my assistant pointed by in this direction the other day while we were struggling to shoot tethered with the ZD
I like countless others have waited long for the day when mamiya made something to go on the back of the brilliant AFD system.
Like comments I have read here I knew of its failings, so I went in with my eyes open.
So what happened? No purple worm! althought i've seen some shocking examples of that problem.
Shadow area noise, we'll not so as you'd be overly concerned.
Back on the wicked MF lenses, yes.
Big fat files for not a lot of bucks, yes. And is'nt that the point, good on Mamiya for recognising that if they are going to release late they had better have some sort of leverage, bring on the price war.
As for operation. The interface and screen are primative but i got this camera for controlled lighting setup either in the studio or on loc, so i run it thru the computer. I've had a few good sessions with it, i'll post some results, but the software is unstable even on the intel mac so thats the bug at the moment, it hasn't stopped me dead yet.
but
please will someone in japan do something, 'cause it's making what is reasonably enjoyable a pain in the ****.
vyanush wrote:
Sorry, this is not the case in real life. Most of lenses on 5D show no softness at F/11 and even at f/16 they hold-on. It is especially true for the coreners and edge-to-edge sharpness. Diffraction raise its ugly head at f/22 and upward.
So you are mistaken 1 stop. It was a very comprehensive discussion of it on LL last spring that ponted out you must up-lift you numbers by one stop. That's because [for Bayer] you must take DIAGONAL of the pixel, not its side.
I'm not sure about that. I have never once seen a single lens perform at its best, center and corner resolution wise at the same time, at anything beyond F8 on the 5D. There are no doubt other specific lens issues contributing to this perhaps. Most of my lenses perform at their optimum resolution in the center at around F4 or 5.6. Some of the wider lenses will not give decent corner sharpness until F8 and sometimes F11. By that time the center is suffering softness compared to its optimum. So a trade off must be made if one is shooting for corner sharpness AND center sharpness with many wides. Anything above F8 is a compromise in every lens I have tested with regards to optimum central resolution. No sharpness loss at F11 and even F16? Show me the money! Corner and center 100% crops will do fine. My bet is that if you can show me such a lens, its not going to be very sharp to begin with compared to a sharp lens and thus you would not be seeing the effects of diffraction as the lens would be the limiting factor.
I find every one of my lenses on the 5D starts getting noticeably soft at f16. Usable for most shots, but softer than f11. f22? danger danger
I often bracket aperture. Go for the best, but diffraction is better than falling outside the COC.
SoderhamBratsk wrote:
This thread has gotten quite long and I have tried to keep up with it, so I apologize if someone has answered this already.
I would like to know if Frank or anyone else has tested if the Leaf Aptus 22 can expose longer than the ZD back. I am afraid I might have jumped the gun with the Mamiya platform now. I shoot a lot of Architectural in low light and NEED for the exposures to be open longer than 8 seconds at f8.
Thank you,
Doug
I don't know where you are located but you need to hook up with a dealer like Global Imaging and have them bring the cameras to you . That is the ONLY way to buy a MF digital system . If you buy a system without a demo the saying a fool and his money are soon parted could be very true . I have been very happy with the Mamiya system and the 35mm manual focus lens for architecture . I also like the 55mm lens as well
As for the Aptus it is great at iso 25 for any exposure as well as iso 50 . Iso 100 gets noisy but near as bad as the mamiya starting at around 6 seconds or longer and seems to be worse in the heat .
For you guys that want to get into MF digital cheaper now is the time . Phase One is going to have a lot of demo backs available as people move up to the + series and turn in their loaner backs . Even the non plus backs are very good . For about 5 grand more you could end up with a P-21 or 30 .
Back went the back last week. Adorama were very good about it: no hassle at all.
I'm not at all down on the ZD: what it does well, it does better than the 1Ds III will do, no doubt: but it's primarily an aesthetic rather than a technical improvement. If I didn't do so much work at twilight, I'd have kept it. And as soon as the budget allows I will be stepping up to one of its more expensive brethren.
In the meantime, for interiors, architecture and landscapes, the 1Ds III will be the machine to beat, I believe. The thicker DOF, wider lenses and tilt/shift options weigh heavily in its favour for these applications. And the best Zeiss lenses take an important half-step toward the '3D magic' delivered by MF.
However, for controlled lighting work, and especially for portraiture and product photography, the ZD cannot be beaten below $10K. Here, the larger format brings something special to the party that no 35mm sensor is going to match.
Really close to getting the ZD back for my RZ Pro IID system. Lots of great samples and reviews for the 645 setup online, but nothing about the 67. Anybody using it? How's the setup? Can you rotate the back? Is there a crop from the 645 sensor to the 67 adapter plate? Etc...
Really close to getting the ZD back for my RZ Pro IID system. Lots of great samples and reviews for the 645 setup online, but nothing about the 67. Anybody using it? How's the setup? Can you rotate the back? Is there a crop from the 645 sensor to the 67 adapter plate? Etc...
On a second note, the Mamiya adapter plate also allows you to use Phase One digital backs (in the Mamiya 645AFD mount) on your RZIID. So it's quite a good investment for both the ZD back, and future backs from Phase One, etc.
I see refurbished phase 21 with a 1 year warranty are just a bit more than the zd back. From some of the experiences reported here that device is probably a more mature product than the ZD.
RobertP wrote:
On a second note, the Mamiya adapter plate also allows you to use Phase One digital backs (in the Mamiya 645AFD mount) on your RZIID. So it's quite a good investment for both the ZD back, and future backs from Phase One, etc.
Leaf backs will work as well .
drefus wrote:
Really close to getting the ZD back for my RZ Pro IID system. Lots of great samples and reviews for the 645 setup online, but nothing about the 67. Anybody using it? How's the setup? Can you rotate the back? Is there a crop from the 645 sensor to the 67 adapter plate? Etc...
I have a RZ with a P-30+ back and like it a lot . I would spend a few bucks more and get a used Leaf or Phase back as you will have a better system . I have seen images shot with the ZD and I can say that a Canon 10d will have less noise issues .
hubsand wrote:
However, for controlled lighting work, and especially for portraiture and product photography, the ZD cannot be beaten below $10K. Here, the larger format brings something special to the party that no 35mm sensor is going to match.
Not sure for it. 1Ds3 + ZS 100/2 Macro sounds quite capable combo... May be new Zeiss-Hartblei 120 Macro could even add something to equation? Though it would be raise the bar to $12K
My own personal opinion is that the 3D effect with the bigger sensor is a factor of the combination of the size of the sensor and the focal length. Seperation from the background for the 3D effect is more a factor of focal length that aperture. With a smaller sensor you need a longer focal length which in turn due to the working distance gives flattening to the subject which is counter effective to a 3D effect. You can use the longer lenses with medium format closer up without flattening the perspective hence the 3D effect.
That aside, with all that has been written here, if I had to shoot MF again I would probably shoot film. The 100 and 400 speed emulsions have proven characteristics and must be far easier to work with than the hoops that MF back shooters seem to be going through. The price advantage of digital must only be real for very busy photographers if you need the most expensive backs to circumvent the problems. Is the commercial market such that a film workflow is no longer viable even if it makes things easier? Your client is paying for the processing be it digital or film in any case are they not?
For me a 5D has all the benefits and none of the deficiencies of a film workflow, MF backs sound like a nightmare, you pay a fortune and grind your teeth down trying to get them to do what is so seamless with film. Yes you will need a bigger peice of film to match the digital but if you need to use an RZ instead of an AFD, is it that big a deal.
some help is needed. so, here comes my question:
I have the opportunity to buy a mamiya zd back for 8000 Euros or a a Phase One P21 back for 11000 Euros here in Germany. Both brand new with warranty for my old 645 AFD. I'm shooting basically Portraits, Music and Livestyle... some fashion. What should I do?
the mamiya has 21mp the phase 18mp but it is 14 (half real) vs. 16bit. The mamiya sensor is larger. hmmm...
