Here's another interesting test: the same three apps asked to cope with the bonanza of multicoloured confetti produced at ISO 50 on a 15 second exposure. SilkyPix Free (left); Lightroom (middle), PhotoStudio (right). Samples shown at 100%. LR has all its noise reduction controls maxed out; PhotoStudio's NR was set to 50% (increasing it had no effect beyond blurring the image). SilkyPix' NR routines are not fully implemented in the demo version. Full testing will follow. http://www.16-9.net/raw/zd_noise.jpg
hubsand wrote:
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
It looks like to me that in these Car Samples, the SilkyPix image on the far left suffers more from stairstepping on the diagonals and that terrible watercolor look in the background. I guess thats the trade off for more detail compared to Lightroom.
With the clarity adjustment in LR, it now looks much better (Capture One-ish?)compared to the watercolor mushy-liciousness of SilkyPix.
That was kind of my suspitious thought... I had also found quite and extensive sharpening switched-on in my trial of SPix with no option to change it...
The multicolor confetti is not an isolated condition for the ZD back alone. It also exist in other digital back shooting long exposure longer than the back is capable. The ZD back is aimed at a certain market and the best niche for the ZD back is for wedding application since there images are like to be on location against strong sunlight and with flash for indoor. The dynamic range is much appreciated here. My P20 Phase One digital back also has the multi color confetti if you use it longer than 40 second exposure but the manual say only 10 second exposure and no longer. It looks that your ZD back can only handle less than 15 seconds which is what have been well documented with some of the other MFDs. No surprise data here.
Pham Minh Son wrote:
The ZD back is aimed at a certain market and the best niche for the ZD back is for wedding application since there images are like to be on location against strong sunlight and with flash for indoor. The dynamic range is much appreciated here.
-Son
Sorry, I don't think the small 11 frame buffer and then long wait for each additional shot before that buffer clears(15-30 sec. depending on card used?) would work for any wedding I have shot. Thats almost a guarantee to miss an important shot.
Folks that use the old Hasselblad camera to do wedding all the time without any problem before the DSLR became the system. Sometimes it is not about speed unless that is the photographer style; anticipation and knowing your job is the biggest challenge for most photogaphers. Robert White in the UK will tell you the success of their ZD sales for wedding photographers. Also fashion photographer such as Frank demonstrated how this digital back is used successfully. I believe testing is important but it requires the right application of the tool and not challenging it to something it was not meant to be challenged.
Edited by Pham Minh Son on Aug 12, 2007 at 09:25 AM GMT
Yes, and a Hasselblad user(which I am) can have many additional backs loaded with film to keep shooting. It would be extremely expensive to have many additional digital backs waiting would it not?
This buffer issue might not bother Frank and his particular style of shooting but most Fashion shooters I know shoot very fast and the buffer is a deal breaker. Even in the Film days, many backs were loaded and waiting so shooting could commence seamlessly. I know as I was the assistant loading those backs.
As I mentioned Robert White have sold the Mamiya digital sensors to many wedding photographers and they are successful in this regards. The advantage of using the medium format digital back is not to have mutiple back but to use them for highlight details that you are not getting with the other DSLR system. Most photographers now a day use 2 sytems such as the Leica M8 and a Canon DSLR 5D to get their job done in the fashion that they can. There is no one absolute solution; there are advantage and disadvantage of any digital systems but what can you do to make it works for you is the final results. You can come into the debate of auto focus versus manually focus camera and etc but the photographer who can make use of the tool that is available to him/her is a successful photographer.
My Point is only that, given the choice, most Photographers would prefer to use equipment which does not cripple their shooting in a fast moving situation. Don't the Phase One and Leaf digital backs have a greater buffer as well as offer the higher Dynamic Range? I guess you really do get what you pay for in the end when it comes to Digital Backs.
Now, I can see using something slow like the ZD back for the set up shots at a wedding and complementing it with a faster DSLR for the rest of the stuff. Thats probably what a lot of these guys are doing with the ZD back.
Yes Tariq, this is why when we paid for something in the $6.7K we must live with the deficiency of the back. If money was not the issue we all be on the Phase One back for sure in which I am already on it. But as you can see just because I own the Phase One P30+ and P20 does not mean I have to degrade Mamiya for their efforts to put something so affordable for photographer to use. Perhaps this will affect the medium format market some what so other photographers do not have to paid for what I paid for my Phase One backs. If you look at the Leica Forum you will also see that the wedding photographers more likely to have both the Canon 5D along with their M8 to do wedding. Both system offers them something the other one cannot. Here the ZD back also is a niche to our work as well and I am very encouring to see the price on medium format back coming down so photographers like you who use medium format system before can reconsider their tool option again.
For me when I shoot group picture and enlarge them for clients in the film day I even took my 8X10 Sinar P2 with me; what a monster in weight. Today I am very happy to bring my P30+ or any of the medium format digital back to take large groups of the wedding parties. This is a much lighter system for me than Sinar P2. I guess I am a nut when it comes to resolution and for my clients; I will try my hardest to give them more than what they are expecting from me. There is a great reward to see your clients satisfaction.
I don't wish to "degrade" Mamiya(I think they make fine cameras) but to only point out both the Pros and Cons of the System which is what I think is one of the great things about these Forums - getting all sides of an issue from people with many different and varied expereinces. I think Frank(and its of course only my opinion) gave a slightly overly rosy picture of the Mamiya ZD's capabilities without perhaps complementing that with some of its obvious deficiencies. Promoting the ZD Back as an ideal tool for Fashion and Wedding work is a bit of a stretch based on its inherent capabilities. Will it work for some, sure. Its just not the single ideal tool for most who work in those two areas and I don't think it should be heralded as such.
Pham Minh Son wrote:
For me when I shoot group picture and enlarge them for clients in the film day I even took my 8X10 Sinar P2 with me; what a monster in weight. Today I am very happy to bring my P30+ or any of the medium format digital back to take large..
Tariq, I agree with you that the Mamiya ZD back is not the all solution back. I do however, admire how Frank use his tool and this is where I am coming from. In the film day I have to work so much harder to get my image for my one time shot client and no second chance and I have to do whatever it took not to fail. I love the passion of Frank's work.
Pham Minh Son wrote:
Tariq, I agree with you that the Mamiya ZD back is not the all solution back. I do however, admire how Frank use his tool and this is where I am coming from. In the film day I have to work so much harder to get my image for my one time shot client and no second chance and I have to do whatever it took not to fail. I love the passion of Frank's work.
-Son
And, Frank is a master at lighting as well. Its easy for someone to see his ZD Beauty images and think, wow, look what the ZD is capable of but most of us know that those images have more to do with Franks abilities than what camera back was used.
Tariq, yes it is important for folks to know that this is not a toy but it is a very capable back when used it properly with the right application. For the others in a more basic level try to be like Frank.
Ok, so you guys are establishing that a ZD back, in the right hands, could be a great tool for a wedding photographer, with certain limitations. . . . What about for landscape photography?
I am watching the ZD back user evaluations, and my sense is that, for an avid landscape photographer, it's an excellent, albeit imperfect, solution. Many landscape photographers, like me, sell prints, but are not professionals, i.e., I do not make a sizable income from it, and do not depend at all on landscape photography for my livelihood. I would much prefer a P25 back, but I'm not going to spend that kind of money ($18k or so used, I think from capture integrations). So, I'm evaluating the ZD back and will compare it to the new Canon IDsIII when it comes out.
I must say that I'm a bit struck sometimes by reasons people bring to the table why something is NOT good.
I never painted the review rosy.
I think you than completly misread my review.
What I do PAINT ROSY and I love that is the depth and sharpness of the back and MF system.
I remember that when the 5D came out alot of people complaint because the buffer was so little, only arround 3 frames per second pff what a problem.
I don't know what flash system you use in the studio but even my RXs can only handle app 2 frames per second.
And to be honest I do alot of fashion/glamour etc. and I NEVER EVER shoot on the continues mode in the studio, to be honest when I shoot FAST it's maybe 2 frames in 3 seconds and that's for maybe 5-6 frames.
When you don't have your shot by then you are doing something completly wrong.
It's more coaching your model and keeping the flow that's important in fashion, a lot of people misread that by shooting as much pops in an minute as you can get.
For me there is a good flow in a session when I shoot and let the model take another position, shoot, model repositions etc.
I also never shoot more than 20 frames in one burst, meaning that even when the buffer fills up I still have time for it to empty.
Does it never happen, yeah sure.
We all do sometimes fast sessions and high flows, but most of the time I don't fill up more than 75% of my buffer.
You HAVE to remember that the MF system is a completly different setup than 35mm DSLR, I use both cameras and both for different uses.
I love my 5D (and will buy a 5DII when it's released) for the casual outside stuff or high ISO, in other words the reportage style shooting.
The MF CAN'T be beat for difficult lighting situations (high contrast scenes), and it's can't be beat for sharpness and quality.
So both have different uses.
I see my cameras as a tool, and when you are a good carpenter you know when to use a hammer or when to use a screwdriver
