Home · Forums · My Profile · PM · Buddy list · Search · FAQ · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting · Avatar · Software

	Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell FM Forum Rules FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses Pages: 1 [2] 3     Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF (archived topic)

mark1958 Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Jan 27, 2002 Total Posts: 7437 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF The newer digital backs have almost twice as many pixels as the p21 dcmiller wrote: The zd sensor is 2x the 1ds. The p21 chip is maybe 1.6x. Dec 02, 2007 at 05:44 AM

Daniel Buck Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Jan 13, 2004 Total Posts: 2921 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF mark1958 wrote:The newer digital backs have almost twice as many pixels as the p21 that would make a nice comparison, see what type of difference there is for a mediumish sized print, like a 12x18" print, done with one of the newer backs and the 1Ds3 :) Dec 02, 2007 at 06:54 AM

tom in mpls Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Sep 19, 2004 Total Posts: 1990 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF One point of reference for me, please. I know the 50/1.4 well. But I know nothing about the Mamiya 80/2.8. Is the Mamiya lens considered to be a good lens? Dec 02, 2007 at 09:29 AM

rfkiii Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Dec 25, 2005 Total Posts: 144 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF dcmiller wrote: I really don't like these comparisons of "unsharpened" files. When I provide comparison images, I always supply them with zero processing though I usually explain in the disclaimer that I am providing them this way so that each individual viewing the files can apply their own processing routines. Lord knows my CS2 game needs improvement. To the group: In CS2, the file sizes are recorded as: 1Ds mkIII = 5616 x 3744 ZD = 5328 x 4000 P21 = 4906 x 3682 Maybe I assumed too much, but I figgered the p21 would be at least 21 mp. From this list, doesn't it stand to reason the 1Ds mkIII would have more resolution all other factors being equal? Another queston. Are the ZD & P21 backs crop sensors? Or rather what cam was used for the DBs? Just did bit of research on my own. The P21+ is a 1.3x crop sensor according to the Phase One website explaining in part the narrower field. If I were considering MF, the P25+ would be my starting point. The ZD is full frame. For the 1Ds mkIII to be so much wider than the ZD, I am guessing that the lenses were not equivalent. Dec 02, 2007 at 12:16 PM

foto-z Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Jul 14, 2005 Total Posts: 2968 Country: Estonia Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF rfkiii wrote: Maybe I assumed too much, but I figgered the p21 would be at least 21 mp. From this list, doesn't it stand to reason the 1Ds mkIII would have more resolution all other factors being equal? Another queston. Are the ZD & P21 backs crop sensors? Or rather what cam was used for the DBs? The P21 is only 18 megapixel and has a 44x33mm sensor. The ZD has a 22MP 48x36mm sensor. The ZD is probably the weakest performing MFDB on the market. It says something that even the bottom-of-the-range Phase One back beat the Canon here, with less resolution. It would be more interesting to see a popular 22 MP MFDB back like the P25 up against the Canon. I expect the Canon would be beaten by a wider margin. Of course the 33MP and 39MP backs are in a different league. Dec 02, 2007 at 12:53 PM

adamdewilde Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Jul 04, 2005 Total Posts: 1835 Country: Canada Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF How come we shoot large scenes.. I'd use the 1Ds3 for fashion, as I would the P25+ Won't someone shoot a model full body and then a macro of the head/hand (nail polish model style)... That way we can have the best lenses, focused right up the the model, with the same exact lighting and then we can pixel peep around the eyes, and judge the colors of the makeup and skin etc.. I mean really, in the end if your shooting weddings you'll need a faster camera. If your shooting landscapes you'll buy what you can afford (large format if possible), and if your shooting fashion you'll want the best camera for the price/quality.. Which is where I think the whole 1Ds3/MF tests should be targeted towards.. Adam Dec 02, 2007 at 01:22 PM

Conner999 Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Jan 22, 2006 Total Posts: 1841 Country: Canada Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF Shades of D2x/s vs. 1Ds2 or 5D anyone? I should add - it's remarkable that the Ds3 is even getting close with the NR requird, AA filter, etc. Stick a Leica or Zeiss lens on the Ds3 and the gap would narrow much further (micro contrast, etc). I guess the next question would be where does the cell count on the 35mm format run out of steam w.r.t to noise and NR killing detail? At what MP count are we going to end up with a FF D2Xs equivalent -- great pics - up to a midest ISO level? At what MP count (or has that been reached already) are we going to sit back and go "... hang on a sec, who the @#$%^ needs a _____MP camera anyway...?" Dec 02, 2007 at 01:48 PM

dcmiller Offline Image Upload: On Registered: May 21, 2002 Total Posts: 2326 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF httivals wrote: Who would buy a Mamiya ZD after seeing this comparison? Even if there are user errors/flaws, there will always be some in practical use. I wouldn't take these comparisons as definitive. Dec 02, 2007 at 03:15 PM

Arianne Dubois Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Jan 26, 2006 Total Posts: 71 Country: Italy Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF Since some asked about the comparability of the Mamiya 80/2.8 against the Canon EF. I think it is on a similar level with a similar center resolution as the EF 50/1.4 and so of good use for this check.I had the Mamiya lens attached to Canon DSLR's with a Zörkendörfer rig, so I saw them side by side projecting to the same sensor. The Canon is a Gauss/Planar type closely inspired by the same specification Contax lens. The Mamiya also seems to be a Gauss type with 6 elements / 5 groups, instead of 7 elements / 6 groups. (Just thought: Would be interesting to have this same lens on all three camera systems to be able to judge just one parameter: the sensor. Hopefully someone will do this while I reflect on skipping one Canon camera generation this time.) Dec 02, 2007 at 03:17 PM

dcmiller Offline Image Upload: On Registered: May 21, 2002 Total Posts: 2326 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF tom in mpls wrote: One point of reference for me, please. I know the 50/1.4 well. But I know nothing about the Mamiya 80/2.8. Is the Mamiya lens considered to be a good lens? Yes, it's a "plastic fantastic". An inexpensive standard prime with good glass. Dec 02, 2007 at 03:23 PM

John Black Online Buy and Sell: On Registered: Jul 15, 2004 Total Posts: 3224 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF The 1Ds3 shot is the best sample I've seen so far. It's hard to compare the dynamic range; this is one are where I think the MF backs will still have a big advantage, plus cleaner shadow detail. With regards to the ZD back, its perceived performance is highly dependent of the RAW converter. Raw Developer sounds to be the favored RAW editor amongst ZD owners. The Mamiya 80mm F2.8 AF lens isn't Mamiya's best lens. Probably no better or any worse than a Canon 50mm F1.4. They sell on Ebay for ~$200. Dec 02, 2007 at 05:38 PM

mark1958 Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Jan 27, 2002 Total Posts: 7437 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF John.. I also mentioned in my earlier post in this thread that I think the dynamic range is still going to remain much better on the MF backs. I agree with you that this image does not give a good test of that. In my experience with the 1DsmkII and 5D and the leaf aptus back, the leaf back gives much better DR when doing most landscapes. I cannot imagine the 1DsmkIII is much different than the 1DsmkII in this regard. On the other hand, I was impressed with the resolution with the 1DsmkIII. I would like to see the best glass tested as well.. and agree the 80mm vs 50mm are probably reasonably fair and comparable. I think Michael R's comparisons are going to be quite informative when he posts them on luminous-landscape. Of course if not soon, I will do some of my own comparisons..Next few weeks will prove to be interesting and generate a lot of discussion. John Black wrote: The 1Ds3 shot is the best sample I've seen so far. It's hard to compare the dynamic range; this is one are where I think the MF backs will still have a big advantage, plus cleaner shadow detail. With regards to the ZD back, its perceived performance is highly dependent of the RAW converter. Raw Developer sounds to be the favored RAW editor amongst ZD owners. The Mamiya 80mm F2.8 AF lens isn't Mamiya's best lens. Probably no better or any worse than a Canon 50mm F1.4. They sell on Ebay for ~$200. Dec 02, 2007 at 06:25 PM

dcmiller Offline Image Upload: On Registered: May 21, 2002 Total Posts: 2326 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF I will say that one of my first thoughts on using the 1DIII was that Canon was getting closer to MFDB: Better, "cleaner" colors out of the camera, more graceful going to white or black (Significantly less blocking up of high DR images). I hope the 1DsIII is the same. I felt the 1DsII lost some of the magic of the 1Ds. I'm someone who liked the 5D files better than the 1DsII files. The 1DIII files are clearly superior to 5D files, especially before processing. The ZD files are very nice at high EV. Significantly sharper out of the camera than anything I've seen from Canon, including the 1DIII. I will also say to that I was pleasantly surprised with the completeness of the 645ZD kit. Didn't feel like a work in progress at all. Charged the battery, put in a CF card and started taking pics. After reading some past evaluations of MFDB, I expected first use of the back would be like starting a nuclear reactor for the first time. But it was easy. Hubsands ZD review is right on, IMO. When Mamiya improves noise one stop, or increases throughput, they will satisfy a significant market share. Dec 02, 2007 at 07:06 PM

shirozina Offline Image Upload: On Registered: May 22, 2006 Total Posts: 986 Country: United Kingdom Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF I tested a 1Ds2 against a Sinar 22mp back a number of years ago and in terms of resolution it was a very close run thing - this test is not a suprise. 22mp MF digital is not were it's at as far as resolution is concerned - if this is what you need from your camera then you need to look at 33 and 39mp backs which comfortably outperform these 22mp sensors. Dec 02, 2007 at 10:23 PM

eronald Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Feb 02, 2004 Total Posts: 562 Country: France Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF I have an 80mm Mamiya lens in front of a P45+. It's clear that the lens is outresolved by the sensor at infinity - a lot of detail pops out after sharpening. Or else, maybe my back's focus plane is set off. Even so, I would be surprised if there were any contest between this back and the new Canon. Edmund Dec 03, 2007 at 12:26 AM

raul jarquin Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Oct 30, 2007 Total Posts: 29 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF Interesting comparisons, the P21 & 1DS3 quickly make the cut in terms of resolution but I think to draw more conclussions you have to take into account the difference of coverage between the P21 and the 1DS3. I would argue that if you put a lens on the 1Ds3 that had the same effective coverage as the 80mm on the P21 sensor the resulting increase in magnification would yield more pixels to record the same object and possibly make the 1DS3 the top choice in terms of resolution. I am actually far more encouraged by the sample image for the 1DS3 in dpreview than the ones Canon published. It seems that it may be possible to make 20x30 or 20x20 prints at 185dpi on an Epson LF printer and get acceptable results from this camera (not something I can really do with a 5D). Dec 03, 2007 at 01:08 AM

httivals Offline Buy and Sell: On Registered: May 08, 2004 Total Posts: 620 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF Of course a 39 megapixel back is going to outresolve the Canon 1Ds3. The question is how does the Canon's resolution compare to a 22 megapixel MF digital back? The Canon costs $8,000, including camera, and is A LOT more convenient, with a lot more lens choices than any MFDB. The 39 megapixel backs are about $30T, and much bigger and heavier than a Canon. The 22 megapixel backs, like a P25 cost over $20T, so again no contest on price, but the Canon is looking like it will resolve close to a P25, but lose out on dynamic range. For those of us who are used to shooting slide film, and who like the convenience and weight of the Canon, and who like saving over $20T (taking into account the cost of a comparable medium format system), there's no contest. I'll best medium format back sales are going to plummet. Especially, now that they've gone into this weird turf war of closing systems that Hasselblad initiated. The last man standing in the medium format turf wars will be -- Canon (or Nikon when it comes out with the D3x). Medium format is going to be relegated to even more of a niche role. Now it's time for Canon to update the tilt shift lens and to put the nail in the coffin. eronald wrote: I have an 80mm Mamiya lens in front of a P45+. It's clear that the lens is outresolved by the sensor at infinity - a lot of detail pops out after sharpening. Or else, maybe my back's focus plane is set off. Even so, I would be surprised if there were any contest between this back and the new Canon. Edmund Dec 03, 2007 at 04:16 AM

John Black Online Buy and Sell: On Registered: Jul 15, 2004 Total Posts: 3224 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF Used P45 @ ~$16,500 Used P30 @ ~$11,500 Used P25 @ ~$12,000 Those are refurbished units from an authorized Phase dealer with the basic 1 year warranty (not the value added). The starting price will be higher, but that's about where you'll end up depending on mount, age of the unit and payment terms. Dec 03, 2007 at 04:56 AM

RobertP Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Mar 12, 2005 Total Posts: 1245 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF Yeah, but the Phase One '+' backs are still a lot more expensive. Those are the non-plus backs, and those can be found pretty cheap. I'd still want a P45+ over a cheaper P45 if I were to jump to MF, because until the MF backs go to 70MP, right now it costs too much for too little. The new + backs seem to resolve more detail, or people have just found them to be sharper. Dec 03, 2007 at 06:00 AM

foto-z Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Jul 14, 2005 Total Posts: 2968 Country: Estonia Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF httivals wrote: The 22 megapixel backs, like a P25 cost over $20T, so again no contest on price, Well I have heard of refurbished P25s going for around $10K, and the same goes for backs from other brands. The Canon is really NOT a lot cheaper. Yes, there are more lenses, but how may of them will work well with this sensor? Apart from that there are the non-sensor related differences which will make people select one or the other. Canon has the faster frame rate, better high ISO and convenience. Medium format has higher flash sync speed, larger viewfinders, easier-to-clean sensors, ability to use back on view camera, etc Dec 03, 2007 at 09:11 AM

eronald Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Feb 02, 2004 Total Posts: 562 Country: France Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF It's pretty obvious that the next ZD in about 2 years will have a 39 MP chip in it. This will give it usable 400 ISO and a body size pretty much equivalent to today's Canon, presumably with a price of around $10K; it's inevitable that as sensor prices sink MF will slowly come into its own again, at least in the boutique upmarket landscape/ fashion/portrait/commercial sector. Edmund httivals wrote: The Canon costs $8,000, including camera, and is A LOT more convenient, with a lot more lens choices than any MFDB. The 39 megapixel backs are about $30T, and much bigger and heavier than a Canon. Dec 03, 2007 at 09:51 AM

Tariq Gibran Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Oct 01, 2006 Total Posts: 1119 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF ...and in that same 2 year time frame we will start seeing some major full frame 35mm competition between Canon, Nikon and Sony so that $10K price is going to be competing with $2500-$5000 FF 35's by then. The botique, high end upmarket segment you mention will never get cheap enough as there is simply too little competiton there coupled with much much lower production numbers. At some point, I expect Canon and Nikon to hit the market with a new line of super high resolution prime lenses which can handle future sensor resolutions. Technology marches on and its going to be a tough road going forward for MF makers. eronald wrote: It's pretty obvious that the next ZD in about 2 years will have a 39 MP chip in it. This will give it usable 400 ISO and a body size pretty much equivalent to today's Canon, presumably with a price of around $10K; it's inevitable that as sensor prices sink MF will slowly come into its own again, at least in the boutique upmarket landscape/ fashion/portrait/commercial sector. Edmund httivals wrote: The Canon costs $8,000, including camera, and is A LOT more convenient, with a lot more lens choices than any MFDB. The 39 megapixel backs are about $30T, and much bigger and heavier than a Canon. Dec 03, 2007 at 02:05 PM

httivals Offline Buy and Sell: On Registered: May 08, 2004 Total Posts: 620 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF It's obviously unfair to compare used prices to new prices. The used MFDBs are also a very quickly depreciating asset, especially when they're already a generation behind state of the art. The Canon 1DsIII should hold its value well for at least 2 years, so it would only cost you about $1,000 - $1,500 per year, at most, in depreciation. . . . Predicting 3-5 years out is obviously speculative. My speculation is that there will be foveon-type sensors in full frame 35mm format. This will place much less stress on lenses. A 12 megapixel full frame, foveon type sensor (36 megapixel if you count each site 3 times), should place no more stress on a lens' resolving power than a 5D, and should resolve at or around an equivalent of 25 megapixels. The AA filter should be much weaker because there's no color aliasing to worry about, only grayscale/diagonal stair-step aliasing. . . Hopefully we'll see this by the time Canon comes out with a 1DsIV or Nikon comes out with a D4. I'm not the only dreamer in this dream -- I recall Thom Hogan having written something similar recently on his website. . . . Whoever gets there first with a great product at a competitive price -- Canon or Nikon -- will be the market leader for the next round, which could last an awful long time. Dec 03, 2007 at 03:30 PM

dcmiller Offline Image Upload: On Registered: May 21, 2002 Total Posts: 2326 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF I believe the price of MF backs will come down significantly, and that a successful business model can't be primarily built around profit from these items. How to build a back, specifically software, is something that needs to be learned. Once enough companies learn how to do it well, margins will fall. A 70 mp back it primarily about waiting for the hardware to be developed. It was very difficult to build a 35mm dslr in 2000. Today any electronic company could go out and buy the talent and hardware to build a decent $1000 camera. But will the market for mfdb be large enough to support generalized medium format products? There's always going to be a specialized need to do such things as copy work. But will the features and conveniences be enough to compete with high end 35mm? Take tilt for example. One of a few ways to get both large DOF and high res is camera movements. The solution for MF camera movements out of the studio is not good. In fact traditional 4x5 is in many ways a much more elegant solution for less controlled environments. I think we will get 70 mp 645. But beyond that point it's unchartered territory. I'm confident that Mamiya can get to the ZD II. But at that point if Mamiya is willing to sell at a modest profit to make money on other parts, I'm not sure what happens to the rest of the market. Dec 03, 2007 at 03:39 PM

dcmiller Offline Image Upload: On Registered: May 21, 2002 Total Posts: 2326 Country: United States Re: Here we are: 1Ds mkIII vs MF httivals wrote: It's obviously unfair to compare used prices to new prices. The used MFDBs are also a very quickly depreciating asset, especially when they're already a generation behind state of the art. The Canon 1DsIII should hold its value well for at least 2 years, so it would only cost you about $1,000 - $1,500 per year, at most, in depreciation. . . . Predicting 3-5 years out is obviously speculative. My speculation is that there will be foveon-type sensors in full frame 35mm format. This will place much less stress on lenses. A 12 megapixel full frame, foveon type sensor (36 megapixel if you count each site 3 times), should place no more stress on a lens' resolving power than a 5D, and should resolve at or around an equivalent of 25 megapixels. The AA filter should be much weaker because there's no color aliasing to worry about, only grayscale/diagonal stair-step aliasing. . . Hopefully we'll see this by the time Canon comes out with a 1DsIV or Nikon comes out with a D4. I'm not the only dreamer in this dream -- I recall Thom Hogan having written something similar recently on his website. . . . Whoever gets there first with a great product at a competitive price -- Canon or Nikon -- will be the market leader for the next round, which could last an awful long time. The back makers trade-in policy has made for an artificial market. They've probably released the trade-in backs to retain the lower end of the market. The oligopoly that has created the apparent collusion in this market will eventually collapse. One way to look at the true price of new backs is upgrade price + plus wholesale price of old (traded in) back. This is the amount of cash the back maker got from the sale of a new back to an existing user. I don't agree with your technical analysis of a foeveon type sensor. Dec 03, 2007 at 03:50 PM

	FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses Pages: 1 [2] 3