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,
SoderhamBratsk wrote:
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
That's the problem with a gun ho review before all the dust has settled.
I agree a little there Brent...
That is why I am watching from behind the lines...:+}
The leaf dose sound pretty interesting.
My bummer is I cannot get any hands on experience where I live, So I might have to make a decision on some reviews only.
I honestly was hoping the Mamiya was going to be a good entry point with out any damage, but the Big problems so far has turned me off for now.
No tethering
Bloomy Worms?? What is that about.
HIGH Noise
Slow as malasses
2 year old technology atleast(?)
Maybe the ZD MarkII...
I almost was sold on Franks review.. That is why I asked from the beginning about the Cons.. AS there was a lot of Flowers being thrown around about the ZD that it sounded like some was wanting a "Good" deal on a Mamiya...
I find it really strange that not many others are posting around the web as they have sold many I am sure recently..?
The leaf sure sounds like a good one. The fan deal kind of worries me though. Or is that in the older leafs only.?
Snook
I have done a handsdown review with the ZD back.
EVERYTHING I posted is something I still stand behind, for it's given price the ZD back is the best way to get into MF.
I have tested two backs, the first one I got was perfect except a non working firewire port which I knew from the start.
When I got the final release I found some problems with it which are currently being solved by Mamiya and will NOT reach the market or will be solved for the first adaptors, so there is no problem there also.
The tethered shooting is something else.
Although Mamiya CLAIMS they are working on that I have the feeling they are waiting it out for new software but don't want to promise anything.
They claim alot of photographers are using it without problems on MACs but I'm on a PC.
Because MY workflow is 99% tethered I have decided to upgrade to the Leaf, not because I did not like the QUALITY of the ZD, but PURELY because I need a working system.
If I would shoot for myself I would wait it out and shoot on the card for the time being, but the problem is that I have people watching over my back while doing a session and tethered shooting is a must in these situations.
Being said.
I play alot with backs and cameras and for myself I wanted to have a 16 bits back, I have said this from the start, however pricing was just too high for me, so I decided to start with the ZD and upgrade later on. This later on became earlier because I got a good deal on an Aptus from leaf.
HIGH Noise ?
With all due respect but check every back, they are NOT like DSLRs.
There is no magic software running that will destroy small detail.
I have done some shots on ISO400 yesterday with the ZD back and the noise is there but also there is the sharpness and detail, when shooting HIGH ISO on the 5D all fine detail is flatenend.
With the MF backs you can also do this with noise ninja, no noise, but also no more fine detail.
MF backs are meant to be used on low ISOs, for the moment you have to live with that, even with the Leaf.
Slow ?
The leaf is slower than the ZD back.
To be honest the ZD back is one very fast back.
Only when you fill the buffer it's slows down, but again look at other backs, they are shelving arround with app 40MB files.
2 Year old technology ??
Oh because of the small preview window
The technology is new, on the other hand we all work with more than 100 year old technology.
All digital backs have problems with long exposures, phase is the best in that department.
8-10 seconds on ISO100 will not be a problem however.
PLEASE remember that the technology of the MF backs is totally different from DSLRs, the DSLRs all have software running for noise control etc. A MF back often is much more simple and leaves the after work to the photographer, in other words you can decide yourself what to do, keep the fine detail and noise, OR loose the fine detail slightly but also the noise.
I would MUCH rather have the choice as that the camera does this for me.
Snook,
All of the current Aptus backs have the fan feature. Phase and Leaf have a fundamentally different way of cooling, as Phase has a passive cooling system. In the short peroid that I have been using the Aptus, the fan has not shown itself to be an issue. I have photographed on location and in the studio. My sensor is also still clean. One thing some people do no realize from looking at the Leaf brochures is that the battery mounts to the underside of the back frame: so it is external vs. being internal like with the Phase back. Also if you want the benefit of "higher"iso with Leaf, then you have to look at the 75 and the 65 as the iso goes from 50 to 800 as opposed to 25-400 found on the 22/54 models. I know there is at least one Phase back that goes to 1600.
regards
J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
PLEASE remember that the technology of the MF backs is totally different from DSLRs, the DSLRs all have software running for noise control etc.
Sorry, Canon does NOT modify RAW files on their DSLRs (and didn't that on P&S either when they had RAW). So for the RAW workflow there's no difference.
I don't think we are overreacting at all. I think being a blatant fan boy of something and influencing others to buy then switching so soon is irresponsible.
If it was so good you wouldn't of switched so soon.
I said from the begining that the quality was only slightly better then a 1Ds II, but a whole lot worse in almost every other area of use.
Who doesn't get enthusiastic about a new camera? We all do. I thought Frank was very explicit about the back, his results, and what it was like to use it. On the strength of his blog, where he posted results and crops for us to look at, I decided that the ZD wasn't going to work for me. Frank has been very honest and has kindly shared his experience with what is in many ways a nice bit of kit. That's not irresponsible. Irresponsible was when some proponents of the M8 encouraged others to buy while obeying the manufacturer's request to keep silent about some aspects of its performance. Frank's just a photographer enjoying his experiments like the rest of us. Give him a break.
Thanks Frank. I'm looking forward to seeing more results from your Aptus.
J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
I think there is alot of overreaction.
I have done a handsdown review with the ZD back.
EVERYTHING I posted is something I still stand behind, for it's given price the ZD back is the best way to get into MF.
I have tested two backs, the first one I got was perfect except a non working firewire port which I knew from the start.
When I got the final release I found some problems with it which are currently being solved by Mamiya and will NOT reach the market or will be solved for the first adaptors, so there is no problem there also.
....Show more →
Again, perhaps I'm misunderstanding but Frank DID leave out very pertinent information in his review as he admits over at the LL Forum. The back was crashing on him when he wote and showed the great images from the ZD. Was this only in Tethered shooting mode? Apparently not if the Firewire was not working either on this first back. I think it just might have changed a few peoples opinions about things had he mentioned this at the time. I just think a reviewer should never hold back pertinent info either at the request of a manufacturer(LL on the M8) OR because they believe the manufactuer will fix an issue in the future. An unbias review should mention everything. But thats just what I think and I am grateful to Frank for taking the time out to post and show us some of his expereinces with MF backs.
Here is a quote from Frank from the LL Forum about his first ZD back:
"The first back I got crashed on me about every 20-30 frames, the shutter would not fire and the error no dB was shown very much.
This was however something I knew about and did not mention in my review because it was already told by me it would be solved when I got a final release back.
Also firewire was not connected on that back, again something I knew."
...but was anyone under the impression that Frank was providing an exhaustive or objective review? When I saw it I thought "here's a photographer trying out some kit and kindly sharing the experience". I didn't expect any objectivity at all. It was not a commercial review by a commercial reviewer. Those who make a career out of reviewing gear have a responsibility to their readers. Frank is not one of them and never pretended to be.
I guess I did expect some objectivity given that Frank posted links to his review all over the web in various Forums. He also monitored all of these forums, answeared questions, ect. Seems like there would have been ample time at some point to mention major operational issues such as "well, the back is crashing on me every 30 frames or so" and add that he expects this to be fixed. In paricular, I mentioned that I had the feeling his review was just a little Rosey. He said it was not. Again, another opportunity to throw out there to everyone some of the issues he had been expereincing. Frank never said he was providing an exhaustive review and I fully appreciate and understand that. I'm also grateful as mentioned elsewhere that he has taken the time to post his review and monitor these forums. I just believe that if you do that and really promote it as he has, then he does in fact have some ethical obligations to be as forthcoming as possible, particularly about major operational issues such as the back crashing often. I in fact think people would even expect this more coming from a completely non commercial review(if in fact that is what it was).
Again.
THE FIRST BACK I GOT was NOT a final product, this was told to me by Mamiya I KNEW some problems but did not mention them indeed because it was KNOWN by Mamiya and they said the final product would not have them.
ANYONE who has EVER worked with a just before product knows this.
The final release back I got was working as it should, on the card.
So I did not make any further notice of that.
HOWEVER as soon as I found out that tethered did not work the day I found that out it appeared on my blog.
Also the purple worms were mentioned the day I found out about them.
AGAIN for the purple worms Mamiya CLAIMS to have the solution and it would not happen with new backs sold, if it DOES there are 2 stories.
1. Mamiya lied to me which I think would be stupid.
2. People got one of the first bad backs and need to swap them with their supplier.
So AGAIN (and yes I'm getting a bit frustated) I still believe the ZD back is a great product, however I'm a working photographer I need something working NOW, Mamiya could solve the purple for me within 2 days but the tethered shooting would take at least to the next software release.
THIS and ONLY THIS is the reason I bought a Leaf.
And yes the pictures will be better, and yes I will post that again in my blog.
However if I upgrade in a year please don't blame me
When you shoot on the card and use tethered sometimes the ZD back is a stunning performer, it smokes the 1DsII on ISO50-100 anything above that is just nice but it's not were it's designed for.
Again for the last time, I did not upgrade because I did not like the ZD back. It was just not the time for me, maybe if I would have switched a month later and the tethered would have been not a problem I would have shot the ZD probarbly for a long time.
However when I advertise with Medium format to my customers I cannot have the situation were something does not work.
The purple worms really got me offguard, I have shot several 400 ISO shots with the first back and they were clean.
Also now I have a sample of the artifact on my website posted this afternoon (way before this post to prove I did not do it quickly, I still have to make the post in my blog but I did not YET have the time).
I'm not paid by anyone for the reviews I do, but PLEASE don't change my words arround, it's as posted and I still stand by that for the full 100%.
Edited by J.A.F. Doorhof on Aug 25, 2007 at 07:14 PM GMT
AGAIN, my first back crashed a lot, but AGAIN this was known to me.
The new back NEVER crashed on me while shooting on the card.
Tethered is something else and I have mentioned that from the day I experienced it.
Well that is not entirely true by the way, I knew 3 days before I posted it the first time, simply because I first wanted to make sure I did not do something wrong myself.
Why did I post the review on so many sites ?
As mentioned before by someone else, I'm an enthiousastic photographer and I loved to get a very early sample of the ZD back, because ALOT of people mailed me when they saw the first remarks I made about buying it I decided to make the review.
I am getting more lost here.
How has Mamiya Fixed the Purple Problem in 2 days?
Also I would not say the ZD smokes the 1DsMII..
I would like to add that from the beginning I ask the downfalls and was actually Slammed in many post for doing so.
I thought it was "too" rosey also to not have some kind of affiliation to Mamiya.
Maybe Frank was hoping to get some freebie or super discount for his rosey review.. That we will never know.
I do appreciate Franks review but always thought it was biased..
Then the Can of worms came out ,no pun intended.
Hey Frank can you explain how Mamiya has fixed the Purple problem.
When that came out along with some bad grainy shots along with the fire wire problem that just through me way off.
I was always concerned about how it really was as only 2 reviews were being posted on the web, which again is strange with all the units sold.
I also think Canon has hampered the ZD sells with it's new release for sure , no doubt about that.
WHY are there not MORE reviews or posting of images from the ZD?
I would love to hear how mamiya has fixed the purple probelm and how they are going to fix the wormy problem.
But I am glad they were discovered before I pulled the trigger to try out the ZD. Where I live there is no service and it would have been a BIG deal to have to ship back for service.
My clients would be quite upset.
Frank I hope you take more time when you continue your leaf review, b//c again you have jumped the gun overly ecstatic about it aswell. I hope not but the flowers are flowing agin in that review. Although I truly believe it is WAY better than the ZD.
Also Frank, It is PROBABLY.. I have noticed you always spell that word wrong...:+}
Thought I would help you out..
Thanks and let me know the Mmaiya fix for the problems..
Snook
1. I experienced the problem after a week or so because it simply does not show up on ISO50-100 and barely on ISO125.
So when I mentioned it, it was already known by the importer and they already called with Mamiya. According to Mamiya it's a problem in the chip programming (and seeing the artifacts I believe that).
They were still waiting on an answer if the backs had to go back to Mamiya or if they could service it themself.
Again this can happen.
2. I have told you MANY MANY times that you have to keep in mind a MF back is NOT a DSLR
Of course it sucks on high ISO, of course the AF sucks compared to the DSLR but only on speed, I still have to see a DSLR which is so accurate as the spot focus of the AFD/II, and yes it does not do 9 or even 3 fps.
A digital back excells in studio work and on location work with controlled light and when you have the time.
If you need speed buy a DSLR a MF can never beat that.
As mentioned before I did not sell my 5D and will keep it for most of my other work,
I don't know your experience with MF but I have done extensive research before I made the switch and to be honest I found the adaption easier than I expected, but than again I knew what to expect.
My review was not rosy as being unfair, again I'm still VERY happy with the quality of the ZD back and would STILL advise it to EVERYONE who wants to have something better than the DSLRs.
The remarks that the ZD smokes the 1DsII are based on direct comparisions.
As mentioned a lot of times before, it's not only resolution because that is not true.
But it is:
1. Larger sensor (more depth in the pictures, some people call it MF magic).
2. Better optics.
3. No AA filter so there is alot more fine detail.
4. Larger sensor so better control over DOF.
5. Much more dynamic range.
I don't want to go into a debate, however I can't stand it when people think I'm keeping up appearances because I switched brand, I have explained it many times why I did that, and if you were in the same position as me you would understand.
Frank, this might be a good point to tell you the phrase your looking for is "hands on" review.
"Hands down" is slang for "with little or no effort". It comes from horse racing. The jockey who is winning easily drops his hands and lets up on the horse. e.g. "The ZD is hands down the best value in MF backs".
I come to enjoy your handsdown terminology, however Just like I am now strangely comforted by the vast number of broken links on Hubsands web site. So if you decide to stick with the phrase, it works for me.
