya software - though when shot, was metered even and with a well-balanced histogram on camera! In the computer however using the Mamiya software, both PL and non-PL images registered as a stop under which boggles me...
During the full week assignment I used the back, I started exposing heavily to the right as underexposure on the back rendered very noisy spots in underexposed areas, a problem not experienced with slightly unexposed images with my Nikon system. Adding the color shift/posterization created by the PL too - these PL files were un-useable in my opinion and had to be reshot.
It would be interesting to get feedback from other Mamiya ZD back users trying PL filters and see their results.
Hopefully in my case, it was just a weird mix of atmosphere, CCD sensor temp (indeed, coming from a cold hotel room to Phuket outdoors would have some effect?), or ...? who knows!
-
Hi
If you are using the ZD & are on a MAC use Iridient Raw Developer. It is very fast & does an excellent job with the ZD files.
Take a look at this review & since then RD has been updated several times.
http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photograph...article027.html (http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photography/articles/photoarticle027.html)
Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Denis,
Thanks for the tip - I'm on a total PC system but will check out Iridient as there may be a PC version(?).
I've been using Lightroom when possible but hate having to load files ever time I want to see an updated folder...
Thanks again,
Brent.
-
Greetings. I too will soon be a ZD back owner to use with my AFD. I'm confused though; I thought I had read that it is the 645 AF needs the firmware upgrade (free by Mamiya to make it an AFD) not the AFD. I thought I had read that the AFD works fine with the ZD back.
Is there a definitive answer to this? Thanks in advance.
-Josh
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132903\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The mamiya dealer told me to avoid hangs I'd need to upgrade the firmware of my AFD which they could do at the shop. I've hear the same now from a few - and it seems to do the job.
Also - there are conficts with the new zoom lens that has been released - and the firmware supposedly solves those problems.
-
The mamiya dealer told me to avoid hangs I'd need to upgrade the firmware of my AFD which they could do at the shop. I've hear the same now from a few - and it seems to do the job.
Also - there are conficts with the new zoom lens that has been released - and the firmware supposedly solves those problems.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=132910\")
Thanks for the info. It appears the confusion runs far and wide as to which 645af/afd/afdII requires the firmware upgrade (or perhaps there are multiple firmwares for the different versions).
Here's a thread from FM forums that seem to complicate the matter:
[a href=\"http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/541314/1]http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/541314/1[/url]
I emailed Mamiya USA for a clarification and will call this week.
-Josh
-
Thanks for the info. It appears the confusion runs far and wide as to which 645af/afd/afdII requires the firmware upgrade (or perhaps there are multiple firmwares for the different versions).
Here's a thread from FM forums that seem to complicate the matter:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/541314/1 (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/541314/1)
I emailed Mamiya USA for a clarification and will call this week.
-Josh
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132920\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
All, I emailed Mamiya USA (MAC) this weekend. I was excited to received an email response today. It appears, at least with the US ZD backs, that no additional firmware is needed for the AFD or AFDII, only the AF.
My ZD back arrived today. I am charging the battery right now...I can't wait.
-Josh
****
info mamiya <[email protected]> 10:47 am
to Josh
date Aug 13, 2007 10:47 AM
subject RE: Clarification re: firmware for AFD and ZD back
Josh:
An AF camera will have to be upgraded to and AFD; the AFD and AFD II
should work perfectly with the ZD back.
-
All, I emailed Mamiya USA (MAC) this weekend. I was excited to received an email response today. It appears, at least with the US ZD backs, that no additional firmware is needed for the AFD or AFDII, only the AF.
My ZD back arrived today. I am charging the battery right now...I can't wait.
-Josh
****
info mamiya <[email protected]> 10:47 am
to Josh
date Aug 13, 2007 10:47 AM
subject RE: Clarification re: firmware for AFD and ZD back
Josh:
An AF camera will have to be upgraded to and AFD; the AFD and AFD II
should work perfectly with the ZD back.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133088\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Josh - great news and thanks for the report from Mamiya. I do believe a firmware update is needed to use the new zoom lens they've just released however. I tried it on my AFD body in the shop - and got 'blanks' across the viewfinder screen. The salesman said the firmware update would fix it.
Wonder why firmware updates aren't available on the internet like every other camera...?
Thanks again,
Brent Madison
www.madisonimages.com
-
Brent
I am also new to the ZD, with the ZD camera (not back). Coming from D200 myself I agree with much you say but not with your comment of underexposure not being useful. On contrary it blows the D200 away on this. Using SilkyPix I found my undexposed waterfall (attached) to be fully useful and to print very nicely. I adjusted it +1.5 stops in SilkyPix! That print is next to an HDR from D200 in my office and the ZD image is far superior even though not same subject or size of print, simply just the impression. I tried a couple of HDRs from the ZD, but I have so far found I get better results adjusting curves in SilkyPix. The DR and great latitude is impressive from the ZD.
So far I have done two landscape shoots and the camera and system definently makes me feel as being back to photography again . I grew into photography with the F100 and Velvia 50 and I never liked the D200. My subjects are landscapes, scenery and people living tradition lives on many travels and living in foreign countries.
The controls of the ZD camera are truly excellent. I like the simplicity. They are different from the computer jungle I felt on the D200, and pretty much exactly where most should be, what I need and with ease to use them. Last Saturday I woke up 4am and drove 3 hours to a green tea field here in Korea (sigh... I have to drive about 3 hours to any beautiful scenery from where I live... ). Light was so so, but after near an hour of wait some sun shined through an opening between the clouds during a few minutes (not perfect condition... but right place right time is most difficult in photography... ). See attached. Green is the color I have found most difficult to get appealing in digital (whereas Velvia was magic ). It took some time adjusting the photos, but overall the colors from the ZD are much better compared to D200. I also do not find the noise much issue. It is usually rather easy to remove in SilkyPix and whenever present it renders the images more film like. The D200 was terrible in noise. Third attached photo is from a business factory visit here in Korea. I shot 400 ASA, compensated +1.4 stops in SilkyPix, noise cleaned in SilkyPix. Ah yah. Propably some noise still, but pleasant looking and better results than I expected. The noise from D200 was not nice. ZD blows the D200 away.
The ZD is a loooooong time keeper.
Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132899\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Anders -
I'm bummed as I'd written a long, detailed reply to your posting (thanks very much btw) - only to have lost it when my wireless internet connection went down!
Anyway, I was going to say thanks for posting the photos - great to see the work you're doing. Also had said that I loved the d200, though indeed noisy - and the Mamiya ZD reminds me of that in the shadows but with seemingly very different noise per channel.
I'll do more shooting and hopefully will change my mind on the noise - or learn how to deal with it better.
A major concern to me now as i post-process is finding a program that does a decent job with color. Adobe Camera Raw on both Bridge and Lightroom 1.1 render soupy, thick colors from a variety of shots. The Mamiya software tends to go the other way and wash out color, then blow the exposure to the right. Very strange.
A few have recommended SilkyPix - I've tried downloading but get a crash every time I try to load, so will have to try another way.
All this to say - good luck with the back. I hope to keep mine a long time too (so it pays for itself and more...) and I look forward to more discussions on it in the near future.
Sincerely,
Brent.
www.madisonimages.com
-
Hi Anders -
I'm bummed as I'd written a long, detailed reply to your posting (thanks very much btw) - only to have lost it when my wireless internet connection went down!
Anyway, I was going to say thanks for posting the photos - great to see the work you're doing. Also had said that I loved the d200, though indeed noisy - and the Mamiya ZD reminds me of that in the shadows but with seemingly very different noise per channel.
I'll do more shooting and hopefully will change my mind on the noise - or learn how to deal with it better.
A major concern to me now as i post-process is finding a program that does a decent job with color. Adobe Camera Raw on both Bridge and Lightroom 1.1 render soupy, thick colors from a variety of shots. The Mamiya software tends to go the other way and wash out color, then blow the exposure to the right. Very strange.
A few have recommended SilkyPix - I've tried downloading but get a crash every time I try to load, so will have to try another way.
All this to say - good luck with the back. I hope to keep mine a long time too (so it pays for itself and more...) and I look forward to more discussions on it in the near future.
Sincerely,
Brent.
www.madisonimages.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Brent,
It is interesting what you say of Lightroom. I am curious of that program because it seem to have some nice features. Colors are very important and SilkyPix is very satisfying in colors. It can be worthwhile to download it for you. Perhaps try another computer or email support? Do read the online manual to learn the program, you will find it much worthwhile. If you do try SilkyPix and after having had your head in both, please do let me know what your learnings are. I am keen to hear of a comparison in regards to colors specific, and the ease to select different presets as a starter. SilkyPix has presets for different colors (similar to colors of film types). This makes rather quick and easy to adjust the rendering to what matches specific shots.
I should say it is pleasing with contact with people in the Asian corner also ... I am in Korea, for now. Next year we shall see where in SE Asia.
Regards
Anders
-
Anders I must say those are some of the noisiest images I have seen in a long time..
What happened there?
The picture in the FActory with chinese workers is soooooo noisy.
Can you explain?
I also see you have the ZD camera not the back. I thought they were not going to produce the ZD camera and just the back for sale with or with out the AFDII?
Can you please verify..
Thanks
Those are the first horrible noise pictures I have seen for the ZD?
And I say that in a non offensive way by the way..:+}
Snook
-
Anders I must say those are some of the noisiest images I have seen in a long time..
What happened there?
The picture in the FActory with chinese workers is soooooo noisy.
Can you explain?
I also see you have the ZD camera not the back. I thought they were not going to produce the ZD camera and just the back for sale with or with out the AFDII?
Can you please verify..
Thanks
Those are the first horrible noise pictures I have seen for the ZD?
And I say that in a non offensive way by the way..:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133501\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Snook,
In all respect, if you are not clear on that the ZD Camera has been out on world market for about 18 months... then I will naturally take the rest of your post with much and alot of grains of salt.
F.y.i. the factory is in KOREA. That is not Chinese workers but my much respected Hong Kong colleagues, engineers at much Senior level. F.y.i. the fabrication is for Incheon Bridge that will be the fourth longest bridge of its type in the world.
In regards to noise, bear in mind that what you see is not original photos but in this case resized using MS Resizer. The ZD will smoke any DSLR to pieces in image quality. This has been stated by others (short of for sports, action and the like). This is also my impression and I am happy to feel back to photography with it, because I never liked Nikon D200 and Nikn DSLRs. Any noise is typically more film like with it and only at dark situations with high ISO to disturbance. That factory shot was DARK. I am surpriced it got as good as it did, but... it can be cleaned up further, but for its intended purpose of photo from a business trip I did not see the need. Oh, b.t.w. it was handheld. Try same with a 39MP hassy that is heavier and see what you will get. Maybe better, maybe worse? Does it matter? If image quality is to your satisfaction like in this case mine? My Nikon D200 would have been smoked.
Well pixel peeping is one thing, what actual you get as photograph is another. What matters most? The photo, or camera? The waterfall was underexposed 1.5 stops by misstake because new meter I am not used to, but still very nice in print! As for all respect, do some reading on the ZD camera, e.g. here in forums and links from them! Or, simply trust the words I say...
Regards
Anders
-
Snook,
In all respect, if you are not clear on that the ZD Camera has been out on world market for about 18 months... then I will naturally take the rest of your post with much and alot of grains of salt.
F.y.i. the factory is in KOREA. That is not Chinese workers but my much respected Hong Kong colleagues, engineers at much Senior level. F.y.i. the fabrication is for Incheon Bridge that will be the fourth longest bridge of its type in the world.
In regards to noise, bear in mind that what you see is not original photos but in this case resized using MS Resizer. The ZD will smoke any DSLR to pieces in image quality. This has been stated by others (short of for sports, action and the like). This is also my impression and I am happy to feel back to photography with it, because I never liked Nikon D200 and Nikn DSLRs. Any noise is typically more film like with it and only at dark situations with high ISO to disturbance. That factory shot was DARK. I am surpriced it got as good as it did, but... it can be cleaned up further, but for its intended purpose of photo from a business trip I did not see the need. Oh, b.t.w. it was handheld. Try same with a 39MP hassy that is heavier and see what you will get. Maybe better, maybe worse? Does it matter? If image quality is to your satisfaction like in this case mine? My Nikon D200 would have been smoked.
Well pixel peeping is one thing, what actual you get as photograph is another. What matters most? The photo, or camera? The waterfall was underexposed 1.5 stops by misstake because new meter I am not used to, but still very nice in print! As for all respect, do some reading on the ZD camera, e.g. here in forums and links from them! Or, simply trust the words I say...
Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133529\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not to get into the middle of this but when you post images that look like that factory scene, what type of comments do you expect? I assume you were posting to demonstrate the backs capabilities. That one is not going to sell ZD backs.
-
Not to get into the middle of this but when you post images that look like that factory scene, what type of comments do you expect? I assume you were posting to demonstrate the backs capabilities. That one is not going to sell ZD backs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
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
-
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,
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
-
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.
-
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] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=133618\")
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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,
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.
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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 )?
-
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] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=134062\")
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
-
Hi Denis,
Interesting what you say compared to your ZD. I recall this thread ; http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....159&hl=firmware (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=18159&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
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
Wondering if anyone has used a Polarizing filter yet with this ZD back.
I shot a few tests with a polarizer on a 210 f4 and I'm not seeing anything out-of-the-ordinary.
I underexposed a shot and got a little noise but nothing unexpected.