Author
The test HERE was done pure out of my own need to try it out, the real test for me is the work in the studio or on location.
The shots HERE from outside are posted PURELY for a quick and dirty guide to see what happens.
The lens choice for the Tamron was done because the shots were done with the kit lens 80mm f2.8 which according to most sites is not the best lens from Mamiya, and I can confirm this, I also use the 120MM macro and it's a STELLAR difference, the 80mm f2.8 is nice but the contrast/depth and sharpness of the Macro is breathtaking.
For this reason I brought the Tamron with me, at the start it never was MEANT as a REVIEW, I did some shooting for myself, but because my mailbox was overrun by questions I decided to put it online.
When you REALLY want to know what the combination can do, check the later added model shots.
Let's make some things clear before you read further.
I'm very well know with the Canon setup, the Mamiya was given to me today just 4 hours before this small session as a testsetup.
The delivery for the Netherlands will start in about 10 days (as far as I understood).
My thanks go out to Mamiya Nederland for giving me the possibility to test this setup, and can't wait to get my own next week which will be the same by the way because this combination works like a charm as you can read further on.
Test material
Mamiya ZD digital back, 22 MP
Mamiya 645 AF/D II
Mamiya 80mm f2.8 kit
Mamiya 120mm Macro f4 manual focus
Canon 5D, tamron 28-75 f2.8
About the lens choice I don't want to defend myself, I tested THIS copy against different other lenses including the 24-70 and 28-70 Canon L and kept THIS copy, I know there is alot of talk about bad Tamrons, and I can not confirm or deny that, THIS copy however is amazingly sharp with great contrast.
Session
Tomorrow I have a studio session planned with a model so tomorrow I will be so to say in my element
.I'm not a landscape or street photographer, but as you can imagine I could not wait, and because I was overwhelmed with mails I decided to make this review tonight, and I will add to it tomorrow night after the studio and outside session with Corine.
I drove out from home to Urk and did some standard shooting, all handheld and I tried to get the same field of view from both cameras from EXACT the same location.
The work in Photoshop I decided to make it real life, in other words, I did exposure in Camera Raw and colorcorrection via auto (which gave some funny results, did not bring a whitebal with me, sorry). In photoshop ONE run of smartsharpen was done, no other corrections.
The system feel and look
A while ago I was totally into Full frame Canon cameras (still am) for me it was the best system, it delivered speed, amazing quality and great performance.
While I was teaching workshops on the Pro Imaging this year I got to loan a Hasselblad H2D22MP back from Hasselblad to play with.
When I looked at the pictures I has to be honest that the extra resolution was great but not shocking, understand me correct it is shocking but normally you won't need it, I have done billboards and LARGE banners with a 10D. What however struck me with an enourmous bang was the 3D of the pictures, they really almost came out of the screen and in print my jaw dropped to the ground, this is real.
I started searching were the problem was in the Canon system, and although some is accounted to contrast the biggest issue is sensor size.
So I needed to up the sensor size, from that moment on the 1DsIII for which I was waiting was shoved aside and the search began for a MF digital system.
Because, as many of you will know, the start is VERY expensive. I have a fortune in Canon material and the MF system is even more expensive.
Luckely of course you can keep both and work in a mix, I don't see myself doing soccer with the Mamiya.
In came the ZD but the concept of one camera is not appealing to me, I know myself and I want to grow without burning money.
So I needed a system with a loose back.
After deciding to go for the Mamiya system due to the better pricing of second hand lenses and a lot of stories from people that the newer Hasselblad AF lenses were not as good as the Mamiya units the conclusion was fixed, Mamiya it would be.
At the time I took this decision the ZD back was one day out, because we are filming the new instructional DVD at the moment I wanted to make the switch very quickly and luckely for this review and the instructional DVD (free promotion for Mamiya
) I could confince the dutch importer to lend me a system untill my order comes in.Today I picked it up.
I have to add that my only experience with MF was the 2 days with a H3D39MP hasselblad and a H2D22MP hasselblad.
The 645AF/DII is a totally different camera, I love the Hasselblad don't get me wrong, but the Mamiya is more camera, it's heavy but not too heavy, shooting handheld is no problem for me, but I have to make clear I'm not a small person.
The ZD back is a small and more plasticy looking device than the camera, but joined they make a wonderful unit.
Add the lens for portrets 120mm Manual Focus f4 and you have a camera that looks more like a rocketlauncer compared to the 5D, but a very attractive one.
Because the 645AF/DII is described enough on the web I will concentrate on the ZD back.
The back
I have mixed feelings with the back.
Pricing is amazing, resolution is fantastic, I love the removable IR and Lowpass filter, the controls are fast and easy although I have to get used to the double button operations.
The negative thing is the small display, it's really small and not usable to judge focus or exposure, although with the histogram you get a very accurate idea (what I found out later).
The speed of the display after shooting is not lighting fast but I have done some buffer filling work during the test and it's much slower than the 5D or 1DsII but I cannot believe I will run into problems during a session.
I'm 95% positive about the back, the only thing that is a letdown is the display, for me however this is not really important, the back and camera is a tool that has to take a good picture, and if I have NO display that's also ok, as long as I have the histogram.
on the PC
The software from Mamiya looks amazing but on my PC which is plenty fast it hangs when I maximize the viewer, when I drag it maximum it never hangs, small bug and easy to work arround.
What I miss is the possibility to browse through the files via tumbnails and delete and rename the files.
This can be done but you need lightroom which reads the files without a problem, but if you DON'T have lightroom you can use bridge from Photoshop.
In practice
I expected to about 1-2 weeks to adjust to the new system, but I have to say that after tonight I'm very confident about the system.
My first batch of shots were all wrong, soft, fuzzy and the manual focus was off. I relaxed a bit more for the session this night and got 95% keepers.
Even some birds in flight
Image quality
Why do you want Medium format ?
Some people will claim that the 5D cannot be beat by the ZD digital back.
Well to be honest it can't indeed, the 5D rules in his price range, at the moment I even prefer the 5D above the 1DsII for high iso and skintones.
But I wrote PRICE RANGE.
And although the Mamiya back is still the cheapest MF digital system arround at the moment (almost unbelievable) it's still 5-6x more expensive than the 5D.
HOWEVER as with high end audio you have to realise that the switch from a 600,00 PS camera to the 2000,00 5D is ENOURMOUS and no competition, the switch to the Mamiya is more subtle, but man is it worth it for me
I still love the 5D but I think it will be degraded for sports, live shows which need high-iso and birding or zoo's (however I think I can even take the Mamiya with me).
Let's look at what is different, first in text and than in pictures.
DOF.
When you have ever made the switch from a crop camera to the 5D or 1Ds series you have probarbly seen heaven, the viewfinder is large, bright and the DOF is to die for.... well multiply this with a lot, the almost full frame ZD back (1.27 crop) gives you a viewfinder that making manual focus very easy (this is by the way also aided by an electronic display which let's you see to turn left or right and when you hit focus (this works great)) and the DOF is simply gorgous I can't wait to try this out with a model outside.
Pixel quality.
Well I can be very short on this, see the pictures later on.
The pixel quality is much better than the 5D which looks incredible soft on 100% views on some shots.
When shooting at apertures of f5.6 or f8.0 the 5D holds it ground against the Mamiya although the Mamiya has more bite (later more in contrast) but when stopped down for landscaping (which I normally don't) the Mamiya just keeps getting better and better where the 5D has great problems with difraction above f13.0
Contrast/Micro contrast.
This is probarbly the biggest jump for me and the reason the 3D look is now finally mine in my workflow.
See some crops of the boat later on and you will immediatly see what I mean.
Depth/3D.
Yep it's finally here, the combination of all above mentioned factors give the pictures amazing depth and bite.
A shame on internet you can't see it proper, but I decided to add some 100% crops.
Ok, let's go to the pictures.
5D
Mamiya
And here a 100% crop for the above mentioned contrast difference, look at the diagonals on the green hull, there is so much more depth in the ZD.
And a crop from the side of the picture, here the 3D effect is seen, look at the small truck, on the 5D the truck is almost flat with the ship, on the Mamiya you can see it loose from the ship, this gives you a wonderfull sense of depth, also see the roofs of the houses.
But this is not the best example....
Here we have a scene from the forest, the difference in 3D is here striking (or at least for me)
5D
Mamiya
The trees look ALOT more real and you can see the depth of the forest, I have tried photographing trees before, inspired by the wonderfull DVDs from the Luminous landscapes and never got it like I wanted. This is still a picture they will laugh at, but it's done in my neighbourhood and just to test, I can't wait to get some serious time with the back on a few days I have a small holiday in 2 weeks. For the first time I think I will try landscaping.
But there is more of course.
There is always alot of talk about highISO noise.
And I must say I was looking forward to see what people were talking about, to be honest I sometimes have fun reading the comments on online fora about noisy pictures when watching 1:1 and giving +4 stops exposure.
My reference is print, and I print at app A3 and A2 poster formats for my work, and even on ISO3200 most of the time the noise on the 5D is hardly a problem, just make sure you light correctly.
So how does the ZD do ?
I never tried another back on ISO400 to be honest so I will just post the picture.
I have done a worse case scenary, a bit oversharpened and one were I first did noiseninja on auto and later slightly oversharpened.
I expected it to be worse. I will not just use the back at ISO400 for fun or ease, but when I need to I will. I think that in print with a bit noise ninja you will NOT run into problems.
I will give the link because the picture is rather large:
http://www.htforum.nl/fotofrank/albums/testzd/ISO.jpg
This is the original
And the last in the comparisons a crop from the forest scene:
Dynamic range
The 3D look was my main reason to switch together with more bitdepth (more later), but dynamic range was a very close second.
Don't you just hate it when you make a picture that the sky is almost always blown ?
Well first start shooting RAW (just kidding), sometimes there is just too much dynamics in the scene.
The ZD will not capture every scene of course, it's not a miracle back (well actually with this price it is), but it's a BIG step up from the 5D as I can see.
I tested several high contrast scenes with the 5D and Mamiya and the Mamiya wins every time, for example here:
5D
Mamiya
And finally this very difficult shot which in my opion was a test that was not worth doing because I expected it become unusable, so I did not even shot it with the 5D, which I now regret because I think this difference would be huge, with the 5D I could never have gotten the details in the shadows and blacks without getting the sky to blow out as seen in this shot:
The sky was very light gray by the way, so this is an accurate rendering, no blue skies over here tonight
And one close up (100% crop)
Conclusion up untill now
Let's make this short you have allready read alot of my review.
I love the system, it will not be my final back that's 100% sure.
I want to go ultimately go to a full 16 bits back and this back is a 14 bits downsampled to 12 bits.
Don't be misguided by the 12 bits from Canon by the way, alot of people claim this is downsampled to 10bits, which I cannot confirm by the way.
What I CAN confirm is that the color saturation and smoothness of the ZD back is MUCH better than the 5D.
This is impossible to see on the internet, or on your monitor. Comparing a print on my Epson 3800 the difference is however clearly seen.
Tomorrow in the studio I will make some difficult light setups were the Canon often struggled and I will work with some color accents to get it also in the studio enviroment.
I would probarbly not have switched to MF when the Mamiya ZD back was NOT on the market.
I don't believe in buying a 4 year old digital back with a square 16 MP resolution.
The 4:3 format is perfect for me. With the 5D I had to crop a bit from the top and bottom to print without borders.
Now I have to crop arround 25% less but from the sides to print without borders (it's just a few cm's total for a A2 but the less the better).
For this pricing I can't think about a reason NOT to upgrade, the MF has many advantages over the DSLR system if you can adopt to the slower workpace, which for me is no problem because normally I already shoot very defensive in a photoshoot and think about my composition before I shoot.
I hope you liked the review, if you want to reproduce please use this link to the review, or mail me directly for publication or whatever.
Greetings,
Frank
Logged
, great review Frank.
