I was going to post this in the "Mamiya ZD camera Kit in Stock @ B&H" thread but decided to move it to a new thread.

I completed a lifestyle shoot Monday that was in conditions that were less than ideal (dark, dark and dark) for shooting the ZD back (or really anything but the newest backs or a DSLR) so with that said here's what I'm finding looking at my images today.

Shooting at ISO 100-125 noise in the shadows is minimal and not any more than I would have expected with a Canon or my Valeo 22. There's no color noise and zero purple blobs so Mamiya has definitely solved the problem.

Sharpness looks good - certainly better than my Canons and equal to my Valeo. Fabric moire doesn't seem to be an issue like it was with the Valeo. Where I did get some moire was in an area of sheer fabric curtains and it seems to be more of a pattern than color noise.

[EDIT FROM ORIGINAL POST] The ZD back with the hardware issues corrected seems to handle long exposures just fine. At 10 sec's there is some minimal noise but nothing that is a deal breaker. This is a huge surprise to me!

Skin tones look good and are predictable. The auto white balance is not very good but obviously correctable in the raw converter.

ISO 200 is usable as long as you realize there will be some noise. I will definitely use ISO 200 under lights again in the future.

I did hit the buffer a few times during shooting and I just had to slow down some. It gave me time to enage the talent and check to make sure I was nailing the shot. I can see the buffer possibly becoming an issue with a faster pace shoot. Time will tell if I can live with it.

I have not given tethered shooting a try but I'm going to figure it out in the next few days. My goal is to shoot through the Mamiya software into Adobe Lightroom. If anyone has experience with this I'd love to hear frm you.

My conclusion now that Mamiya has worked out the kinks is that the ZD back is a great value for the money. I decided to stick with the back to see if Mamiya could deliver and I believe they have. The ZD has limitations - don't get me started about the LCD - but if you can live with them I think the ZD back is a great product.

If anyone has any questions please feel free to ask here in the thread. I'll try and post an image or two from the shoot as I have time Wed or Thurs. I obviously can't post anything that's publishable but I may have a frame or two with my assistant testing lights that might be OK.

thanks. nice to have some feedback about the ZD.
myself I would like to see if possible the long exposure shot...

Great to hear..:+}
Please do post some images if you get a chance even if they are of your assistant checking the lights..:+}
About the buffer? what pace were you shooting at?
Also have you searched really good in the shots to make sure there are no purple blobs?
Sorry but I ask because a couple of guys posted in these forums not noticing it themselves.?
Only after posting did I see them..
Congratulations on your buy and thank for your time to post.
Maybe you could show some 100% crops with out the models or peoples faces as not to have problems posting it here.
What other backs have you used personally to make the comparison to??
I am probably going P30 here soon and would love to see some comparisons to it or a Aptus 22 which is supposedly sporting the same Dalsa CHip??
Thanks again
Snook
PS. I plan on using mine for Advertising jobs and they can be slower pace than catalogue for sure.
I will using the Canon for catalogues as the paper and quality are just fine with the CAnon 1DsMII.


PS2:
i forgot to ask a while back but why if they use the same sensor, why is the ZD only 14 bits and the aptus 22 16 bits? anybody know?
thanks again

Snook,

I've looked at several different frames from 2 different shoots and no purple blobs. My first back had them but this back does not. If it did have them I'd be asking for a refund today.

I shoot slowly with the MFDB and if I need speed I go with my Canons. I can get about 20 frames working slowly before I hit the buffer. The ZD has a 10 frame continuous buffer.

And....like I mentioned in the original post, I owned a Valeo 22 that sports the same chip. I can't do any comparisons as the Valeo is long gone to pay for the ZD back.

Thanks for the mini-review. Took the ZD back to Oklahoma for the weekend. Took this shot in Witicha Falls TX in a 50s era hamburger joint. I tried to upload the raw but it ws too big. Here is the jpg for study of noise, etc. Taken with the 35mm handheld.

Response: ISO 100, F3.5, 1/80.
This back is two months old (from B&H, one of the first ones off the shelf).
To be honest, it is hard for me to see the blobs since they may be just
color cast from the bottom of the chairs. I have examined the detail in ACR (the processor for this image, cnr 25) and I do see noise. Prior to the ZD I had a Kodak back and expected some noise.

If anyone knows of a revealing blob test, it would be nice to know.

Just for "fun", I am adding the Magenta Channel only version of this photo, I would expect blobs to stand out from mormal "random variable" noise.
Not sure I see it?

Hey Jon thanks for posting. You clearly have the Purple Blobs syndrome, I think.
Look under the table against the white wall. Big Purple Blob! It is really clear...
You mind adding at what you shot.. ASA speed etc... I'd appreciate it. Also do you have a recently bought ZD or Older one?
Just wondering.
Thanks agian for the post . I noticed in the White over hang there is a little purple Blobbing going on there also.
In no means am I bashing, Just an Observation.
Thank you again
Snook

PS....
The whole back wall around the Writing board has pretty much Purple Blotches also.
Not sure if you noticed it or not..?

I'm not totally convinced those are the purple blobs (mine were way more pronounced) but there's definitely something going on back there. Jon - any idea if the back you have is the most recent version?

Hi!

Might be also heavy jpg-artifacting, the image is very compressed.

Cheers,
J

Too my eye the picture looks very natural like I was standing in the room. The dynamic range and colors seem to be well balanced. I'm considering the ZD back in the near future. Thanks for the sample.
Marc

Hi
What processor did you use. If you are using a Mac try a demo of RD which works very well for the ZD. Also your critical focus is on the front of the chairs (most likely shot wide open). If you use the Mamiya software I found the files were not as clean as RD. Using RD made the files much closer to the Aptus 22. The Aptus 22 is 16 bit even though it uses the same chip. You pay more plus you get way better software. As for DR my ZD camera is far better than my 5D. For example when I shoot clouds I use the ZD as much as possible.

What is RD Processor and DR?

RD -A brand of Software for processing files called 'Raw Developer'

DR - Dynamic range - how much contrast the file holds before losing the shadows or blowing the highlights


----

THat file

Jpg artifacts and banding aside looks pretty typical of a first gen 22mp dalsa chip to me

(on my poor screen)

Exaclty the situation that needs a little 'fill' in IMO - not practical under these conditions I fully understand - a good example IMO of what these cameras are bad at

S

I looked seriously at the ZD back but was very underwhelmed.

I bought an Aptus 22 for Mamiya 645AFD at Photoplus and am blown away with the quality.

Just playing around in the studio today to get a feel for the back, software and everything.

Here is a strobe lit shot from today sent through Lightroom with a little extra spin in PS. I feel the files can certainly be 'bent' much more before breaking as opposed my Canons.

lab beaker

I strongly urge those interested in the ZD back who feel other backs are too expensive to look out for good opportunities in price, refurbs, whatever, on other backs that will exceed the ZD back in the whole experience.

The A22 is a pleasure to use in the studio. 30 sec exposures are also exceptional on the Aptus and the ZD back simply cannot compare in that respect.

And IMO that's the issue with the ZD back versus the other backs on the market - why should I have to jump through hoops and learn the secret handshake to get a competive price on a back. An Aptus 22 refurb is not worth $7k - $8k more than a ZD back IMO. I was in the market for an Aptus 22 refurb and was quoted a price of $16k. I decided that was just too much so I started looking at the ZD backs. Only after buying the ZD back did a mass email pop into my inbox one month later from the same dealer letting me know the Aptus 22 refurbs were now $13500 - still too high IMO but it might have swayed me one month earlier.

The new ZD back that Mamiya shipped me one week ago does what I need it to do for the money. The older backs had issues but they seem to be solved. No more lock ups and purple worms. It's all about what works for you.

Here's some images and one very pleasant surprise - noise at 10 sec's is actually usable! The blue channel doesn't look bad. I was seeing the xmas tree lights in the low rez previews before the 1:1 previews were built in Lightroom. I take back what I said about noise at long exposures - whatever hardware Mamiya replaced seems to have fixed several issues.

These are slices from images right out of the camera and run through Lightroom. The 10 sec exposure is ISO 100 and the other ISO 125.

Bob

Thanks for posting a few samples.

I gotta say,though,that I find the executive image a little 'scary'
All fine detail seems mushed together in a way that's not pleasing to my eye.

I look on your site and see examples such as the lead image in 'Survivors',
'old school surfer,or 'new school surfer and am impressed with the level of detail
and definition even in a web version.

Do you feel,given your experience, that the ZD would be able to deliver a file with
equal, or similar, detail as the images referenced above?

Mark

I just realized color noise reduction was set to the default of 25 in Lightroom. Turning it off completely results in some very slight noise in the dark shadows. At about 10 in color noise reduction the noise disappears. I've attached a 100% crop that shows the noise.

Mark,

I definitely think the ZD back will deliver similar detail. I feel a little uncomfortable posting raw and unprocessed images but I think it's worth it. The focus is off a little on the image I attached unfortunately. The light sucks as well. My retoucher is going to love me this month.

BTW - the survivor portraits were shot with a 1Ds MKII and the surfers were shot with a Blad and Kodak NC 160. They are far from raw images.

Thanks for the background info,Bob

Appreciate your feedback on the ZD product

Mark

I agree with mark alittle in that the shot with the guy looks like it is blurry or something?
The lines and even his face looks like it is slightly Blurry or mushed like mark said.
Was there some ambient light entering and you were shooting at a slow shutter speed?
Just an observation...
Thanks alot for the Post and please post more..
Snook

I played around with tethering this morning and I'm happy to report it was a piece of cake to set the ZD back up and shoot through the Mamiya software. I shot to a Macbook with 3 gigs of RAM running OS 10.4.4.

Shooting can be slow but I was only shooting to the HD and not to the card as well. Not sure if that makes a difference in speed.

There is a lag of a second or two after firing the first frame and then I was able to fire a frame every 1.5-2 sec's with an occasional lag. It takes about 10 sec's for the preview to pop up in the Mamiya software which is light years behind my experience with the Valeo 22 and LC11.

When shooting to a hot folder in Lightroom it takes triple that amount of time making that setup useless for now. My hope is that the rumored Lightroom ZD back tethered shooting support materializes soon.

I'm hoping to try this during an actual shoot soon.

It was crap light at a slower speed plus there's some jpg artifacting going on. I'll find a better example later today. Plus looking at that baby-poop green wall is killing me!

Bob I really appreciate your posts and in no means trying to be offensive..
Please keep us informed...
Nice work and thanks a lot.
Snook

10sec from what I can see it looks not bad.
Promising at least...

Bob,

I use SilkyPix as well. You may wish to check your NR setting on that portrait. Per my eye the look is as if NR is tuned high.

Regards
Anders



Jon,

In an older thread I posted a test I did with my ZD camera. I shot from tripod of subject posted on wall with diffused backlighting. The subject was near black neoprene in one half of frame and near white in other. I shot this at different ISOs. The near black neoprene is similar to darkest shadow and it may help to detect a problem if there is one.

Regards
Anders

NR was set at the Lightroom default of 25. It's just a mushy frame is all. I'm going to shoot something specifically for this thread tomorrow so we can pick it apart.

Bob,

In no way trying pick apart your image, just trying help.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that the default vary somewhat depending on how SilkyPix interprets the image. Possibly playing with the different NR settings may help to better that particular image.

Personally, I have used SilkyPix for about 20 months. A few months ago I re-read the manual again. That was an eye opener. I aim to read it again soon, simply there is such wealth of info in there. I can much recommend to anyone to re-read the manual in detail. It is a very good program and definently feels superior to Lightroom to me. Noise is one example where there is alot of different settings.

Looking forward to see more samples from you.

Regards
Anders

I totally know that and no worries. I want to shoot and post something that can be gone over with a fine tooth comb at full or close to full rez.

It's been a really busy week but here's something I shot quickly with the ZD back on my 645AFD with the 80mm. Warmth is from a bright yellow slide my daughter is standing next too. This is far from a perfect image but I think it's a good example of what the files from the new generation ZD back looks like at ISO 100.

Processed in Photoshop with all sharpening and noise reduction turned off. First image is full frame but sized down. Second frame is a full rez crop.

I've used the ZD on several shoots now and I'm very happy with it. The buffer is a little problematic but overall the back rocks.

Can the back write the RAW file to CF and JPEG to the SD? I know it can write both, I'm just curious if Mamiya was clever enough to control which format goes to which card. I'm thinking Epson P3000/5000 would be a nice companion to check JPEGs if the ZD can write JPEGs to the SD.

Hi
Very film like, are you using LR?

Bob,

I think you're bringing hope to all ZD watchers. How does it handle contrasty situations?

Hello Bob,

As has been stated in past the ZD camera & back is at its best 50-125 ISO. I am very interested to know if you see any improvements to to higher ISOs and long exposures compared to that?

Anything else that has improved?

Much thanks

Regards
Anders

I posted a sliver of an image shot at ISO 100 for 10 sec's earlier in this thread and there's minimal noise. I'll try and shoot a test that can be picked apart when I get time but I can tell you from my experience that long exposures up to 8-10 sec's seem very usable.

ISO 200 still shows some noise but doesn't look bad on lights.

Looks good enough to me. I think Mamiya will work out most of the warts that should not occur. If so a back at this price range looks darn good to me.

Has BH had any in stock lately? If no they seem to move them quite well as I have not seen one there in a while.

The important thing is to make sure you're buying a ZD back recently shipped from Japan. My first back had the serial # GC3244 and the new one is GI30XX. My guess is that the later the second letter in the serial number is the better you'll be.

Like I said - all of the issues I had with the first back - lockups, noise, worms, etc. - are fixed. If the buffer was twice as large and the LCD an inch larger the back would be perfect. I'm pretty confident at this point that the image quality of my back can hang with the Aptus and Valeo 22.

will you have soon on your website images done with it? or should you ask more to post here

I have to stay, I got an Aptus 22 Mamiya 645AFD mount for one hell of a price that made it a no brainer for me and the extra amount over the cost of the ZD back was well worth it but a small premium all the same.

I finished a day shoot of interiors today, which I don't do much anymore but still enjoy. The files are just stunning. Tethering was flawless to LC11. Long exposures are smooth and free of specs and artifacts I saw in the ZD back. The Dalsa 22 sensor is definitely a good sensor. And Lightroom makes some of the best looking files from the Aptus.

It's good to hear the ZD back has gotten passed some of the early afflictions. I still think Mamiya needs to work on a better buffer, screen and zooming.

Here is a 23sec exposure on the Aptus 22, 100% crop. NR in Lightroom just 5 luminance, 10 color.

Aptus 22 - 23sec exp

If I could have found an Aptus 22 for less than 16k when I was looking 3 months ago I may have purchased one. Had I found one at $10k it would have been a no brainer. There just happens to be a demo with warranty Aptus 22 in a 645 mount on ebay for $10k from Midwest Photo Exchange right this minute. The best price I saw from PPR recently on a refurb Aptus 22 was $13.5k.

I would expect that price to fall further when the 1Ds MKIII ships.

In the meantime I'm just happy with my ZD back because I learned a long time ago it gets me nowhere to second guess gear purchases.

I'm sure the 1DsIII will be a great camera, but I'm hedging my bet that it will not be the camera that people are already placing on the pedestal. It will certainly be a great ungrade though. I had made my choice on two options, the ZD or 1DsIII. The ZD out of the gate didn't show me what I wanted, and finding an Aptus between the ZD tests and future Canon release sealed the deal.

For people that want high quality files and control their environment when they shoot, digital backs will still be the top no question and probably not drop in price as many want or expect. Certainly some legacy backs will be more affordable, but not the current selling line-ups.

My Canon 5D has made nice files for 2 years and will continue to, but the depth of tones, color fidelity, and 'real' tonality that is palettable comes from my Aptus. They just don't compare. Shadows are far superior on a digital back, no matter the 14bit that Canon is doing now.

Here's a few more frames from a shoot with the new ZD back on lights Wednesday.

The first 2 frames are ISO 200 run through Lightroom with all sharpening and noise reduction turned off. The crop frame is at 100%.

More images to follow.

ISO 100 run through Lightroom with all sharpening and noise reduction turned off. The crop frame is at 100%.

ISO 200 run through Lightroom with all sharpening and noise reduction at defaults. The crop frame is at 100%.

NR is set at Luminance 0 and Color 25.

And just for grins the same scenario shot with a Canon 5D at ISO 100.

NR and sharpening turned off.

Almost forgot - here's a crop from the ZD back at ISO 100 with default NR (Color 25 Luminance 0) turned on in Lightroom.

getting a lot more DR with back.

Enjoy it!

Victor

And I believe that may actually be one of the issues when it comes to noise with the ZD back. It seems at times it's trying to do too much in the shadows. There is some minimal noise at ISO 100 with all noise reduction turned off. Dial in a little NR and hit auto levels in Photoshop and the files are beautiful.

After a few weeks of shooting with the ZD back these are my thoughts:

The back is FAR from perfect but for $7k it's the best bang for the buck in MFD. The LCD sucks and would be completely useless if not for the histogram. The previews take forever to appear and on a modern digital back that's unacceptable.

The buffer can be problematic if you're not paying attention. I recently photographed Dick Vitale and he's an animated guy. After a short period I hit the buffer and had to stop shooting. He's not the kind of guy that wants to stand still and so it was a little uncomfortable. For fast shooting you're better off with a DSLR or renting a Leaf 54s or A75.

A minimal amount of uniform noise will show up in fabrics at ISO 100 if noise reduction is turned completely off in your raw converter of choice. Just a little NR does the trick.

The files overall are crisp and the color is is dead on. It's always better with the ZD to shoot a gray card and not depend on the AWB.

The ZD back can handle long exposures with some color NR. I've gone to 10 sec's and gotten great results.

Now, would I have bought a ZD back again knowing what I know now - maybe. The first ZD back I received was defective. Purple worms, bad color noise at ISO 100 and shoot interrupting lockups. Mamiya was VERY responsive and replaced my back with a new one and things have been great ever since. With the price of used and refurb Aptus 22's dropping to around 10k I would consider one of those first before the ZD back. The larger buffer, fast previews and LC 11 software is worth the extra $3k IMO.

Unfortunately, the games that the back dealers like to play with prices and value-add warranties, etc. is just dumb. And here's where I'm going to probably piss a few people off - the process of buying a digital medium format back is akin to buying a car in my experience and we all know how much fun that is. How a refurb Aptus 22 goes from $16k to $13.5k in less than a month is beyond me. How the same back with warranty can be offered from another dealer for $10.5 is insane. Don't tell me about warranties and support - if I'm paying $7k or $10k or $25k I demand that the back work right out of the box with no if's, and's or but's! I shouldn't have to have my MFDB dealer on speed dial for support when I've paid $20k or even $7k. It's amazing that I can buy a Canon 40D for $1200 and it works and I don't need to call my rep at B+H to get the inside scoop on how to set the camera up.

Bottom line - I wish I had taken James Russell's advice 2 years ago and just stuck with my Canons. I've shot enough with the ZD back, Valeo 22, H3-39, Canon 1Ds MKI + MKII, 5D and even the new Nikon D3 to believe that the perceived quality of MFDB over DSLR's is more perception than reality. Factor in the difference in price and it just gets stupid.

Sorry for the rant at the end of this. I'm going to take the advice of Mark Tucker and shoot more pictures rather than shoot my mouth off any more.

I agree on a lot but not on the difference.
I'm just back from a 12 day trip to the states were I brought both 5D and Leaf Aptus with the Mamiya 645AFD/II

The idea was to shoot with the 5D and some things with the leaf.
After one day it was painly clear that I would do ALL shooting with the leaf (and I did), I did some shots from grafitty and the more gritty parts of LA and with the 5D I was blowing out the sky constantly, with the leaf the sky was a nice blue tint, same goes for the shadows.

Resolution wise the 5D is nice but trust me, I did some landscape shots in the Desert and the 5D simply doesn't hold the detail as nice as the leaf.
I really thought I would use the 5D most of the time because it's lighter and more stealth but I ended up with over 90GB of leaf files and 10GB of 5D files (mostly done on the halloween parade where I needed the high iso