Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Mamiya ZD 22MP Back $ 6995 announced in US  (Read 32215 times)
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #80 on: June 05, 2007, 05:15:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Or try reading the reviews here on LL which do a good job of summing the camera up.  Obviously I own one so I am hardly objective, but then again, some tools take more work than others to get right - I still own a Kodak 14nx, a camera widely derided by many but very capable once you work it out.  A nice even histogram may spell trouble with a ZD file.  But you have to make up your own mind with these things.

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


that is one of the stranger advices i have read here.....don't check for yourself, just read michaels review!
i used to own the kodak as well...a very capable camera under the right conditions....but also capable of producing absolute crap....so the camera has to considered with a huge warning.....i think the ZD is much less "temperamental" but also has downsides that need to be pointed out....just like it has great pros (like the price) which is why we are even talking about it.....

either way...read the reviews and PLEASE look at raw files and make up your own mind!
Logged

mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #81 on: June 05, 2007, 05:47:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
6. reasonable price

Kind of an understatement  :>))

For the price of any one of the standalone 'premier' backs currently available
a buyer can get the AFD II kit and quite possibly every new AF lens Mamiya currently offers.
Probably have some change left over to pick up a couple of used manual lenses as well.

Assuming this product release (now slated for release 90 days away) is valid I think Mamiya has
made a very good tactical move.

The files might,conceivably,be slightly inferior to other products but the price point is sure
to attract a huge number of new 'devotees' to the MF digital world who probably could not have  afforded to make this decision with other brands.

As most photographers are pretty brand loyal (even though we won't admit it) once they make a choice Mamiya has them in the fold for lenses,accessories and back upgrades for years to come.

Mark
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8211



WWW
« Reply #82 on: June 05, 2007, 06:54:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
that is one of the stranger advices i have read here.....don't check for yourself, just read michaels review!
i used to own the kodak as well...a very capable camera under the right conditions....but also capable of producing absolute crap....so the camera has to considered with a huge warning.....i think the ZD is much less "temperamental" but also has downsides that need to be pointed out....just like it has great pros (like the price) which is why we are even talking about it.....

either way...read the reviews and PLEASE look at raw files and make up your own mind!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121317\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd definitly second that advice, but would add that the ZD RAW files should ideally be compared to image shot with the P25+ and A22 in similar conditions. This is the only way to understand how the 3 backs behave in terms of highlight rendition vs shadow noise.

The best way to do this is probably to convert the RAW files from each back with the best available software. C1 would probably be recommended by Phase, not sure what is best for the Lead. As far as the ZD goes, I would personnally recommend RAW developper 1.62 or Silkypix 3.08 at this point of time, but Lightroom 1.1 might change that.

Lightrrom works overall nicely with ZD Raw files, producing good colors and a very decent level of sharpness, but RD is superior as far as fringing is concerned. You have also much more control in terms of the ratio between noise reduction and sharpness with RD. Again, Lightroom 1.1 might change this and I assume that Mamiya and Adobe have worked together on this since LR now appears to be bundled with the ZD back in the US.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
jmboss
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 95


« Reply #83 on: June 06, 2007, 02:08:08 PM »
ReplyReply

I received the following reply this morning to my email last week concerning use of the new ZD Back with view cameras for more flexiblity with the creation of architectural/landscape images:

>Hello Joseph

>At this time there is no way to connect the Mamiya ZD back to a view camera.
>Please understand this is a very new product – in fact it will be a month or so before production is really rolling.

>However, there are plans in the future to have an adapter that will allow you to connect to view cameras. No details are >currently available. We’ll do our best to keep you informed, but feel free to contact me with any questions.

>Regards
 
>Jeff Karp

>Mamiya Product Marketing Manager

>MAC Group
>8 Westchester Plaza
>Elmsford, NY 10523
>914-347-3300 x268
>Fax 914-347-3309

>JeffK@MACgroupUS.com

>www.Mamiya.com

While Jeff has confirmed my suspicions about the lack of a view camera attachment with this ZD Back model, he offers fodder for a number of issues raised in this forum discussion with the phrases "this is a very new product" and "there are plans in the future". Maybe not only for just the adapter?

Joe Bossuyt
« Last Edit: June 06, 2007, 05:07:25 PM by jmboss » Logged
Pantoned
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


WWW
« Reply #84 on: June 06, 2007, 04:10:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
well i downloaded raw samples again and looked at them 50, 100 and 125iso with perfect exposure, nice even histogram, nothing clipped....all 3 show what i consider muddy shadows, just like the canons...neither the P20 nor the P30 show any sign of this.....even at higher iso (400, 800) they get grainier, noisier but they maintain more information.....maybe i am crazy, but that is totally obvious on my screen.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121151\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I would like to see a side by side comparison of this muddy shadows, I think this is more a software dependant problem than what backs are really capable of. Just for testimony I've attached a shot I did while waiting for the sun to pop out. As it can be seen default ACR shows even clipped shadows (which disappear when black level goes down). It's just an exaggeration of fill light to show how much information digital cameras contain even in shadows, so if there is so much information, getting well balanced, gradiented shadows should be more a matter of software.

Just my two cent.

Arnau Anglada
Logged

---------------------------------------
www.arnauanglada.com
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #85 on: June 06, 2007, 04:18:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I would like to see a side by side comparison of this muddy shadows, I think this is more a software dependant problem than what backs are really capable of. Just for testimony I've attached a shot I did while waiting for the sun to pop out. As it can be seen default ACR shows even clipped shadows (which disappear when black level goes down). It's just an exaggeration of fill light to show how much information digital cameras contain even in shadows, so if there is so much information, getting well balanced, gradiented shadows should be more a matter of software.

Just my two cent.

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

different software can pull different things out of the shadows (or the whole file for that matter), so of course this is software dependend.....but like i said before, if the information isn't there, the software  can't show it...or worse: it will make it up....
C1 pulls a tiny bit more detail out of my P30 files then LR/CR does...but the ease of handling makes me stick with LR....of course this is also because the P30 do have so much information....so i don't have to worry about loosing 0.5%.....
Logged

mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #86 on: June 06, 2007, 08:03:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi
Since I own a ZD camera & use it 90% more than my 5D. On the subject of the small screen the best way to deal this is to buy a viewer (Epson..etc..) to take advantage that the ZD back will shoot jpegs which I think is the only back that does this? On location shoot Raw/jpeg & then download the card on the viewer. Then you can scroll through your images faster & without burning up battery power on the ZD back. This way you can concentrate on your photography. As far as viewers go I don't know which one is best.
Thanks Denis

My Webpage
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
jjlphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 467


« Reply #87 on: June 07, 2007, 02:17:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I just read this on the main page:

Mamiya Digital has announced the Mamiya ZD 645AFD II Digital System......[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120574\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Sorry for being dense- I can't find it  
Logged

Thanks, John Luke

Member-ASMP
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #88 on: June 07, 2007, 03:01:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Sorry for being dense- I can't find it   
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Quote

[a href=\"http://www.mamiya.com/]http://www.mamiya.com/[/url]
Logged

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

Posts: 59


WWW
« Reply #89 on: June 07, 2007, 04:09:49 PM »
ReplyReply

anyone know if the zd will work w/ the older rz67 and rz67II? all the literature mentions the proIID but doesn't specifically say it's not compatible with the older bodies.
Logged
sjprg
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41



« Reply #90 on: June 10, 2007, 05:43:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Along the same lines. What is the difference with interfacing the back between the 645, the 645AFd, and the 645 AFDII. I keep reading but I've haven't found an explanation of the differences. Can I use the back on the 645AFD or do I need the 645AFDII?
Logged

Paul
Galleries: www.sjprg.us
              www.pbase.com/sjprg
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #91 on: June 11, 2007, 12:45:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Along the same lines. What is the difference with interfacing the back between the 645, the 645AFd, and the 645 AFDII. I keep reading but I've haven't found an explanation of the differences. Can I use the back on the 645AFD or do I need the 645AFDII?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122115\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Quote
Hi
From my reading at the MAC group you can use the 645 AFd with the ZD back however you won't get  the shooting rate that you will get with the 645 AFDII. I think the 645 can be up graded and the question here is it worth it. you would be better to put your money into a 645 AFDII. I have seen these bodies go for about $1600.00 USD on ebay.
Thanks Denis
Logged

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

Posts: 65


« Reply #92 on: June 11, 2007, 08:52:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Ok, so Bottom Line:

Is the Image Quality of the ZD back as good as the one of the other 22mp, but more expensive MFDB's?

If so then the other MFDB mfg's might reduce their backs prices... If not, they hold their ground.

The 20+ mp 1Ds mk3 is only 2-3 months away. And although IQ might be superb it will still be a smaller format and all what that entails..
Logged
Dinarius
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 710


« Reply #93 on: June 11, 2007, 09:02:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Good to see one of the Japanese players finally dipping their toes into the MFDB market. Whether it makes any difference or not remains to be seen.

But, they have seriously deep pockets and that's the only way anyone can scare the Hassie/Sinar crowd into making their (excellent) product more affordable.

D.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad