I thouht the P21 was the best by a meaningful margin.
I'm currently testing the ZD. From the first shot the improvement in sharpness is significant, compared to Canon DSLR. I don't see that in these comparisons. I'm not sure what to make of the ZD shots above.
I would like to know if he has NR on or off with the ZD. NR reduces resolution, according to the manual.
Let's have it correct: Ted Pedersen, the original poster at dpreview, did add this note to his post:
"Here are full-res files from the Canon 1DsMKIII, Phase One P21+, and Mamiya ZD. All files were shot in RAW and processed to 16bit Tiffs. Then files were converted to jpg format for uploading to web. Camera mirrors were locked up for each exposure. No sharpening or noise reduction was applied. The focus point was on the blue BMW, which was 40 yards away. Also, I disabled all default sharpening when converting the files."
There was a fierce discussion over there about the results of diffraction for the f/11 used for both MF and 35mm.
It is not just 4:3 to 3:2 as Andi noted. The 80mm MF lens captures a slightly narrower angular field, so things get closer and bigger in this comparison for the MF candidates. This must be taken into account when gazing at fine detail resolution.
I would cautiously guess that the 1DsMkIII could look better than the P21 at f/5.6 and with a closer position of the camera (to balance the difference in angular field).
OK, if you look at that orange warning light between the red and the blue-ish car you can see that the P21 has the most detail, the canon is second. However this may be in the margin of normal user error. A truck driving bye could already erase the finest detail from these shots. I guess it would be important to know what Ted Pedersen thinks about this result
I think the Canon walks away with it for contrast but with a little sharpening the P21 would hold up well for sharpness. Kind of surprising given that with the 1ds2 I would guess the positions would be switched and the contrast would look better with the phase one. The ZD shot doesn't look bad, just a little mushy and definitely needs a little work.
For the price and convenience though I'm likin' the canon. Unfortunately I blew the remainder of the photography budget for this year on a new printer. Maybe the easter bunny will be kind.
Sorry --- change my vote I thought the clips Andi posted were all there were. The canon looks better in the infinity crops but not better than the P21 for the close ups. Playing around with sharpening in photoshop it strangely sharpens the little details like license plates very well but the orange sign still looks kind of blurry. Looking at the license plates of the cars the difference between the two looks less pronounced but not the traffic sign. ZD still trails and I still want a mark 3.....
Doug
Edited by Doug Morgan on Dec 01, 2007 at 04:49 PM GMT (Reason: because I'm an idiot and jump to conclusions)
I foresee a lot of 16MP and 21MP medium format back coming up on FM B&S and eBay cheap shortly.
Ease of use, price and durability of a 1DsIII are going to make it hard for the 22MP medium format solution providers. It is going to be very interesting to see what Phase, Leaf, Sinar and Hasselbad introduce at Photokina in 2008 to remain relevant. Something mind blowing I'm hoping...
I wish I could find a 1DsIII in stock to buy I can't wait to start testing it with Leica and Zeiss glass But so far no luck finding a 1Ds III...
Andi, you could really mislead people with those crops. The focus was in the foreground (the BMW) but you posted crops way beyond the focal plane. (Perhaps you could replace them with crops of the BMW?)
The P21 was the winner for me, then the Canon then the ZD.
It should be mentioned that this is as much a test of the Canon 50mm v the Mamiya 80mm lenses as anything else. I'd like to put the Canon up against my Schneider 80mm.
I really don't like these comparisons of "unsharpened" files. As if there something basic and natural about a raw file. I'm sure both Phase and Canon do active noise reduction post-capture. So they are likely manipulating edge information.
Expertly sharpened comparisons would be better. Unless someone is selling/using unprocessed files
As far as contrast, Canon may have the largest light to dark range. But that doesn't mean anything for the final print. It looks to me that Phase has substantially better micro contrast. (Or perhaps just more resolution). These characteristics are meaningful.
OK.. the point is that i asked him and he told me the focus point was the BMW near the front of the image.. Since the apparent DOF will be different for each of these setups, one needs to look near the focus point to make any comparison.
I think the Phase was better slightly in resolution, contrast, and color. The mamiya was the worse but i wonder if there was some camera shake there. Nonetheless, these comparisons were interesting.
Ok i see this was stated on page 2....
Edited by mark1958 on Dec 01, 2007 at 07:01 PM GMT
I recently made prints 16x24 with my aptus65/hasselblad and canon 5D using my 90mm TSE (unshiffted). At this size print, there is almost no difference in resolution. The color and contrast can all be manipulated. The shots were not identical but close in composition. At 100% pixel peeping, one could see a tad more resolution using the MF setup. I should also note that the DR is clearly better on the MF setup when shooting scenes with a sky. I would say there are many ways to evaluate performance.
One other point.. M.R. on luminous-landscape has done extensive comparisons. He has not posted them yet but made the comment that the microdetail is still better on the MF back when compared to the 1DsmkIII but the differences do not sound huge. Waiting to see his writeup and comparisons
dcmiller wrote:
What do you guys with MFDB see in your prints when images are compared to 35mm DSLR?
Edited by mark1958 on Dec 01, 2007 at 07:09 PM GMT
I will also say the car is not the best item to concentrate on even though it was the focus point. There is not alot of detail to look at. I was looking at the gravel just in front and the telephone poles just off to the side. You can see a bigger difference between the Canon and Phase back. Also note that it would be interested to see the largest back or at least the aptus 65 where the pixel density would be very high and the very best lenses for both set ups.
)
I can't wait to start testing it with Leica and Zeiss glass