END OF YEAR WRAP UP

Six weeks and 1500 images since ZD’s arrival. Having previously owned the Phase One P25, it is known quantity or benchmark if you prefer. I was not left wondering, “Gee, how much better is a P25? Should ‘upgrade’? What am I missing out on?” Like any other potential ZD buyer, I read the reviews and scoured the internet for little tidbits of info. I felt reasonably informed about the ZD’s file quality and the expectation level was dialed back. Today’s entry compares the ZD to a Phase One P25. This is not scientific; just opinions and observations. There is not specific order, mostly random thoughts and little lessons learned along the way -

1. •Auto White Balance (AWB) - Most medium format digital backs do not offer auto white balance. They do provide white balance presets - typically Outdoor Sunny, Outdoor Cloudy, Outdoor Shade, Tungsten and Flash. During post processing white balance is edited to taste. The Mamiya ZD does have AWB - and it works very well in outdoor light and under strobes. RAW Developer’s white balance interpretation does nicely, and being able to tune white balance at the highlight, mid-tone and shadow points is a great for warming shadows or cooling mid-tones for added definition.
   

2. White balance with the Phase One P25 was not as simple. The C1 workflow begins by selecting a color profile for each image, such as Easy Gray, Easy Black, Outdoor Portrait, Flash, etc. Next, white balance is tuned. The edited white balance values could look good with one profile, but then look wrong with another profile. Considerable time was spent toggling between the color profiles and editing white balance values. Finding the best mix was not a simple 1-2-3 process. Changing the profile changed how the white balance looked. Changing the white balance changed how the color profile looked. It was circular reference...
   

3. With the ZD most of the time I use its AWB value because it looks good. Obviously this is a time saver, but more importantly it is one less frustration.
   

4. •Battery Life - The Mamiya 645AFD II has a reputation for draining its batteries quickly. On a full charge the 645AFD II typically netted 200-400 clicks if the shooting was all in one day. On day two, the batteries would most likely die within 25 clicks. There is Mamiya 645AFD II firmware update, but user reports have been mixed. According to the user forums, even when the Phase Back and 645AFD II are turned off, they keep communicating, eventually draining the 645AFD II’s batteries.
   

5. Having a fully charged spare set batteries for the 645AFD II was a must. The P25 seldom ran out of juice before the 645AFD II, but I still carried an extra battery for it too. The downside was having to carry two charger set-ups and the extra batteries. It’s added bulk and weight.
   

6. With the ZD I expected 150-250 clicks per charge. On four occasions a single fully charged battery has netted 200-250 clicks in a single day and the battery indicator still showed a full charge. The current battery has been in the ZD for 2-3 weeks and still shows a full charge after 200-300 clicks of on and off shooting. I am very impressed with ZD’s battery life.
   

7. •File Sharpness - Sharpness and noise control are conflicting objectives. Sharpening makes the noise more noticeable. Removing noise diminishes sharpness. RAW Developer is equipped with an array sharpening and noise control parameters, but it does not do a good job of identifying where to apply sharpening and noise control. In comparison C1 (version 4.5.2, non-Pro) has very simple parameters, but appears more selective in where (and / or to the degree) it applies those parameters.
   

8. Subjectively speaking, the Phase One P25 files are sharper the Mamiya ZD files. I see a clear difference at 100% views. The ZD can can keep pace if the sharpening is increased, but added sharpening may make the blurred backgrounds look coarse / gritty, and any shadow noise will be more apparent. I prefer to apply a light amount of noise control in the raw editor with sharpening set to a minimum. Then later sharpen the processed TIFF file in Photoshop - with sharpening applied to only select areas. With this approach I feel the ZD’s resulting file quality is very close to a P25.
   

9. The Mamiya ZD files are sharper than the Canon 1Ds2 and 1Ds3 files, so the ZD is sharper than a dSLR, but not quite as sharp as a Phase One P25. I have also viewed a number of Leaf Aptus-22 files - which uses the same Dalsa sensor as the Mamiya ZD - and the Aptus-22 files look similar to the ZD’s in terms of detail and out-of-the-box sharpness.
   

10. •Shadow Noise - First and foremost the ZD is an ISO 50 camera. The LCD may go to ISO 400, but that doesn’t mean you have to do it! The Phase One P25 is exceptional at ISO 50, but even its files take a noticeable quality hit at ISO 100. At ISO 100 both the ZD and P25 are very usable, but the noise increase is clear. At ISO 200, put them back in the bag and pull out the dSLR.
    

11. At ISO 50 the Phase One P25 files are cleaner (assuming a good exposure) than the ZD, but the ZD runs a close second. If the color smoothing in RAW Developer is increased, then the P25 and ZD run a very, very close race. As stated above, with the ZD files it is best to address the color noise at the raw stage and then enhance sharpening via Photoshop.
    

12. The ZD holds highlights better than any camera I have used - period. When shooting a landscape scene with the P25, I under-exposed by 1/3 to 2/3 EC to keep clouds from clipping. Then during post processing the shadow detail was boosted --- thus adding some noise, albeit not much, but a touch of noise. Whereas with the ZD, EC adjustment is seldom needed since it can handle the highlights without clipping. The ZD mid-tones and shadows are fairly open, so usually I can reduce them slightly - thus hiding noise the shadow noise. Boosting the P25 file and lowering the ZD file closes the noise gap. The ZD still isn’t as clean, but it tries real hard.
    

13. At ISO 50 the P25 are extremely clean and the shadows can be boosted in post processing by one stop, two stops - even three stops with little noise penalty. The ZD files cannot go that far. The ZD’s file can handle about 1 stop EC adjustment in post processing; anything past 1-stop is risky and will require some Photoshop work.
    

14. •Day-to-Day Use - Using the ZD for the past six weeks has been trouble-free. It has performed flawlessly with no lock-ups, no digital hiccups and no nasty surprises. If I was always shooting in studio conditions, then I would prefer the Phase One P25 because its out-of-the-box sharpness is fun - just plain fun. For outdoor shooting I would pick the ZD every time. The ZD has 90-95% of the P25’s file quality, and in some areas the ZD is better - such as holding highlights.
    

15. Sensor cast was a big problem on my P25 and every file needed a LCC calibration file. The ZD has not exhibited even the slightest hint of sensor or lens cast. This has been a tremendous relief. I have seen some moire and false color, but not nearly as much as the P25’s. The ZD and original Canon 1Ds are probably comparable when it comes to moire. The P25 is a moire magnet.
    

16. I shoot the ZD like most people probably shoot their Canon 5D’s - and for medium format, that says alot. The 5% to 10% in quality that the ZD gives up to the P25, the ZD makes up for in its ease of use. The ZD is the smallest, lightest digital medium format package currently available. Battery life is great. There are no crop lines in the viewfinder to worry about. Metering is very good. Shutter slap seems less than Mamiya 645AFD II (the ZD has a slightly smaller mirror). The ZD is a well thought out, well executed camera - except for the rear LCD.
    

So, does the ZD stay in the bag? The Canon 1Ds Mark III was sold two weeks ago.