Mamiya ZD versus... Mamiya ZD??

[lowep]

Just came across this provocative observation about a hitherto unsuspected difference between the Mamiya ZD body and the ZD camera on Mark Welsh’s 16-9.net site

“Encouragingly, the ZD back displays significantly less noise at all apertures than samples I've played with (both from Mamiya and real world users) shot with the ZD body.”

Before reading this I naively thought the two ZD systems were identical apart from the bells and whistles.

Can anyone explain if this is fact or fiction?

[stefan marquardt]

I have used the zd camera now for two years and i can honestly say, that i have never seen any noise in my files from the zd (unless I wanted the noise for creative reasons).  you have to treat both zd´s like 50 iso film, give it plenty of light - and you wont be bothered with noise at all. even quite the opposite: exposed at 50iso you can open the shadows until they look like highlights without seeing much noise.
  IF you want to use it without tripod or above iso 100 you better get an other camera. I am sure that applies to both versions. If you use  a zd - camera or back - and you see noise, you either don´t use/expose it properly (see above) or you have a defective unit.

stefan

[mcfoto]

Hi
I just sold my ZD camera last week after owning it for 2.5 years. It was one of the first ones off the line & I found it was very good between iso 50-100. 160 wasn't bad. I found that since I had the 1DsMKIII body I wasn't using the ZD much anymore. I will get the 5DII as a second body for my Canon system. I still have a Mamiya 645 AFDII kit with a few lenses & will rent the Aptus backs when needed for certain projects. We have been shooting mostly Canon this year since we have the 1DsMKIII. Back to the ZD camera what I did like about it was the size, weight, 1.2 f/s, ease of use & excellent DR.  
Denis

[Anders_HK]

Just came across this provocative observation about a hitherto unsuspected difference between the Mamiya ZD body and the ZD camera on Mark Welsh’s 16-9.net site

“Encouragingly, the ZD back displays significantly less noise at all apertures than samples I've played with (both from Mamiya and real world users) shot with the ZD body.”

Before reading this I naively thought the two ZD systems were identical apart from the bells and whistles.

Can anyone explain if this is fact or fiction?

Hi, The ZD and ZD camera have same identical internals. A difference was that the ZD camera came out about much earlier than ZD camera, and earlier series ZD cameras did not have a firmware upgrade, hence more prone to noise. Also that a ZDb back was announced recent.

ZD is 22mp which is where Canon 5DII is. Mediumformat is still mediumformat and a different look. In regards to ZD you should be aware clear of its limitations as Stefan points out above. Also see my post here http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....p;hl=zd+problem that do describe an issue which may or may not b ok for your photography. It was not for mine, and I have heard nil yet of that having been fixed in ZDb.

If I was considering the ZD today, I would personally rather gone with 5DII. I sold the ZD a year ago and now use Leaf Aptus 65 which is newer sensor than zd and it hurt me $$ obvious. Leaf Aptus also have the Aptus 22 with same identical 22mp Dalsa sensor as ZD, but far better implemented. Considering that Leaf now have a new series of backs, much due to change of the box itself, you may be able to pick up a bargain Aptus 22!

Regards
Anders

[JDBFreeheel]

I recently "turned in" my ZD back to MAC Group after struggling with a fair number of usability issues.  I originally purchased one of the first zd backs sold in the US about 1.5 years ago.  It was a solid performer, but had some purple fringing (not the blobs that was heavily documented on some unknown numbers of the production run.  I also ran into a date/time stamp issue where the zd back could not "hold" the correct time and date despite a full battery.  As a result of this, MAC Group replaced my original zd back with a replacement, free of charge.  It worked well, but then seemed to all of a sudden 'hiccup' and it started skipping capturing images and producing random purple/snow frames.  After a series of conversations with MAC group, I agreed to trade in my back and but the DL28 kit (Aptus II 6 back) for a highly reduced price.  I am currently working to learn this new system.  The chip is different (28mp cropped chip versus the 22 full frame Dalsa chip) but I am enjoying it thus far.

The images produced by the ZD back, when it worked properly, were great between 50-100 iso.  Beyond that was hit or miss up to 200 and not usable at 400.

So far, I like the Aptus II images up to 200 and 400 holds up well with some good post processing work.

I think the 22mp Dalsa is a really solid chip; I think due to its tried and true application with a number of db companies and therefore development.  Additionally, the pixel size, 9 microns, holds up really well.  There's a good discussion going on right now at getdpi forums about this pixel size issue.

-Josh