A comarison:Mamiya ZD22 Back via 1DmkIII

[reissme]

Hi
There is discussions about the new generation of canon 14 bit 1DmkIII (10 mp), DR, noise, color depth, in comarison to MF Mamiya or other MF backs.
I would like to see real side by side pictures of the same very high contrast scene that shows the difference between Mamiya ZD22 Back or a P30+ on a Mamiya and the 1DmkIII at 14 bits. a true comparison that will show DR in shadows and in highlights, colors and gradation. it can show real life shooting, instead of camera manufacturer claims or theories . CAN SOMEONE DO THIS (NOT SIMPLE) COMPARISON AND PRESENT IT HERE???
I will appreciate it very much (I intend to buy the new 1Ds mk III (21 mp), when it comes, or Mamiya ZD22 Back)

Menachem reiss       www.reiss.co.il

[reissme]

Hi
There is discussions about the new generation of canon 14 bit 1DmkIII (10 mp), DR, noise, color depth, in comarison to MF Mamiya or other MF backs.
I would like to see real side by side pictures of the same very high contrast scene that shows the difference between Mamiya ZD22 Back or a P30+ on a Mamiya and the 1DmkIII at 14 bits. a true comparison that will show DR in shadows and in highlights, colors and gradation. it can show real life shooting, instead of camera manufacturer claims or theories . CAN SOMEONE DO THIS (NOT SIMPLE) COMPARISON AND PRESENT IT HERE???
I will appreciate it very much (I intend to buy the new 1Ds mk III (21 mp), when it comes, or Mamiya ZD22 Back)

Menachem reiss       www.reiss.co.il
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=143964\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I meant of course : A comarison:Mamiya ZD22 Back VS 1DmkIII

[Anders_HK]

Hi

Perhaps it is difficult to get a direct comparison. Here are from two separate tests posted online:

1Ds Mk III -
http://www.carstenrasmussen.dk/diverse2007...es/_C0A8238.htm

reference:
http://www.carstenrasmussen.dk/diverse2007...t_1Ds_Mark_III/
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...thread=25106922


ZD -
http://it.nikkei.co.jp/photo/camera/mamiya.../MMFC0926l.html
http://it.nikkei.co.jp/photo/camera/mamiya.../MMFC0923l.html

reference:
http://it.nikkei.co.jp/pc/column/dcreview....Tda063016022006 (use google for text)


Both were shot jpg. It can be noted the smoother transition to brightest with the ZD and the complete white blob on 1Ds Mk III. Also the much black in darkest shadows of 1Ds Mk III. Is that all the 1D/1Ds Mk III are capable of?? Anyone???


Do bear in mind that the ZD is useable more or less at 50-125 ISO and not for very long exposures.

Regards
Anders

[Snook]

Anders, are those examples suppose to be something special?
A back lit shot of trees that do not not even have that much information in them?
I posted in another post the same doubts.
But I do not see how you are going to compare that ZD shot to a 1dMIII shot or any other shot for that matter.
I know there are alot of guys interested in the ZD, but there is just not enough hard evidence for it.
And most guys that are comparing are just wondering alos I can imagine, because they are reall meant for totally different photographic applications.
The 1DMIII is basically a sports camera and the ZD would be about the worst choice for someone shooting sports.
So really I do not even get the Post. Maybe he meant to say a 1DsMII?
In any case I am still waiting for some real world ZD pictures. Not some Back lit forrest.
what is that shot suppose to prove?
Thanks for the constant information though. Next  to Frank Doorhf you the second most defender of the ZD.
Frank by the way gave up and went with a Leaf system....
Snook

[juicy]

Hi!

1D3 is a sports/wildlife/wedding/photojournalism -camera and as such no one is interested in  comparing it against the ZD from handling etc point of view. But it is the first Canon to have 14bit signal processing and as such represents Canon's dynamic range and their current sensor technology. That way I can easily see why it would be interesting to compare these cameras side-by-side.

Of course when the 1Ds3 ships it certainly will be put in countless similar tests against all possible competitors and also the hi-end backs (although there probably won't be a competition, anyway). But in the meanwhile the 1D3 might give some insights.  

Cheers,
J

[mcfoto]

Anders, are those examples suppose to be something special?
A back lit shot of trees that do not not even have that much information in them?
I posted in another post the same doubts.
But I do not see how you are going to compare that ZD shot to a 1dMIII shot or any other shot for that matter.
I know there are alot of guys interested in the ZD, but there is just not enough hard evidence for it.
And most guys that are comparing are just wondering alos I can imagine, because they are reall meant for totally different photographic applications.
The 1DMIII is basically a sports camera and the ZD would be about the worst choice for someone shooting sports.
So really I do not even get the Post. Maybe he meant to say a 1DsMII?
In any case I am still waiting for some real world ZD pictures. Not some Back lit forrest.
what is that shot suppose to prove?
Thanks for the constant information though. Next  to Frank Doorhf you the second most defender of the ZD.
Frank by the way gave up and went with a Leaf system....
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144394\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi
I myself are a user & owner of the ZD camera. Look at Michaels review on LL it was the best review.

[Anders_HK]

Anders, are those examples suppose to be something special?
A back lit shot of trees that do not not even have that much information in them?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144394\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What??? Ehh... look again.
ZD: Do you see all near black on branches? I see detail. Do you see white blob instead of sun? I see sun.
1Ds MkIII: Do you see near black in shadows? I see near black. Do you see white blob instead of sun? I sure do.

Now... it would be great if the 1Ds Mk3 was just as good as the ZD... but seems it rather typically resembles all other DSLRs which is disappointing... If you find some better samples, please show us  

Rgds

[Jonathan Wienke]

Comparing in-camera JPEGs is stupid, I know Canon's camera JPEGs throw away nearly a stop of highlights and even more in the shadows. Wait until RAW samples are available and you'll be able to make valid comparisons.

[djgarcia]

On top of what Jonathan states, how can you even remotely think of comparing cameras using images of different subjects shot under different conditions by different people using who knows what exposure decisions?

Let's wait for some meaningful data, please!

[Anders_HK]

On top of what Jonathan states, how can you even remotely think of comparing cameras using images of different subjects shot under different conditions by different people using who knows what exposure decisions?

Let's wait for some meaningful data, please!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As stated by Carsten in above link, the 1Ds Mk3 is a preproduction model. Of course we can then not be certain of final output as from production models.

Yet dont bash me for stupidity, you are both missing my points:
1. The sample from the ZD resembles my experience from the ZD camera and what MF is well known for: details in shadows and fine graduation with much less of a large white circular blob where sun is supposed to be.

2. The sample from 1Ds Mk3 on other hand resembles a DSLR with not much detail in darkest shadows or brightest highlights, only more MP. Having stepped up from D200 to Zd, that step was very significant. I do not see such with the  samples from 1Ds Mk3 yet and that is disappointing. RAW is not magic. Also ZD has RAW. Lets wait and see how 1Ds Mk3 production models will be...

Edit: Perhaps a problem with the 1Ds Mk3 is the use of an AA filter, check [a href=\"http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d200hr.htm]http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d200hr.htm[/url]. Perhaps that is why dark shadows and bright highlights do not hold more detail?? If we speak of stupid, seems should be referred to Canon having such on a 21MP camera  

Rgds
Anders

[NikosR]

Take any well exposed picture with lots of shadow and highlight detail. Bump up the contrast either in camera or in post. See what you get.

Comparing two different images taken by two different people under different and unknown lighting conditions (e.g. scene dynamic range) and with different and unknown postprocessing and trying to produce meaningfull conclusions is really stupid in my book and the sign of a quite inexperienced person if I may say so..

Disclaimer: I haven't shot with either of these cameras so my comment only refers to the comparison validity not to the actual output quality of these cameras.

[reissme]

Till now, no one that have both cameras, did and send, real side by side pictures of the same, very high contrast scene, that shows the difference between Mamiya ZD22 (using only half of the frame)and the 1DmkIII (10 MP) at 14 bits, developed from RAW.
 I still hope to see such test.
many thanks in advance.

Menachem reiss.   new 1DsMII pic. in my site: www.reiss.co.il

[Dinarius]

Of course when the 1Ds3 ships it certainly will be put in countless similar tests against all possible competitors and also the hi-end backs (although there probably won't be a competition, anyway). But in the meanwhile the 1D3 might give some insights.  

Cheers,
J
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144410\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It most certainly will be compared with all others and, in particular, MFDBs.

As I see it, in the commercial (film) studio photography world, medium-format was the default system of choice. 35mm and large format were the exceptions.

So, the task for the market is affordable digital that is the equivalent of medium format.

There is no doubt that the high-end MFDBs are the equal of medium format film. Probably better. But, there is no comparison in the price.

Is affordable medium format digital already here in the form of the 1Ds Mkll? Some have argued that it is.

Is it about to become more widely available with the advent of the 1Ds Mklll and the Mamiya? We shall see.

But, one thing is sure. If these two cameras become accepted as true equals of medium format film, then Phase/Hassie etc. will have something to think about. Since many of us (me included) can switch back to our Sinars when we need something extra, the Canon (in my case) can be used the rest of the time.

Very interesting times.

D.

[Anders_HK]

Till now, no one that have both cameras, did and send, real side by side pictures of the same, very high contrast scene, that shows the difference between Mamiya ZD22 (using only half of the frame)and the 1DmkIII (10 MP) at 14 bits, developed from RAW.
 I still hope to see such test.
many thanks in advance.

Menachem reiss.   new 1DsMII pic. in my site: www.reiss.co.il
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hello Reiss,

I actually posted topic asking for same comparison back in early June and since then also to D3. The cameras are different beasts and perhaps it is simply rare for same persons to use both.

As far as NikosR's comment to my post above of comparing two different images of different photographers, cameras and time I disagree. There are similarities in the conditions of those images and we can draw some initial conclusions from those already.

Actually, to share my experience, it was per reading testing of D200 and the raving for it that caused me to buy it early last year. Yet my experience from that camera was I never liked it because my photography is actual photography and not camera comparisons or test charts. I think it is important to see what different photographers can produce and listen to what they say of the cameras rather. That is what I did when buying the ZD, and the ZD is enjoyable and capable of very high quality results under certain conditions. It will be interesting to hear more of the 1Ds Mk3 on this.

You may have seen this one [a href=\"http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds-mk11-vs-p25.shtml]http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...11-vs-p25.shtml[/url]? It is not on 1D/DsMk3 vs. ZD, but perhaps close.

These were recently posted from the 1DsMk3 http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...10/11/7180.html.

Regards  
Anders

[Henry Goh]

Apart from bigger files, I do not see the samples from 1Ds MKIII to offer any thing outstanding.  21MP is nice but if IQ is what we are after, I feel MFDB is still the way to go.  Just MHO of course.

[reissme]

Hello Reiss,

I actually posted topic asking for same comparison back in early June and since then also to D3. The cameras are different beasts and perhaps it is simply rare for same persons to use both.

As far as NikosR's comment to my post above of comparing two different images of different photographers, cameras and time I disagree. There are similarities in the conditions of those images and we can draw some initial conclusions from those already.

Actually, to share my experience, it was per reading testing of D200 and the raving for it that caused me to buy it early last year. Yet my experience from that camera was I never liked it because my photography is actual photography and not camera comparisons or test charts. I think it is important to see what different photographers can produce and listen to what they say of the cameras rather. That is what I did when buying the ZD, and the ZD is enjoyable and capable of very high quality results under certain conditions. It will be interesting to hear more of the 1Ds Mk3 on this.

You may have seen this one http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...11-vs-p25.shtml? It is not on 1D/DsMk3 vs. ZD, but perhaps close.

These were recently posted from the 1DsMk3 http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...10/11/7180.html.

Regards   
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hello Anders
Thanks for for the sites that you have posted, I downloaded the images and looked in PS, however it is very hard to judge the quality since I cannot compare to ZD. What interests me is the 14 bits capability, the extra highlight details option, in the upcoming 1DsMIII (that can be tested already in the 1DMIII) and the reduction of sharpness in 1DMIII, because of the anti alaising filter vs ZD without it.
does someone knows if smart sharpening can compensate for it?

Regrads
Reiss    (I love my great 1DsMII, but want to upgrade)see in: www.reiss.co.il

[Anders_HK]

Hello Anders
Thanks for for the sites that you have posted, I downloaded the images and looked in PS, however it is very hard to judge the quality since I cannot compare to ZD. What interests me is the 14 bits capability, the extra highlight details option, in the upcoming 1DsMIII (that can be tested already in the 1DMIII) and the reduction of sharpness in 1DMIII, because of the anti alaising filter vs ZD without it.
does someone knows if smart sharpening can compensate for it?

Regrads
Reiss    (I love my great 1DsMII, but want to upgrade)see in: www.reiss.co.il
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hello Reiss,

For similar JPG images of the ZD you can look on the link I posted above, which is [a href=\"http://it.nikkei.co.jp/pc/column/dcreview.aspx?n=MMITda063016022006]http://it.nikkei.co.jp/pc/column/dcreview....Tda063016022006[/url]. Of course nothing like JPGs for either camera.

I think the ZD will beat the 1Ds Mk3 in capability of image quality at ISO 50-125, and if good light also 160 and maybe 200. The 1Ds Mk3 will be faster/easier to work with and and capable of higher ISO. To be honest, there are times I miss being able to shoot faster and at higher ISO, but the files from the ZD are lovely to work with and I save time there and the ZD makes my shooting more selective (I had D200 before the ZD).

Regards
Anders

[Guillermo Luijk]

The DR is limited by one of two factors:

1. A theoretical math level set by the bit depth of the RAW file (a maximum of 2^N f-stops can be codified in N bits, where anyway the lowest f-stops will not be properly represented due to the lack of levels)

2. A practical SNR threshold level set by what we consider information free of noise enough to make a f-stop usable.

Today, the first limit never gets into the discussion because of noise. i.e. sensor noise ruins the lowest f-stops of the dynamic range sooner than having to worry about bit depth.

That means the 14 bits found on the MK III will allow larger DR as long as sensor noise is also reduced compared to previous Canon sensors.

If MKIII's sensor is as as noisy as other Canon sensors (5D for example) there will be absolutely no DR improvement. Just more tonal richness which could improve robustness against posterization and so forth, but not DR enlargement at all. I haven't checked any MKIII's noise yet, but I think this is likely to happen: no DR improvement. If you want DR, get a Fuji