hubsand, try SilkyPix with the ZD files, and if you're on a mac, try raw developer as well.
For me, Lightroom/ACR gives too much of the water color look, and so far, playing with SilkyPix, it does pretty much the same thing, which is why I stick with Capture One, but too bad C1 doesn't support the ZD files.
BTW, I took your crop sample into DPP (as a jpeg) and ran a Chrominance noise reduction twice, and it pretty much got rid of the green/red aberrations, along with the color noise in the background from your full-frame shot. Color noise is my arch enemy.
Regarding the Mamiya 645AF trade in deal - I believe, that basically, you can buy a really really cheap used Mamiya 645AF, and Mamiya will exchange it with a Mamiya 645AFD for free. NOT an AFD2, but an AFD.
I'd second Silkypix for the ZD. I've owned the camera for about a year now and Silky, suitably tweaked, does a great job. The manual macro lens is well worth trying.
Good to see more reviews.
On the shadow part I must disagree a LITTLE bit.
When shot on ISO50 you can recover quite some shadow detail.
More than with the Canon, although that is of course logical because the Canon is a bit more noisy on ISO50 and ISO100.
The ZD is really very clean.
Love to hear more opinions.
What I can echoe is the sheer sharpness and detail, even without sharpening the detail from the 120MM macro is jawdropping.
J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
Good to see more reviews.
On the shadow part I must disagree a LITTLE bit.
When shot on ISO50 you can recover quite some shadow detail.
More than with the Canon, although that is of course logical because the Canon is a bit more noisy on ISO50 and ISO100.
The ZD is really very clean.
Love to hear more opinions.
What I can echoe is the sheer sharpness and detail, even without sharpening the detail from the 120MM macro is jawdropping.
I agree with your analysis here. Medium format back is simply a different beast and you cannot compare two sensor at the same ISO. Instead compare them at their optimal ISO. I also have the P20 and the best ISO is at 50. When shooting at ISO 50 it simply blow away the Leica M8 in terms of resolving details, color and noise. Folks will always speak highly of having higher ISO setting but never speak about the ability of the sensor that can do well at lower ISO. There is a great advantage of having ISO 50 when you do not carry on location a powerful flash. Download the images and see them in Photoshop since they are not resizing properly on the web here.
IMO, the PhaseOne H20/P20 is still the most popular standard by which all is measured. And the H20 has been around for a while, it still amazes me. It was so far ahead of its time.
Given that, the breakthroughs that followed have been so incremental. That leads me to believe that this type of technology has pretty much been maxed out, so any huge leaps forward are going to have to be something totally different. Whether its Foveon, living tissue, or what, who knows?
I had the chance to observed the Foveon sensor of the sigma SD14 and I am very impressed. However, they got to make the chip bigger to compete. The SD14 is a very nice file but just not enough pixels and thus I could not wait any longer and went with medium format digital backs and the Phase One was one of them.
From first impressions, I wouldn't necessarily agree that the ZD is smoother at ISO50 than the 5D at ISO100. Despite its greater DR, the more aggressive colour noise makes pushing shadows much more troublesome than with the CMOS ship. As long as the exposure is right (in both senses), it won't be a problem . . . but it is not forgiving of underexposure.
Having said that, further comparative testing of RAW processors available for the Mac has been revealing: SilkyPix seems to have a clear advantage over the Adobe and Mamiya software. Lightroom is smooth but poor at detail extraction; PhotoStudio is accurate but noisy; SilkyPix combines the best of both. In particular, it has the same limpid, clean look and pure colouring that I associate with C1.
hubsand wrote:
Having said that, further comparative testing of RAW processors available for the Mac has been revealing: SilkyPix seems to have a clear advantage over the Adobe and Mamiya software. Lightroom is smooth but poor at detail extraction; PhotoStudio is accurate but noisy; SilkyPix combines the best of both. In particular, it has the same limpid, clean look and pure colouring that I associate with C1.
Any chance you could post an example that might show the differences between these processors that you are describing?
Lotusm50 wrote:
Any chance you could post an example that might show the differences between these processors that you are describing?
Yes, please. Since it is directly opposite to photozone RAW SW comparison (Adobe demosaicing being ~30% more resolving that SPx). And my experiments with ZD files also put ACR/LR very close to RSP as a Resolution Champ...
I think SilkyPix or Raw Developer are the best programs for the ZD files right now, but comparing SilkyPix and C1 with Canon files, C1 blows it away for detail. I love the SilkyPix program itself, however.
SilkyPix renders detail in the watercolor/painterly/mushy type of way, while C1 renders pure detail, both FINE edged and WIDE edged (from the files I've processed so far) with no watercolor mushyness.
It's really incredible how disappointed I am with the way LR/ACR and SilkyPix render files. Is this really the best they can do? Every program except C1 is adopting the painterly mushy look, it's driving me nuts.
I think it started with Raw Shooter Essentials, and though it was popular, and I enjoyed playing around with it, I could never use it, because it made my images look like plastic.
RobertP wrote:
I think SilkyPix or Raw Developer are the best programs for the ZD files right now, but comparing SilkyPix and C1 with Canon files, C1 blows it away for detail. I love the SilkyPix program itself, however.
SilkyPix renders detail in the watercolor/painterly/mushy type of way, while C1 renders pure detail, both FINE edged and WIDE edged (from the files I've processed so far) with no watercolor mushyness.
It's really incredible how disappointed I am with the way LR/ACR and SilkyPix render files. Is this really the best they can do? Every program except C1 is adopting the painterly mushy look, it's driving me nuts.
I think it started with Raw Shooter Essentials, and though it was popular, and I enjoyed playing around with it, I could never use it, because it made my images look like plastic....Show more →
Great details in your description here. Thanks!
Folks should also try the Raw Developer program. It is also a very good program that will convert most digital files as well. But if you have the chance to use Capture One it would attenuate your work flow problems significantly; their algorithm impressed me the most thus far and it is still the gold standard raw conversion application.
I had an email from Phase this morning: there are no plans to add ZD support to any future version of Capture One.
I broadly agree with your assessment of RAW developers: only C1 roots out the fine detail without smearing it away. For Canon files, there's nothing to touch it in my opinion.
SilkyPix treats ZD files like C1 treats Canon files: Lightroom and PhotoStudio look mushy by comparison. Squinting through the green haze in the Raw Shooter demo, it appears potentially to rival SilkyPix, but you'd have to splash the cash to find out. Very enlightened demo policy at SilkyPix.
I've just taken the ZD on its first job this evening, as a backup/alternative to the 5D. Shooting in the post-twilight blue, exposures were 15 seconds at ISO 100 / f8. You would not believe the snowstorm of multicoloured confetti the image is strewn with. I shot two frames with the ZD and the 50mm Shift, and a single shot with the Canon 24-105 at 24mm / f8 / ISO200 for comparison. Fortunately they were only reconnaissance shots.
Whether this is a 'feature' of the ZD, or whether mine is faulty, Mamiya will be able to tell while the back is in their workshops to look at a red streak that appears on every frame . . . .
Frank, I have a feeling you might be running back to Lightroom after you try SilkyPix because of the fact that you shoot models.
I don't have a ZD, but with Canon files, I've been trying to get decent results with HAIR on people in SilkyPix, (eyelashes, eyebrows, and head of hair) but the hair on people's heads turn into mush, and the eyebrows and eyelashes turn into water color paintings.
SilkyPix never tempted me away from C1 for CR2s, but it's a different ball game with the ZD. Here are some screen shots at 100%: Lightroom left; SilkyPix middle; Mamiya PhotoStudio right. The SP shot was dev'd using the free version, which means we're comparing a JPEG with two uncompressed files . . . . making the already difficult job of leveling the playing field just about impossible. Unfortunately, the highlight recovery tool is disabled in the free version. http://www.16-9.net/raw/zd_raw_comp.jpg
More from a different image: SilkyPix on the left; Lightroom on the right – screen captures at 200%.
Whereas the files above were as close as possible to being out-of-the-box default conversions, I've played with each file here with a view to getting the best quality each can deliver. The LR shot is CA-corrected; the free version of SilkyPix doesn't do CA. Auto-tone has resulted in an over-warm image from LR, whereas the SilkyPix shot (default colour) is spot on.
hubsand wrote:
Whether this is a 'feature' of the ZD, or whether mine is faulty, Mamiya will be able to tell while the back is in their workshops to look at a red streak that appears on every frame . . . .
I'm scared you got in same "feature" I faced year ago. Bought my ZD-body "demo" with nice discount, but after about 30 shots 50 to 80% of each frame came out black.
Got it replaced, but it took nearly 3 months (may be because of Russian logistics/Customs and lack of Mamiya reps in the market).
Hence no real problem with a replaced one (keep'n my fingers X)
Thanks for sample. Definitely SP deserve another try for ZD. May be I was too quick to throw it away year ago (though it had full-featured demo at that time with TIFF export).
One quick question though. What was your setting for "Clarity" in ACR? As mentioned by Jeff Shew (and my personal taste too) you'd better start with 30 and try up 50 and even 70 sometime.
Also could be worth to adjust sharpness in ACR since the new controls start a bit conservative...
Finally, try RawDeveloper. It was reported by MIke Reichman and some others as definite "par" to C1 (and even better for P45 at ots launch)
Here's the Lightroom shot redeveloped with Clarity = 85 (right) set alongside the original (Clarity = 20, middle) and SilkyPix free version (left) http://www.16-9.net/raw/zd_raw6.jpg
