Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: ZD users please check  (Read 32888 times)
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 19, 2007, 12:08:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do we see the color anomalies using certain lenses, or the afd rather than the afdII?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134145\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm shooting with an AFD and AFDII with an 80, 200 and the new 75-150 and I'm seeing the same results across the board. I just shot a series of tests outdoors in shade and the results look just as good as my old Valeo 22 with the ISO 200 shots looking amazing. In open light outdoors I'm not seeing any funky noise in the shadows even at 200.

I have a feeling the ZD has to be carefully exposed indoors in crappy light. My Leaf back wasn't any different. I was already reaching for my Canons anytime I had to shoot natural light indoors and with the ZD it won't be any different.
Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1519


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2007, 02:32:04 PM »
ReplyReply

When you don't use exposure compensation like I did with my example shot it should NOT show up.
I'm by the way not talking about noise, I don't care about that to be honest.
But the worms are terrible and are unshoppable.
Logged
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2007, 03:02:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Frank - I agree.  It looks like you've got a bad back.
Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
David Blankenship
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2007, 03:49:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Pinkish-purple fringe on right I noted.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134135\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was getting that same kind of problem from my Kodak 35mm dslrn camera.  Just a bad bunch of sensors I guess.

db
Logged
espressogeek
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2007, 05:57:41 PM »
ReplyReply

First the purple worms and now someone reports a "centerfold'ish" issue in another thread. The shop here in Nashville does not inspire confidence in me that they would help me resolve an issue should I find one. I really want to take the plunge so Frank thanks again for keeping us posted. I will continue to follow this thread until this proves to be an isolated issue or until mamiya addresses the warts.
Logged
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2007, 06:21:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
First the purple worms and now someone reports a "centerfold'ish" issue in another thread. The shop here in Nashville does not inspire confidence in me that they would help me resolve an issue should I find one.
Two things:

1 - I have a demo ZD unit that doesn't have the problems Frank or the other poster has reported. I think Frank just was unlucky to get a bad back.

2 - Why is it the shop's responsibility to resolve the issue? You buy the back and should have a reasonable amount of time to return the unit if it's defective. Beyond 14 days or so it would be Mamiya's responsibility to fix or swap the back. If you're interested in buying a ZD back with a reasonable amount of support you ought to contact Steve Hendrix at PPR in Atlanta.

The ZD backs are just now finding their way into the hand of photographers. Only time will tell if they're a good bang for the buck. I plan on buying a unit tomorrow. Nothing I've seen so far is any different from what I've seen from other medium format backs and dslr's when the first batch of equipment is tested.
Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
espressogeek
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2007, 09:33:04 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree that its not the shop's responsibility to help me forever but these guys just don't inspire me to do business with them.  I will probably call up PPR and get their input on the situation and going to Georgia would save me a bit of sales tax.

Your also right about this being no different than any other new release. I went through the whole Leica M8 thing and found it terribly irritating. I expect the mamiya back to be perfect but I do expect it to be usable. I suppose I will have to sit on the sidelines for a few more weeks and make sure everything is OK.

I do appreciate everyone's input and I am very excited about this product. I think it offers several things that I wouldn't get in the CFV.  Those qualities being sensor size, more resolution and a bit lower price.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2007, 09:33:45 PM by espressogeek » Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 31, 2007, 05:50:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
@Anders,
You have the same problem, sorry.
Check your ISO400 shots from the factory on the lower part you can clearly see the purple discollerarisation, look for example at the plateau in the metal standing plate and to the right of that, it's less obvious in those shots but it can be seen.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133972\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have now gone through all me near 300 images from my ZD camera at 100% magnification. On the factory scene that Frank mentions it appears to be noise spread over the photo. I do not see that this can be same as the purple worms even looking at full size processed image. Remember that it was 400 ASA +1.5 stops in Silkypix. Processing in CS3 and running Noise Ninjia the purple noise disappears, but... photo is cleaner with SilkyPix noise reduction.

There were three other photos that I suspected for the purple worm syndrome. For two of those it was simply blurred objects, per verification with other frames.

The fourth one does not seem like the purple worm syndrome, but I attach a 100% crop from it here. Perhaps someone knows what it is and why?

Much kind thanks.

Regards
Anders
Logged
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #28 on: August 31, 2007, 06:08:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have now gone through all me near 300 images from my ZD camera at 100% magnification. On the factory scene that Frank mentions it appears to be noise spread over the photo. I do not see that this can be same as the purple worms even looking at full size processed image. Remember that it was 400 ASA +1.5 stops in Silkypix. Processing in CS3 and running Noise Ninjia the purple noise disappears, but... photo is cleaner with SilkyPix noise reduction.

There were three other photos that I suspected for the purple worm syndrome. For two of those it was simply blurred objects, per verification with other frames.

The fourth one does not seem like the purple worm syndrome, but I attach a 100% crop from it here. Perhaps someone knows what it is and why?

Much kind thanks.

Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136527\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Anders,

Do you have a Gretag Macbeth Color Checker or even a 8 x 10" gray card?  If you do and if you can find the time, maybe shoot a full frame (covering the whole card) of both and share the MEFs if you can.  Exposure need to be as accurate as you can get it.  Then you can start to stop down by 1, 2, 3, 4 stops etc and then over-exposed by 1, 2, 3, 4 stops etc. on the gray card.  If the ZD is having any issues with the sensor reacting to over or under exposures, I think it will show very clearly in one of those shots.  Game to give it a try?

Henry
Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #29 on: September 01, 2007, 12:30:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Anders,

Do you have a Gretag Macbeth Color Checker or even a 8 x 10" gray card?  If you do and if you can find the time, maybe shoot a full frame (covering the whole card) of both and share the MEFs if you can.  Exposure need to be as accurate as you can get it.  Then you can start to stop down by 1, 2, 3, 4 stops etc and then over-exposed by 1, 2, 3, 4 stops etc. on the gray card.  If the ZD is having any issues with the sensor reacting to over or under exposures, I think it will show very clearly in one of those shots.  Game to give it a try?

Henry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136530\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hello Henry,

Color checker and gray card would be useful to have! When reading your post last nigh I meant to drive in morning to nearest place to buy them about an hour away, but rain this morning made me lazy! Instead I took the gray side of my Domke wrap, a slightly off white board and a large flat neoprene pouch and posted on a wall. That is a simulation of what you suggest   .

Conditions were following:
Diffused light on subjects from large windows behind my back and cloudy sky just before noon time.
Tripod+cable release.
80mm f1.9 at f22 and about 70cm away from subject.
ISO 100

Processing in SilkyPix
Film color V2 to give more saturation, in order to MAGNIFY any problem.  
Shooting photos with exposure compensation -3, -2, -1.5, -1.0,-0.5,0,+0.5,+1.0,+1.5,+2.0,+3.0 Then doing reverse by compensation in SilkyPix.

Off white showed nothing.
Gray showed nothing.
However, at black neoprene I got results as attached, 100% crops.    

Of course, PLEASE NOTE: I very rarely use Film color V2 because it makes too overly saturated photos, AND SilkyPix in their manual recomments to individually desaturate specific colors when using such overly saturated color setting.

THIS IS SIMPLY ONLY A TEST OF THE SENSOR.


Is what we see normal? Is this normal noise?

To magnify the issue further in order to make it more visual, in addition to color setting V2 I also slid the saturation adjustment to max +3. PLEASE NOTE: doing same on a normal photo with colors would result in very overly highly radiant saturated colors. Again this is only a test for the sensor!

With above in mind, is my sensor acting normal???

I should say that having spent so much more on a camera than my D200, I did not expect this condition. Yet, the test is EXTREME conditions, so with that in mind is this normal to expect from a medium format sensor?

Much thanks.

Regards
Anders
Logged
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2007, 01:45:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hello Henry,

Color checker and gray card would be useful to have! When reading your post last nigh I meant to drive in morning to nearest place to buy them about an hour away, but rain this morning made me lazy! Instead I took the gray side of my Domke wrap, a slightly off white board and a large flat neoprene pouch and posted on a wall. That is a simulation of what you suggest   .

Conditions were following:
Diffused light on subjects from large windows behind my back and cloudy sky just before noon time.
Tripod+cable release.
80mm f1.9 at f22 and about 70cm away from subject.
ISO 100

Processing in SilkyPix
Film color V2 to give more saturation, in order to MAGNIFY any problem.   
Shooting photos with exposure compensation -3, -2, -1.5, -1.0,-0.5,0,+0.5,+1.0,+1.5,+2.0,+3.0 Then doing reverse by compensation in SilkyPix.

Off white showed nothing.
Gray showed nothing.
However, at black neoprene I got results as attached, 100% crops.   

Of course, PLEASE NOTE: I very rarely use Film color V2 because it makes too overly saturated photos, AND SilkyPix in their manual recomments to individually desaturate specific colors when using such overly saturated color setting.

THIS IS SIMPLY ONLY A TEST OF THE SENSOR.
Is what we see normal? Is this normal noise?

To magnify the issue further in order to make it more visual, in addition to color setting V2 I also slid the saturation adjustment to max +3. PLEASE NOTE: doing same on a normal photo with colors would result in very overly highly radiant saturated colors. Again this is only a test for the sensor!

With above in mind, is my sensor acting normal???

I should say that having spent so much more on a camera than my D200, I did not expect this condition. Yet, the test is EXTREME conditions, so with that in mind is this normal to expect from a medium format sensor?

Much thanks.

Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dear Anders,

Looks like some colour noise to me but if you have to push SAT so high to see something like this, MHO is just go and enjoy your camera.

IMHO some cameras are just meant to be used at low ISOs and some can go higher.  Like film, we always try to push the envelope when we expose and process but reality is if you want good images, you must first respect the capability of your media and then you work within their latitude.  Digital should be no difference.

Of course some other backs may be able to give you cleaner files at higher ISOs but the question is how much would you pay to have that ability.  If as a commercial photographer you need that capability and having that will bring you sufficient rewards, then I think the answer will be obvious.  On the other hand, I think there are more photographers who are struggling just to pay off their Canons and Nikons and can only lust for better equipment.  These photographers spend more time trying to be good at their craft because they do not have the luxury of errors.

Rant aside, I think you have a good working camera.

Best wishes,

Henry
Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1519


WWW
« Reply #31 on: September 01, 2007, 01:54:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Looks fine, but make ONE shot correctly exposed on ISO400 please.
Logged
rinderart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 01, 2007, 01:30:38 PM »
ReplyReply

WOW, I sure am glad I read this this morning. I was almost out the door to go buy one here in LA. Think I'll Wait a while. The Mamiya Rep here is a friend of mine. Gonna have a talk with him. Thanks everyone.
Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #33 on: September 01, 2007, 11:49:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Dear Anders,

Looks like some colour noise to me but if you have to push SAT so high to see something like this, MHO is just go and enjoy your camera.

....

Like film, we always try to push the envelope when we expose and process but reality is if you want good images, you must first respect the capability of your media and then you work within their latitude.  Digital should be no difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136705\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Henry,

I think you pointed out something very true here, perhaps we try push too far and pixel peep too much, while it is all about learning the extent of the limitations of our tools.

Same time.... below are two more samples.

Regards
Anders
Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #34 on: September 01, 2007, 11:50:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Looks fine, but make ONE shot correctly exposed on ISO400 please.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Frank,  Henry and others,

Attached are two samples at ISO 400 and ISO 50. This time I used CS3's ACR to save to JPG, all default settings. It also shows up same in SilkyPix using Standard Color mode and no saturation boost, I tried that also. As my previous shots I let the camera meter. Left half of image was off white, right half was black neoprene (as seen here), lower hald was a gray. Same condition with large windows in my back providing diffused light from overcast skies, windows about 4m from subjects, subjects on wall parallel to windows.

I am surpriced I see this noise (or what it is) also at ISO 50 alreaedy. Granted this is similar to a very dark shadow.

Is this typical behavior of the Dalsa ZD sensor and a limitaiton extent in dark shadows? Or is it abnormal?

Much thanks.

Regards
Anders

Woops... no label; left on should be ISO 400, right ISO50 (ISO 50 the better one)

It should also be stated that out of 300 photos I only suspected similar on about 2, both those posted in higher up under this thread. And.. last one of those I am not even sure if exact same thing... So most of time I not observed this problem but the ZD is capable of very high quality photos!  
« Last Edit: September 01, 2007, 11:56:19 PM by Anders_HK » Logged
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #35 on: September 02, 2007, 01:36:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Frank,  Henry and others,

Attached are two samples at ISO 400 and ISO 50. This time I used CS3's ACR to save to JPG, all default settings. It also shows up same in SilkyPix using Standard Color mode and no saturation boost, I tried that also. As my previous shots I let the camera meter. Left half of image was off white, right half was black neoprene (as seen here), lower hald was a gray. Same condition with large windows in my back providing diffused light from overcast skies, windows about 4m from subjects, subjects on wall parallel to windows.

I am surpriced I see this noise (or what it is) also at ISO 50 alreaedy. Granted this is similar to a very dark shadow.

Is this typical behavior of the Dalsa ZD sensor and a limitaiton extent in dark shadows? Or is it abnormal?

Much thanks.

Regards
Anders

Woops... no label; left on should be ISO 400, right ISO50 (ISO 50 the better one)

It should also be stated that out of 300 photos I only suspected similar on about 2, both those posted in higher up under this thread. And.. last one of those I am not even sure if exact same thing... So most of time I not observed this problem but the ZD is capable of very high quality photos! 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136833\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dear Anders,

I believe you have the IR filter attached but I suspect that the sensor is still picking up some IR.  If you have a B&W 486 IR/UV blocking filter, we can certainly find out by shooting with the filter on your lens.

Henry
Logged
SeanPuckett
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 245


WWW
« Reply #36 on: September 02, 2007, 09:09:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Anders,

I see the "purple worms" in your ISO 400 sample.  They are subtle but there.  It seems to me the firmware is making some colour smoothing assumptions during its high ISO processing that are not well designed.  This is too bad; this kind of blotchiness is unacceptable in my work.

-s
Logged

bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #37 on: September 02, 2007, 07:33:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Do any of you think you might be asking a little too much from the sensor in the ZD? The same chip in my Valeo wasn't even usable at ISO 200.

I've shot tests on lights with the ZD back at ISO 400 and the results weren't bad but I would never use it for a client.

If you need a high ISO back look at the new Leaf, Phase and Sinar backs. Or better yet, a Canon 5D....
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 07:44:00 PM by bcroslin » Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #38 on: September 02, 2007, 08:16:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do any of you think you might be asking a little too much from the sensor in the ZD? The same chip in my Valeo wasn't even usable at ISO 200.

I've shot tests on lights with the ZD back at ISO 400 and the results weren't bad but I would never use it for a client.

If you need a high ISO back look at the new Leaf, Phase and Sinar backs. Or better yet, a Canon 5D....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136961\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Bob,

In all respect, I belive you may be missing my point. Granted it would be lovely if the ISO performance of the ZD at 200 & 400 ISO would be better. My point is not the normal noice but the colored purple that on my ZD camera body even shows up at ISO 50! There seem to be a problem, does it not?

For high ISO seems the upcoming D3 will beat anything, but that is NOT the issue here...  

Regards
Anders
Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1519


WWW
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2007, 02:31:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Before people get too scared, please check my sample again (posted in this thread), it's not noise on a black surface I'm talking about, but it's like there has been stamps all over the photo.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad