Mamiya sets launch date for ZD
By Marc Perton 
posted March 2nd 2005 3:23PM
posted March 2nd 2005 3:23PM
We're still saving our pennies for a digital SLR, but if you're a pro used to medium-format gear (or a very well-heeled consumer), $12 grand may seem like a reasonable price for the Mamiya ZD, the first medium format digital camera kit (especially since digital backs for medium format film cameras can go for even more than that). The 22 megapixel (yes, that says 22) Mamiya ZD has been the subject of buzz, rumors and lust since it was first announced at Photokina last September, and now it looks like the wait is almost over. Mamiya has announced that the camera should start shipping this summer. We, of course, will still be saving our pennies.
So when will we hit 100 megapixels? I give it 1.5 years.
Is megapixel/dollar increasing faster than Moore's law?
Ok, Mamiya make medium format cameras like the RZ 67 which use 120 roll film (the negative size is approx 6 cm X 7 cm) - or smaller medium format cameras which take 6 cm X 4.5 cm roll film. 35mm film is much smaller and large format cameras use either 5" X 4" or 10" X 8" film. The film size defines what 'format' the camera is. So why is this a medium format camera? If it's digital its digital?
"Is megapixel/dollar increasing faster than Moore's law?"
Uh, judged strictly on that basis, value for the dollar is getting *lower* if you're going by this camera.
This camera: 22MP, $12,000. $1,800 per megapixel.
The 2 year-old Canon Digital Rebel: 6MP, $1,000. $166 per megapixel.
Obviously it's apples to oranges, but I wouldn't draw the same blanket conclusion you did by looking at this story.
(btw, I'm not saying this camera is overpriced. It fits into a niche format of pro photographers for whom it's very much worth it.)
True that the body is $12k, but I'm pretty sure the site says that the back will be almost as much. It's very possible that they will be sold seperately (or bundled with the prices added, of course) as many medium format cameras are. This would push the price to about $24k and if the camera has interchangeable lenses (which I hope it would) then those prices are almost definately sans lens.
"The film size defines what 'format' the camera is. So why is this a medium format camera? If it's digital its digital?"
Regardless if it's digital a medium format camera such as the RZ67 allows for a larger amount of light to hit the exposure area; in the case of a digital camera a CCD capturing light rather than film. By a general rule of thumb, optical quality improves as the lens is able to capture more light. This medium format should be able to produce quality equivalent to film based Mamiyas, except being digital.
One thing to note, megapixels is not a measure of quality, it is only a measure of resolution.
Check out PhaseOne who already produce digital backs for Mamiya's for a general idea of quality you can get. The P25 and H25 are 22MP digital backs that can fit on the RZ67, quality should be similar to the ZD backs.
http://www.phaseone.com/
Jeff... go to elementary school again! :P
$1,800 per MP... that camera would be $39.6k!
still you're right, ~$545.5 ain't really cheaper than the $166 per mp... ;)
judging it by megapixels only would be the same as comparing a normal digital camera with 2mp and a cellphone with a 2mp cam... and I bet nobody will say the quality is the same.
Thanks SE.
They need to mount these things on the next Mars rovers. And everything else we send out into space. I dont car if it takes two weeks per picture to be sent back, it'll be worth it.
"By a general rule of thumb, optical quality improves as the lens is able to capture more light. This medium format should be able to produce quality equivalent to film based Mamiyas, except being digital."
This is only a partial explanation, and somewhat wrong. Grabbing more light is a function of the lens, not the size of the sensor or film.
Now, answering the "isn't digital just digital" question: a medium format camera has larger film size than a 35mm SLR camera. Thus, you get more detail. Similarly, a medium format digital camera has a larger sensor than a digital SLR which has a larger sensor than a digital point & shoot **even when megapixels are the same **. The larger sensors have larger light-sensing photosites which give you less digital noise, among other benefits.
In other words, digital point & shoots put say 6 million pixels on a sensor the size of a postage stamp while a digital SLR's sensor is 25-40% bigger. Size does matter where sensors are concerned.
A 6 megapixel digital SLR will outshoot and outperform an 8 megapixel point & shoot. It's not just about megapixels....that's just marketing crap. The physical size and quality of the sensor counts -- but doesn't sound so glamorous on the feature checklist. And few people understand it anyway.
The first? I think they're forgetting the Hasselblad H1D, and perhaps others. Granted that one's $10K more for the same resolution.
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/frames/contentframe.asp?pageURL=/general/SectionToItem.asp?secId=1135
K Johnson - Post #5,
Isn't the $12K Digital back ment to be used w/ standard film based medium format cameras?
Not with the $12K Digital Camera.
"This is only a partial explanation, and somewhat wrong. Grabbing more light is a function of the lens, not the size of the sensor or film."
While it is true that the lens is the most important component of caputuring light, the surface area that light is caputured is also important. As you youself point out, the size of the sensor is of importance; in the case of the ZD back the sensor is the size of a medium format film improving significantly the quality of light that is sent through the lens.
"The first? I think they're forgetting the Hasselblad H1D, and perhaps others. Granted that one's $10K more for the same resolution."
The Mamiya, Hasselblad, PhaseOne, Leaf etc. all use DALSA's FTF4052C 22-million pixel CCD. Unless you find Hasselblad's lens to be better than Mamiya's and worth the $10k I would just stick with the Mamiya. While I love Hasselblad, IMHO I think Mamiya produces superior optics and it isn't worth the extra money for the Hasselblad.
Personally, I own a RZ67 proII and with multiple lenses, backs, prism finders etc that I spent an arm and a leg for. However, I'm not too happy that I have to buy Mamiya's pro IID just so that I can use their digital back while there are other digital backs that I can use with the RZ67 proII that use the exact same CCD. While the ~$2,100 for the IID is chump change compared to the digital back, by principle I wish Mamiya could have done without the IID upgrade (MSC functionality is already in other backs that don't require the upgrade).
To K Johnson Post #5
The back your speaking of is a seperate product all together intended for existing film cameras. The ZD SLR is a complete unit with the sensor built in. But you are correct "sans lens". Just a quick note for all of you who have gotten into photography (not to seem condesending). Mamiya is an excellent company in the medium format arena for fine art & comercial photographers who has been around for years. The price of the equipment is actually really competetive for this kind of product. Medium format equipment has always been and is likely to remain on the high end pricewise.
And as someone else stated earlier, digital is digital, but the shear size of the sensor lends itself to greater light sensitivity and image quality. Additionally, you are going to generally be able to get much faster lenses, higher shutter sync speeds and shallower depth of field; all qualities typical of "medium" format.
holy smokes! should i throw away my 1.5mp camera then :|
Average weight of pennies minted after 1982 -- 2.5 (2 1/2) grams
2.5 * 1200000 = 3000000
3000000 grams = 6,613.86787 pounds
um.. go for it, save your pennies
The film size defines what 'format' the camera is. So why is this a medium format camera? If it's digital its digital?"
As was posted previously about this subject.....
Also, most digital cameras, I know at least entry and mid level DSLRs have a 1.5x image magnification factor(if the range for lens starts at 35mm it's actually 1.5x that focal length meaning at wide angle a 35mm film camera witll get more of the subject in the photogarph than a digital camer at the same focal length) because of the size of the image sensor. Most of the really high end DSLrs and above have the same focal lengths as the 35mm film cameras.
That's $24,000 total for the body and digital back—two separate products... The current Hasselblad H1D using likely the very same sensors, and produced by Fuji, is $22,000 at Calumet. So, this is no pro deal, unless switching systems is your game. Leica is supposed to ship the R digital back soon, though I'll be slumming it at 10 m pixels.
SE et al. -
The Phase1 and Leaf and Imacon backs all capture 14 bits of colour information, whereas the Mamiya's chip only captures 12 bits. A big difference to some shooters.
Why is 'medium format' and not 'just digital'? Because the sensor is 36mm x 48 mm, or twice the area of normal 35mm SLRs. Though not the full size of a 645 120 frame it is larger than 'small format', and uses medium format lenses. It has nothing to do with multiplication factors per se, and everything to with the physical size of the sensor. Etc, etc. Bottom line = medium format.
Also.
"in the case of the ZD back the sensor is the size of a medium format film improving significantly the quality of light that is sent through the lens."
A sensor however big or small will never 'improve' the quality of the light. The light is what it is - the sensor simply records it. A lens projects an image (or light) circle. The sensor, or film, simply records a slice of that image circle - be it 24mm x 36mm or 4" x 5" (large format).
As you move further and further to the edges of an image circle the more the image will degrade through pincushion distortion, barrel distortion, or simply light falloff (that is why you need a central neutral density filter when using some lenses on the XPAN). That means that the sweet spot of a lens is the centre of the lens. Which means that as a sensor gets larger and larger it 'pushes' a lens to its limits. The same lens that might be great on a 20D (reduced frame DSLR) might fall to pieces on the 1Ds MKII - because the sensor is PHYSICALLY larger.
So having a larger sensor (physically) in no way improves the quality of the light - it simply reveals any flaws or shortcomings that your lenses might have.
Can you use strobe flash with digital cameras? I read somewhere that strobe lighting can burn-out a digital camera. I have a Speedotron D802b strobe system and a Mamiya Pro TL system and I'm thinking about buying the ZD back. Would I be able to use the ZD back or any digital camera with these strobes? Thanks for your answers.