Mamiya ZD road test. Wow

[Jack]

So if my ZD back is the same vintage as your ZD camera was, then it must be a significant difference in ZD camera and ZD back performance, and quite possibly why we never saw the ZD camera here in the states... Again, sorry you had issues, but I am finding this back excellent in all regards, including very usable at ISO 200. And while it does show noise 400, I find it a usable and not overly objectionable amount noise for occasions that warrant it.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Well yes there are backs that will perform better and be more functional no doubt about but they do come with a higher price tag. The one thing the ZD back does do is get you over the 35mm curve line in a big way and that alone is very good and entry point is low compared to others and equal if not less overall than buying a high end 35mm so for that alone a very good deal. Of course i am also looking to move up too with more functional speed and higher ISO levels but for entry into MF it is very good. Now i noticed this was some time ago when you had these issues, not sure they exist now but certainly worth checking.

 

[Anders_HK]

So if my ZD back is the same vintage as your ZD camera was, then it must be a significant difference in ZD camera and ZD back performance, and quite possibly why we never saw the ZD camera here in the states... Again, sorry you had issues, but I am finding this back excellent in all regards, including very usable at ISO 200. And while it does show noise 400, I find it a usable and not overly objectionable amount noise for occasions that warrant it.

Jack

In all respect but your conclusion of difference in ZD back and ZD camera are incorrect. If you research thorough you will find what I state: ZD back and ZD camera are same. The only differnce I know of was that at time for release of ZD back, the quality was slight better on ZD back, only because they had not yet implemented the latest updated firmware to ZD camera at that time. When that was released some months later, ZD cameras were identical in image quality, both per what I seen firsthand at my agent in comparison testing, and also per what they told me. They sold/sell both ZD back and ZD camera.

Thus it can be assumed, that any new updates that MAY (or may NOT) have been made shall cause same, propably ZD back first, then few months later ZD camera. Mechanically and computer parts are from what I have been told and researched identical inside them, until of course they (if at any time) upgrade those (which is more costly than firmware and Capture One).

I will be happy if you and Guy do thorough, honest and frank testing of what I pointed out months ago as problem with ZD back AND ZD camera. You may have noticed that noone yet has come up with a test against what I pointed out, also including other seasoned ZD addicts (I was one at first blind such), indicating that other ZD users concluded that there was this problem in ZD back and ZD camera. There were for fact more people than Frank Doorhof and I who gave up on ZD, although his problem was different and not same as what I encountered. I should also point out what I recall I also wrote in that LL link, that early ZD cameras did apparant not have same problem as I pointed out.

You should already know that the reason that ZD camera was not released in USA was as Michael Reichman pointed out on his website (see his review of ZD camera per what my memory recalls), there was a dispute between Mamiya America and Mamiya. ZD was in shape of ZD camera released in Canada ahead of ZD in shape of ZD back in USA. Further, per the words I was given by my agent back in end of November was that ZD back was having still at that time compatibility problem with the AFDII, whereby at times one would need to remove batteries for camera to go back to normal. The ZD camera in fact has been more solid, apart from the problem I pointed out, and sorry I am not happy to have had to point this out.

Lastly, when you guys do the testing, do consider that you are both in sunny California and that this very well can and will play in on tests, since you have good light there. The ZD reuires good light as pointed out by other seasoned ZD users in Luminous Landscape forums. That was also a comment I gave to reply to one poster in my above link of LL.

If you need any advise in your testing, please email me. Same time do bear in mind that more people than me have lost money on the ZD. Thus please do a very correct and honest test. We do not want others to buy it and find same problem and loose money, do we? Thus if in first testing you are unable confirm ther problem, look again. Perhaps what I posted in the LL link will help you to see what to look for. When you know that, then is easier to spot it.

I do agree with what Guy points out that the ZD is capable of high quality images (although still a very clear stretch from the likes of Aptus 22 that has same identic sensor as ZD, and more so the Aptus 65&75). When within the ZDs very shallow limits of well performing, such as ISO50 and with much light and not large DR, then I am convinced it beats 1Ds Mk3 based on all images from 1DsMk3 I was able to find and download up thru January this year at least, after that I stopped searching.

As regards to you saying you can use it to ISO 200. So did I say when I was early ZD user, but... that was in very good light, and that is usually not where we need to increase ISO, right? Same time my eyes were accepting to some noise then too. Look in dark shadow regions at such ISO...

Regards
Anders

 

[robsteve]

Anders:

If you have moved on from the ZD to Aptus, why do you want Jack and Guy to test the ZD back for you?

Robert

 

[Guy Mancuso]

From every files i have seen so far i have yet to see anything bad at this point and that is a variety of shots. Just not sure this issue still exists with the newer products at this point. i will keep looking but honestly testing time is something I am short on , rather shoot and see what happens. Jack and I have a workshop to get together also in 10 days so we are limited on time, family, forum , workshops and our real jobs which i am still trying to remember what mine is. LOL

But no question I am looking around at these files pretty hard

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I just printed my first ZD file of this at 17x22 size and I can count the sand. Like I thought it will block up here because of the big size

 

[Jack]

Anders: Not sure what to tell you, I am getting amazing results too. I have only had a little weird moire on a few shots when using the 24 fisheye and shooting directly into bright light. Other than that, the system has been stellar. But for sure, if I see any weirdness like you got with yours, I'll be sure to share it here!

Best,

 

[waynelake]

And I'm going to a rainforest with you guys. Better bring my sat phone

Maybe 2 cars and a GPS...

 

[Anders_HK]

Anders:

If you have moved on from the ZD to Aptus, why do you want Jack and Guy to test the ZD back for you?

Robert

Rob,

It is in my interest to inform others not to buy ZD and loose money way I did. Instead I wish them to know what they get into.

Granted, **IF** Mamiya really fixed the problem is good, but then there are many faulty ZDs on second hand market still... I am honest sceptic to that they have fixed the problem, but... please anyone, prove me wrong! Just words of impression will not prove that a ZD is problem free. Look at LL forums and you will see plenty of such words typed by me also, but that was before I realized what to look for and became observant to the issue. F.y.i. it does show up clear in prints.

I sold the ZD to someone who I informed in detail of these problems. He got it at 2000 USD discount in brand new condition. Actually Mamiya agreed to let me sell the loaner I had, only used for a few days in Angkor Wat...

Jack and Guy,

Please be sure your eyes look carefully. Example is this thread http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=20741&hl=. The problem can easily be observed in first photo posted there, if you look very carefully... but... that was posted by someone with intention of being a "good" ZD photo...

It is not in my personal interest that you do my suggested testing, but I believe it is fair to readers of your "Mamiya ZD road test" that you do so, who else may potentially spend thousands of dollars on this product and find themselves in identical situation to me and others. It is important to find out if this issue has or has not been corrected, and unfortunate Mamiya Digital seem complete incompetent on informing us of this issue.

Please also read that what I say ill of Mamiya is of their ZD product and based on my found facts, and I refer that towards Mamiya Digital. Other products of Mamiya are different. I really enjoy the 645 AFD system and lenses, also my Mamiya 7ii. :angel:

Regards
Anders

 

[Jack]

Anders, I will repeat this only once more, and I expect this to be the last comment on it in this thread. I have seen that thread you keep referring to at LL, and I read your same postings there as you are repeating here, but the fact remains I HAVE NOT SEEN THIS ISSUE COME UP EVER IN MY ZD FILES AT ANY TIME. Granted, it may show up at some future point in time, but for right now, and I repeat, YOUR ISSUE IS NOT SHOWING UP IN MY ZD FILES!

Frankly, it is clear you have a bone to pick with Mamiya over this and were the one really pushing it over on the LL thread too. We have let you have you have your say here, given you leeway to take this post OT and you've made your point. Now it's time to let it drop and for this discussion to move back to the original topic.

Sorry for this digression folks,

 

[Anders_HK]

Anders, I will repeat this only once more, and I expect this to be the last comment on it in this thread. I have seen that thread you keep referring to at LL, and I read your same postings there as you are repeating here, but the fact remains I HAVE NOT SEEN THIS ISSUE COME UP EVER IN MY ZD FILES AT ANY TIME. Granted, it may show up at some future point in time, but for right now, and I repeat, YOUR ISSUE IS NOT SHOWING UP IN MY ZD FILES!

Frankly, it is clear you have a bone to pick with Mamiya over this and were the one really pushing it over on the LL thread too. We have let you have you have your say here, given you leeway to take this post OT and you've made your point. Now it's time to let it drop and for this discussion to move back to the original topic.

Sorry for this digression folks,

Jack, mmm.... I beg your pardon? Not quite sure why the strong words... hmpf.

Anyways, I do read that you say that you do not see same problem with your ZD. That is good. It could be possible that Mamiya did a correction (= at least partial improvement). Likewise it will be good if this can be confirmed by test or simply Mamiya openly saying they did! Let me be clear: **IF** ZD IS PROBLEM FREE, then it is a good product.

"it is clear you have a bone to pick with Mamiya over this" - That is incorrect for you to imply. However... of course I would be delighted if Mamiya Digital Division saw in their credibility to compensated me for my losses and for my work on writing of their product... Think that will happen???

Why do I write of ZD? Responsibility, because I wrote good before. People still read that. I need to show my credibility and speak truth. :angel:

Now that we have set above clear, allow me give some more info to potential ZD buyers:

1. For any medium format digital back/digital camera, make sure to test the product for its limits and usebility before you commit money. This can include a test such as the one I did for my Leaf Aptus 65 per attached (reduced + crop, default settings in CS3 Camera RAW). That is shot at ISO 800 and with much light from window and shadow in corner of wall with black sofa. Granted, such test is tough for any camera because large DR. At high ISO 800 such as what I attach with Aptus 65 we see artifacts (see the purple ones??). That I believe is liveable at ISO800 because it is at high ISO. The ISO 50 of Aptus 65 was completely clean. At ZDs lowest (native) ISO 50 I think it is fair to say that there should be no such artifacts either. I know the ZD I had would have failed that test at ISO 50. However, if instead it would have failed first with vague artifacts at ISO 200 I would not have sold it or stated the "ZD has Problem" thread. To be frank my agent was confused to see artifacts when photographing color test charts under their office lights at ISO 50!!! (color on chart was on white background with artifacts showing in black and darkest gray). This was using numerous new ZDs. Make similar test as I did with Aptus 65 using any digital camera (or an initial test of test chart), and vary the ISOs from native to high. Be sure to look on computer screen without glare to be able see it clear, if any. Then use those or similar tests as part in determining if the performance is acceptable for your photography. For sunset or sunrise hours? While if all your shooting is in bright sunny California, Philippine or Australian sunshine, then you may not have this issue, because you give the ZD plenty of light, and that is what the ZD needs...

2. So, it sounds as if we have good ZDs and bad on market? I say "sounds" because noone has yet posted test to demonstrate a good one. How can we tell good and bad ones apart? The serials? Well, latest serial ZDs should have all updates. But... also earlier ZDs are sold as new. Now... why is that? Mamiya, please correct me if my understanding is wrong, but... my impression is that returned ZDs (replaced under warranty = problem ones) go back to factory for overhaul of what was wrong, then make them look as new and packaged as new to be sold as new. Mmm... they let me keep the loaner... What happened with other do you think??

3. Updates. Has there been a recent update to firmwares (there are two for ZD, check for both)? Ask when latest updates were released. The version numbers can be checked using Mamiya Digital studio. Have the agent demonstrate. Has there been any update to hardware? That would be a new thing. Perhaps question agent of it and ask to demonstrate that it for sure has the new latest.

4. Buy from an agent of Mamiya, or from a store with a simple to return policy. Else how will you easily get problems rectified?


Sorry Jack, I did not mean to hijack your thread, but... I think it is important to let people know the whole truth of ZD :salute:

If you are right in what you say, then I think it is great. :clap: Else you will find youself in my seat later caught eating your hat as I did some months back... After all the good I had told people of ZD and when it turned out to be actually opposite and a problem product... :bugeyes:

With above, let me leave this thread. If anyone have questions, please feel free to message/email me. Ah, last... noone need buy Leaf as I did, there is also Phase One, Sinar, Hassy... and even Canon and Nikon!

Regards
Anders

 

[Anders_HK]

My said attachment test of Aptus 65 @ ISO 800

 

[thsinar]

Hi Anders,

what was the exposure time?

Thanks,
Thierry

My said attachment test of Aptus 65 @ ISO 800

 

[fotografz]

Jack, mmm.... I beg your pardon? Not quite sure why the strong words... hmpf.

Anyways, I do read that you say that you do not see same problem with your ZD. That is good. It could be possible that Mamiya did a correction (= at least partial improvement). Likewise it will be good if this can be confirmed by test or simply Mamiya openly saying they did! Let me be clear: **IF** ZD IS PROBLEM FREE, then it is a good product.

"it is clear you have a bone to pick with Mamiya over this" - That is incorrect for you to imply. However... of course I would be delighted if Mamiya Digital Division saw in their credibility to compensated me for my losses and for my work on writing of their product... Think that will happen???

Why do I write of ZD? Responsibility, because I wrote good before. People still read that. I need to show my credibility and speak truth. :angel:

Now that we have set above clear, allow me give some more info to potential ZD buyers:

1. For any medium format digital back/digital camera, make sure to test the product for its limits and usebility before you commit money. This can include a test such as the one I did for my Leaf Aptus 65 per attached (reduced + crop, default settings in CS3 Camera RAW). That is shot at ISO 800 and with much light from window and shadow in corner of wall with black sofa. Granted, such test is tough for any camera because large DR. At high ISO 800 such as what I attach with Aptus 65 we see artifacts (see the purple ones??). That I believe is liveable at ISO800 because it is at high ISO. The ISO 50 of Aptus 65 was completely clean. At ZDs lowest (native) ISO 50 I think it is fair to say that there should be no such artifacts either. I know the ZD I had would have failed that test at ISO 50. However, if instead it would have failed first with vague artifacts at ISO 200 I would not have sold it or stated the "ZD has Problem" thread. To be frank my agent was confused to see artifacts when photographing color test charts under their office lights at ISO 50!!! (color on chart was on white background with artifacts showing in black and darkest gray). This was using numerous new ZDs. Make similar test as I did with Aptus 65 using any digital camera (or an initial test of test chart), and vary the ISOs from native to high. Be sure to look on computer screen without glare to be able see it clear, if any. Then use those or similar tests as part in determining if the performance is acceptable for your photography. For sunset or sunrise hours? While if all your shooting is in bright sunny California, Philippine or Australian sunshine, then you may not have this issue, because you give the ZD plenty of light, and that is what the ZD needs...

2. So, it sounds as if we have good ZDs and bad on market? I say "sounds" because noone has yet posted test to demonstrate a good one. How can we tell good and bad ones apart? The serials? Well, latest serial ZDs should have all updates. But... also earlier ZDs are sold as new. Now... why is that? Mamiya, please correct me if my understanding is wrong, but... my impression is that returned ZDs (replaced under warranty = problem ones) go back to factory for overhaul of what was wrong, then make them look as new and packaged as new to be sold as new. Mmm... they let me keep the loaner... What happened with other do you think??

3. Updates. Has there been a recent update to firmwares (there are two for ZD, check for both)? Ask when latest updates were released. The version numbers can be checked using Mamiya Digital studio. Have the agent demonstrate. Has there been any update to hardware? That would be a new thing. Perhaps question agent of it and ask to demonstrate that it for sure has the new latest.

4. Buy from an agent of Mamiya, or from a store with a simple to return policy. Else how will you easily get problems rectified?


Sorry Jack, I did not mean to hijack your thread, but... I think it is important to let people know the whole truth of ZD :salute:

If you are right in what you say, then I think it is great. :clap: Else you will find youself in my seat later caught eating your hat as I did some months back... After all the good I had told people of ZD and when it turned out to be actually opposite and a problem product... :bugeyes:

With above, let me leave this thread. If anyone have questions, please feel free to message/email me. Ah, last... noone need buy Leaf as I did, there is also Phase One, Sinar, Hassy... and even Canon and Nikon!

Regards
Anders

Anders, what you may have experienced is "birthing Pains." :angry: Not unusual for any digital solution, especially for those companies just entering the digital arena.

Enormous corrections can be implemented through a combination of firmware and software initiatives ... and occasionally some hardware alterations.

You seem to love your Aptus back :clap: ... let me tell you about Leaf's struggle with "Center-Folding" ... an issue I experienced first hand. :wtf: My VERY expensive Leaf Aptus 75 would too frequently produce a RAW file that was split right down the center with one half a different color cast and a different exposure level than the other half. Outrageous !!!!! It took a bit of time, but a solution was found by means of a firmware and software solution.

Now IF you had purchased your Leaf back when those problems were happening ... you'd be here screaming bloody murder about Leaf. :argue:

Then there was the case of Hasselblad trying to utilize an in-camera conversion to DNG file format with the H2D/22 ... nice idea on paper, but a disaster in reality.

Or the much anticipated Leica M8, which produced all kinds of image and operational issues requiring both hardware and software/firmware solutions ... at the beginning, my M8s spent more time at the repair facility in Germany than it did in my hands.

Finally, there's the case of the Canon 1DMKIII ... a continuous AF focusing issue in certain light and temperature condition with certain lenses ... which Canon ignored until brow beat into fixing the problem ... which required a new mirror box and firmware/software solutions.

Moral of my stories? :angel:

DO NOT BE AN EARLY ADOPTER OF ANY DIGITAL CAMERA SOLUTION IF YOU CANNOT STAND BEING PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. ALL OF THESE CAMERAS ARE A WORK IN PROGRESS. EVEN THOUGH BETA TESTED, IT IS NEVER ASSURED ALL IS WELL. THESE ARE INTENSELY COMPLEX TECHNOLOGICAL MACHINES AND WILL REMAIN SO.

 

[robmac]

"DO NOT BE AN EARLY ADOPTER OF ANY DIGITAL CAMERA SOLUTION IF YOU CANNOT STAND BEING PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. ALL OF THESE CAMERAS ARE A WORK IN PROGRESS. EVEN THOUGH BETA TESTED, IT IS NEVER ASSURED ALL IS WELL. THESE ARE INTENSELY COMPLEX TECHNOLOGICAL MACHINES AND WILL REMAIN SO."

Amen on that one brother. We should all tattoo it on the back of our hands so that every time we reach for the credit card or start typing that Paypal pswd....

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Hello, M8 and DMR been there done that have the T shirt . Marc is absolutely correct and there just is no question about it. I have been the early adopter and I mean early on the 1ds, 1dsMKII, there is another Canon here, DMR and M8. One word: Nuts

BUT I have done exactly this with everyone of them and frankly leader of the pack in doing this

DO NOT BE AN EARLY ADOPTER OF ANY DIGITAL CAMERA SOLUTION IF YOU CANNOT STAND BEING PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

Now just because it was there in the beginning DOES NOT MEAN IT IS STILL THERE. Everyone of those camera's was fixed with either a firmware upgrade or a hardware upgrade. Some issues could not be fixed IR bleed on M8 for one. The Zd has been out for well over a year and jack nor i see any of that issue. So if it is not there than no reason to warn anyone.

Please let's get off this train ride. You made your point

 

[Guy Mancuso]

"DO NOT BE AN EARLY ADOPTER OF ANY DIGITAL CAMERA SOLUTION IF YOU CANNOT STAND BEING PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. ALL OF THESE CAMERAS ARE A WORK IN PROGRESS. EVEN THOUGH BETA TESTED, IT IS NEVER ASSURED ALL IS WELL. THESE ARE INTENSELY COMPLEX TECHNOLOGICAL MACHINES AND WILL REMAIN SO."

Amen on that one brother. We should all tattoo it on the back of our hands so that every time we reach for the credit card or start typing that Paypal pswd....

Yes we should be wearing handcuffs for at least a month.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Alright I am using the C1 new beta here and these are all processed with a little sharpening in C1 amount 160 Radius .8 threshold 1.0 and at this setting it seems pretty nice the sharpness applied . Maybe a touch over but they really look sharp as hell. I shot these with the Mamiya 35mm at around F8 to f10. This lens can be a little soft in the corners above that but looking at the corners they look really well. Also the kelvin is 4400 on this and I left it alone coming off the camera in AWB. If i see one downfall on the ZD is there AWB it can get fooled but what camera can't for that matter , some certainly better than others so on a scale from 1-5 i will give it a 3.5. This camera can shoot jpegs which have not tried and never will try because i am sure they suck just like other jpegs. Nikon and Canon will always do a nicer job with in camera jpegs. Why this is even in this is beyond my thinking. Anyway looking at these the colors actually look pretty good shot around 9 am so still kind of warm light but 4400 sounds about right for this time of the day. Now i did work the shadows and recovery in C1 which seems to be a nice new release coming and biggy for me it supports the ZD.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Now watch the greens because Arizona vegetation there really is no true GREEN . Everything has a yellow green to it and that is normal for this area. The one you can look at as green is the 1st image to the left of the statue in the foreground. It's pretty close to green. i need to go to the midwest to get green. LOL

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Couple things I am impressed by , one is the detail coming from the DMR and M8 these are a step up and they should be. The other is the file is very flexible . i can really push the file around. Color, saturation and tonal range are very good . We have to remember also this is the harshest light around. Arizona is brighter than most places on the planet. So one you may never run into this type of light but you can still pull all the shadow detail and highlights out. I have yet to truly blow out and been able to recover quite nicely. Now when i get to San Juan i will be trying the Phase backs and see how they compare. My feeling is all these MF backs are fairly close to each other . I don't think there is one dominant player from what i have seen . Certainly some are better than other and more features. Given the price point the ZD is the bottom of the barrel and you work up and i am sure the Aptus , Phase Sinar backs are certainly a step up . Question is how big is that step. But so far I'm happier than a pig in mud. But i will move up at some point but I need to slow down too because this is working under ISO 200 pretty well . I have a shot of Jack somewhere at ISO 200 that is very impressive shot in a restaurant in Carmel than is really nice with regards to noise