Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Mamiya ZD 22MP Back $ 6995 announced in US  (Read 32996 times)
alba63
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #40 on: June 03, 2007, 07:31:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Leica DMR is specified as 16-bit.

I am not a Leica specialist, but I remember having read several times in Leica Forums, that the 16bit are a pure marketing feature, not real.

Bernie
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8390



WWW
« Reply #41 on: June 03, 2007, 09:12:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I get confused with all the sensor sizes but don't these cheaper backs from Phase, Leaf and Hasselblad have smaller sensors? That's going to be the selling point of the Mamiya, a bigger sensor at a smaller price.

Barrie
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are totally right. The Phaseone/Leaf backs that have to be compared to the Mamiya ZD are the P25/A22, not the P21/A17. When you do this, you realize the Phaseone and Lead are about 2.5 times more expensive than Mamiya (3.5 times in Japan).

You can buy a full Nikon D2x/Canon 1ds2 system with the extra money you'll have to pay for the Phaseone/Leaf products...

Only those shooting fashion/products are little impacted by the lack of wide angle capability, for the rest of us the P21/A17 are simply not realistic options.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #42 on: June 03, 2007, 09:32:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You are totally right. The Phaseone/Leaf backs that have to be compared to the Mamiya ZD are the P25/A22, not the P21/A17. When you do this, you realize the Phaseone and Lead are about 2.5 times more expensive than Mamiya (3.5 times in Japan).

You can buy a full Nikon D2x/Canon 1ds2 system with the extra money you'll have to pay for the Phaseone/Leaf products...

Only those shooting fashion/products are little impacted by the lack of wide angle capability, for the rest of us the P21/A17 are simply not realistic options.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And still as i said aboth the nice A17 costs around 15000 Eurs that is MUCH more...
Logged

bwpuk
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 03, 2007, 09:48:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I think it can only be good for the MFDB scene that Mamiya is selling their backs at this price. It'll bring more photographers into this market.

For a long time the big three back makers have controlled the prices of all this gear, particularly the second hand backs, with their clever upgrading policy. The only way you could get a good used back was through them and they controlled the pricing.  I felt this was always a bit restrictive. Now maybe it'll open up the market somewhat.

Barrie
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8390



WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 03, 2007, 05:21:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
For a long time the big three back makers have controlled the prices of all this gear, particularly the second hand backs, with their clever upgrading policy. The only way you could get a good used back was through them and they controlled the pricing.  I felt this was always a bit restrictive. Now maybe it'll open up the market somewhat.

Barrie
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120906\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The only feedback companies like Phase and Leaf are going to listen to carefully is feedback from their existing customer base.

The ZD back will help open up the market  if the Phase/Leaf users realize that it is in their best interest to given an objective look at the Mamiya offering, acknowledge the quality of the files and feedback these information to Phaseone.

I am really afraid that many Phase users are going to act defensive here and try to justify to themselves and the rest of the world why they have spent 15.000 US$ extra for another theoretical small few % in image quality. What they should do in think further ahead and see that it is a unique opportunity for them to save money in the long run by having Phase/Leaf to lower their prices.

We are in a situation very similar to what happened 5 years ago when NIkon introduced the D1 at 1/2 the price of the Kodak DSLRs and completely changed the playing field.

Now, I really hope that Mamiya is going to keep investing and that they will release a 33MP version of the ZD within one year.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #45 on: June 03, 2007, 06:51:43 PM »
ReplyReply

yes, this is what we have to see. till now the new onwers just finished things which already have been for years in the mamiya pipeline and which nearly have been finished when they took over mamiya. so lets see if there will be ongoing developement of new tools or if this is just a way of "selling out" what mamiya already has had.
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 03, 2007, 07:21:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am really afraid that many Phase users are going to act defensive here and try to justify to themselves and the rest of the world why they have spent 15.000 US$ extra for another theoretical small few % in image quality. What they should do in think further ahead and see that it is a unique opportunity for them to save money in the long run by having Phase/Leaf to lower their prices.

Now, I really hope that Mamiya is going to keep investing and that they will release a 33MP version of the ZD within one year.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


if we are talking about pure raw image quality (not taking into consideration speed, clean high asa, handling, af,......) and we rank the available cameras the 5D would easily win for its price/value.....and one could argue that those files are already at 85% of what a P45/H39 is....and the ZD would be at maybe 90% and the P30 at 95%, maybe the bunch is even closer, but that is always the case....the closer you get to the top, the more expensive it gets....expotentially.....some people buy speakers for 300.000$ and most people would not hear the difference between those and a pair of 1000$.....it comes down if you can justify or if the difference is worth the price for you.......and the ZD falls very nicely into the market...no question...but for someone who wants a certain quality the difference in price is not that much....and for me a file from a P20 is still better then a file from a ZD....and i don't care about shooting WA.....this is a personal choice that everybody has to make for themselves and anyone would be a fool NOT to look at a ZD these days.....but there ARE options and different jobs require different tools........

considering that it took THAT long to actually bring this back to the market with virtually unchanged specs since announcement and i am assuming that the entire team that built the thing is long gone in the shuffle that went on, i really would not hold my breath for a 33mpix version being announced and even if it was, i would really wait for a shipping date to get my hopes up.....

in my opinion the ZD will cut into canons marketshare more then into the back makers....people who bought a canon for the resolution will now get the ZD and will be better off.....
i also think it might influence the 1DsMKIII pricepoint (more so then the MF's......)

but either way canon will outsell them all 1000times.....
Logged

Aboud
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 03, 2007, 08:11:51 PM »
ReplyReply

A MF digital for under 10K is certainly exciting news. But, and there is always a but, this camera was announced two years ago and has been available in Asia and Europe for about a year. When I contacted MAC back in November 2006 (before breaking down and buying a Contax 645 with a Phase One P25 back ... which did cost twice as much as the Mamiya) I was told that the back needed more work before it would be released on the US market and there was no planned release date. Now that it is here, the question has to be asked:  Is this two year old technolgy, making this an technological antique upon it release or is this a second generation made for the US market?

If medium format digital is your desire it will be interesting to see how the new Mamiya back matches up with Canon's new Digi III on the 1D III (and the rumored 1Ds III)  for color and resolution, as well as Mamiya glass compared to L glass. As far as comparisons to high grade MF backs by Leaf, Phase One and the H3D, I would not expect a David-Goliath result,  but the bang for the buck could be significant.


Photo: Phase One P24 on Contax 645, 140MM. 4 images stitched in CS3.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #48 on: June 03, 2007, 09:15:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The big haunting question is: Will the Mamiya ZD DMFB work on a view camera (or even better, a camera body such as the Cambo Wide DS) for more flexible architectural/landscape shooting and stitching ability?

My gut feeling is NO...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have to agree: the ZD back is not even usable with non-Mamiya MF bodies, or older Mamiya bodies. Mamiya seems to have joined Hasselblad-Imacon/Fuji (the H system) in moving towards requiring digital backs and bodies to be of the same brand, so that the brief "mix and match" era in MF may be coming to an end. This might or might not be justified by the enhanced "team-work" between back, body, lens, and viewfinder metering, but I am sure that many will criticize it as an attempt by the few remaining MF camera makers to block out third party back makers.
Logged
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #49 on: June 03, 2007, 09:55:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi
Yes the ZD is for the Mamiya only but you can't compare the Hasselblad H3D which is a true closed loop camera. The Mamiya 645 AFDII is a completely open platform. Lets say you bought the $9999.00 kit & you wanted to rent an extra back for a specific job ( Leaf, Sinar, Phase & Imacon ) you can. As I have used the ZD camera & Aptus 22/75, at $6995.00 for a 22mp back this is deal. Plus the Mamiya lenses are reasonably priced & you can still pick up 2nd hand ones on ebay for a bargain compared to there quality.

Denis
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
paulhu
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50



« Reply #50 on: June 03, 2007, 10:52:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I just figured it out.  The MAC USA is selling the ZD back as a standalone unit for $6999, or as a package system with the 645 AFD II, 80mm lens, and the ZD back for $9999.  The orignial Mamiya ZD, which is a closed system with the back being non-removable is not available in the US, but in Canada.
Logged
hvk
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


WWW
« Reply #51 on: June 04, 2007, 06:39:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I just figured it out.  The MAC USA is selling the ZD back as a standalone unit for $6999, or as a package system with the 645 AFD II, 80mm lens, and the ZD back for $9999.  The orignial Mamiya ZD, which is a closed system with the back being non-removable is not available in the US, but in Canada.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I live in Europe so i get a choice.  

Problem is I have a hard time to deceide whether to go with the ZD camera
or the back. Today I have an AFD body and a full set of prime lenses (except the 300).  My initial plan was to get a AFD II body and the back. But perhaps the difference in flexibility isn't worth it. In that case I'd end up with a AFD for film and a ZD camera.

A couple of questions:
1. Is there an Arca-swiss compatible plate for the ZD camera? I have the Kirk
    L-bracket for my 645AFD and would need something similar if I choose the
    ZD camera route.

2. From various sites I have gathered that the ZD back comes with a viewfinder
    screen that shows a cropped field of view. Is this done with a marker line in the
    viewfinder image, or is the area "outside" the sensor blacked out? Ideally I'd
    like the possibility of using the ZD back on several bodies, and switch between
    film and digital.  If this requires a focusing screen change it won't
    be convenient, so I might as well get the ZD camera.


Any thoughts on this?

/Henrik
Logged
marcwilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 04, 2007, 09:23:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Henrik,

The zd camera and zd back are really two very different beasts...similar say to comparing the film based mamiya 7 rangefinder and the mamiya 645 or 67 cameras.

The zd will give you great portability and the zd back flexibility in terms of being able to use it on both 645afd and view cameras.

I think that is the choice you need to make first otherwise is your photgraphic style is being dictated by your equipment instead of the other way round.

Marc
Logged

Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1123



WWW
« Reply #53 on: June 04, 2007, 09:32:14 AM »
ReplyReply

The 14 bit/16bit debate is baloney.  Its not what you've got,  but what you do with it.  The ZD has excellent dynamic range - you get muddy shadows from the ZD (camera) if you don't expose to the right and use that range properly.  Its nothing to do with 14 bit capture.  My 12 bit drum scanner creams 16bit CCD scanners.

Quentin
« Last Edit: June 04, 2007, 09:36:25 AM by Quentin » Logged

Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #54 on: June 04, 2007, 10:24:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi
Yes the ZD is for the Mamiya only but you can't compare the Hasselblad H3D which is a true closed loop camera. The Mamiya 645 AFDII is a completely open platform. Lets say you bought the $9999.00 kit & you wanted to rent an extra back for a specific job ( Leaf, Sinar, Phase & Imacon ) you can.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120998\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is there anything about the H3 body that prevents other companies like Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making backs that work on it? I can imagine that some communication features are lost, but would that still leave adequate functionality?

Anyway, given the great price advantage of the Mamiya options, and the great uncertainty hanging over Pentax entering the DMF market, I hope for success for Mamiya in DMF.


P. S. Thanks to marc wilson for pointing out the size and weight difference:
The Mamiya ZD body is 1300g [changed from 1200g that I got from DPReview to the 1300g at Mamiya Japan's web site.]
The Mamiya 645AFD II body plus ZD back is about 2200g, and far deeper.

I expected some size and weigh advantage to integrating the sensor into the body, but not that much! So maybe there is a market for the integrated ZD camera even if the modular body and back option is no more expensive and a ZD back upgrade costs less than upgrading the the next ZD body.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2007, 03:32:26 PM by BJL » Logged
marcwilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 04, 2007, 11:05:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I expected some size and weigh advantage to integrating the sensor into the body, but not that much! So maybe there is a market for the integrated ZD camera even if the modular body and back option is no more expensive and a ZD back upgrade costs less than upgrading the the next ZD body.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121056\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes however good in terms of price/performance etc digital backs are, and even with the obvious benefit of being able to use on them on both mf and view cameras I do feel there will always be the demand for the more portable option with mf quality that currently only the zd camera comes close to fulfilling...I am just a number of many I assume who await a medium format dslr that equals the image quality without question of a camera such as the mamiya 7 rangefinder at very large print sizes thus allowing the large prints that were associated with that camera from a very portable small lightweight solution.

As it stands at the moment the zd camera is the only option so I do hope an upgraded version will appear over the next few years..there do not seem to be any other manufacturers out there who would go that route..the upgraded zd with a mamiya zoom and a couple of hasselblad v series primes (my personal favourite mf lenses) using an adapter...nice!

Marc
Logged

RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604


« Reply #56 on: June 04, 2007, 12:02:04 PM »
ReplyReply

The folks in Japan might see a 33MP Mamiya back in a year or two, and the folks in America will see the same back about 4 years later.  

Quote
Is there anything about the H3 body that prevents other companies like Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making backs that work on it? I can imagine that some communication features are lost, but would that still leave adequate functionality?

These companies simply won't make backs for the H3.  They know it was designed for the Hassy H closed system.  They will continue to make them for the H1 and H2, but don't assume that anything other than a Hassy back will work with an H3.
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #57 on: June 04, 2007, 12:28:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The zd will give you great portability and the zd back flexibility in terms of being able to use it on both 645afd and view cameras.

Where was it announced that the ZD back will work with a view camera? Is there an external sync port?

Quote
Is there anything about the H3 body that prevents other companies like Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making backs that work on it?

I believe that the H3D camera body detects whether the attached back is the H3D back and won't work otherwise. The first example of 'locking out' the competition.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2378


« Reply #58 on: June 04, 2007, 12:39:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The 14 bit/16bit debate is baloney.  Its not what you've got,  but what you do with it.  The ZD has excellent dynamic range - you get muddy shadows from the ZD (camera) if you don't expose to the right and use that range properly.  Its nothing to do with 14 bit capture.  My 12 bit drum scanner creams 16bit CCD scanners.

Quentin
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121044\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Simply not true. It means 4096 or 16384 different values per channel (provided there are true 16bit capture devices). This means alot more information in the 16bit file. If it would not give you a much better file in IQ it will give you a lot more room to work with in image editing programs.

So it is not just what you do with it but also what you can do with it. Whether people will notice it? some will,  many don't I am afraid.

Not exposing the best way is simply user error which should be avoided
« Last Edit: June 04, 2007, 12:42:29 PM by Dustbak » Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #59 on: June 04, 2007, 12:49:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Simply not true. It means 4096 or 16384 different values per channel (provided there are true 16bit capture devices). This means alot more information in the 16bit file. If it would not give you a much better file in IQ it will give you a lot more room to work with in image editing programs.

So it is not just what you do with it but also what you can do with it. Whether people will notice it? some will,  many don't I am afraid.

Not exposing the best way is simply user error which should be avoided
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


apart from the stats, there is a visible difference between 12/14 bit and 14/16 bit on the screen...of course a bad exposure or crazy file tweaking will ruin anything and there are retouchers out there that can make any file look pretty amazing, but there is just more information to start with (with 14/16bit) and i would always rather start with the most information possible.....

what is visible in print is a totally different discussion...
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad