Reading mode: Light Dark

mamiya zd

Go to last post
LarryK said:
Juergen said:
Until Phil has completed it we can read

Juergen
Click to expand...
Hey Thanks Juergen,

you're a prince among men.

Larry
Click to expand...
Hey Larry,

Do you know how can we ask Phil to measure the ZD's reflex mirror, and if there is more room in the mirror box for a bigger one ? That way we could speculate if this camera will be upgraded to "FF 645" in the near future.

Ed
 
Edymagno said:
Hey Larry,
Do you know how can we ask Phil to measure the ZD's reflex mirror,
and if there is more room in the mirror box for a bigger one ? That
way we could speculate if this camera will be upgraded to "FF 645"
in the near future.

Ed
Click to expand...
Sorry Ed,

I don't have any pull with anybody. All we can do is put it in a Post title and hope.
I'm just happy to get 36x48, don't want to look greedy.

Larry
 
LarryK said:
I don't have any pull with anybody. All we can do is put it in a
Post title and hope.
I'm just happy to get 36x48, don't want to look greedy.

Larry
Click to expand...
Me neither

Ed
 
If Mamiya's pricing is similar to Canon's, then this thing will sell for less than $10K in the US. At the same time I expect Nikon D2X to sell at well below Canon 1Ds MK2's $8K. So the photographers who want to save will buy the Nikon, and those who want extremely high resolutions will buy the Mamiya.
 
well put photogeek. Canon's former pricing scheme was based on being at the "top" of the market, Mamiya may now ironically put them in the middle. and, the fact that the new 1ds was listed at $8000, no cheaper than the original 1ds, would seem to confirm Canon feels nothing has changed since then. well now it certainly has. the difference between having 3 players as opposed to only 2 is huge. markets typically with only 2 major players have easily led to price fixing and anti-competitive price schemes, 3 makes that much harder. the $8000 list of the original 1ds at the time was essentially a putoff to all other comers, saying we have the best, we can charge whatever we want. and Nikon, Kodak and Fuji let them get away with it.
 
BJL said:
The ZD brochure http://www.legene.com/planet/mamiya_zd.pdf
mentioned in a post below confirms that Mamiya is using a Dalsa
sensor.
Click to expand...
DALSA confirmed it in several of their new releases. I put the links in another ZD thred yeaterday.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=10477761

They have all sorts of fun stuff up on their website, including a release about how Mamiya has contracted for $20M in sensors over the next 5 years.
--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
rjbc said:
well put photogeek. Canon's former pricing scheme was based on
being at the "top" of the market, Mamiya may now ironically put
them in the middle. and, the fact that the new 1ds was listed at
$8000, no cheaper than the original 1ds, would seem to confirm
Canon feels nothing has changed since then. well now it certainly
has. the difference between having 3 players as opposed to only 2
is huge. markets typically with only 2 major players have easily
led to price fixing and anti-competitive price schemes, 3 makes
that much harder. the $8000 list of the original 1ds at the time
was essentially a putoff to all other comers, saying we have the
best, we can charge whatever we want. and Nikon, Kodak and Fuji let
them get away with it.
Click to expand...
I am well into EOS (investment wise)
Bang bang shoot shoot

Ed
 
I'm with that train of thought. As I've said previously, I would be happy to stay with my versatile 1DMKII and get a 22MP Mamiya and a couple of lenses. The 1DSMKII would be the logical step, but if the Mamiya is at a decent price point.......

Perhaps tha AF on the Mamiya is its kludge factor as a user of AF medium format cameras suggests in another post. Heck, I'll do manual focus. Shot that way from 1968-'90 and still got usable images.

If I want fast AF, got that in the Canon. It seems the 1DSMKII is the same as the 1DMKII except for a bit different in throughput ( less FPS ) and more pixels.

I want more pixels than the current 8MP I have, and have been thinking about MF and a back for a year or two.
I'm looking forward to seeing it at the New York Photo Expo next month.
http://www.photoplusexpo.com/photoplusexpo/index.jsp

There I will ask questions and take pictures.
Best,
Robert

 
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
They have all sorts of fun stuff up on their website, including a release about how Mamiya has contracted for $20M in sensors over the next 5 years.
Click to expand...
Interesting; we might be about to get a lesson in the power of ecomomies of scale, if this large purchase commitment can get the price of 22MP, 36x48mm sensors well down rom trh near $30,000 of recent 22MP backs.

On the other hand, even if they are paying as little as $5,000 each, that is only 4,000 sensors, or about two months of 1Ds production spread over five years.

P.S. Do we need a better name for this 36x48 format? How about Double Frame, since it exactly doubles up on the 24x36mm of so called "Full Frame"? Maybe we should follow the roll film camera tradition and call it 4x5 (cm).
 
BJL said:
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
They have all sorts of fun stuff up on their website, including a release about how Mamiya has contracted for $20M in sensors over the next 5 years.
Click to expand...
Interesting; we might be about to get a lesson in the power of
ecomomies of scale, if this large purchase commitment can get the
price of 22MP, 36x48mm sensors well down rom trh near $30,000 of
recent 22MP backs.
Click to expand...
I hope it does, or the MF backs are going to get eroded by things like the 16mp Canon.
BJL said:
On the other hand, even if they are paying as little as $5,000
each, that is only 4,000 sensors, or about two months of 1Ds
production spread over five years.
Click to expand...
Hadn't thought of looking at it that way. Even if Canon is only paying $2000 for their 1Ds sensor, that's still $50M/year in sensors.

Personally, I'm hoping this new format catches on and radically exceeds the approximatly 1000 cameras/year that the $20M 5 year Mamiya deal represents.
BJL said:
P.S. Do we need a better name for this 36x48 format? How about
Double Frame, since it exactly doubles up on the 24x36mm of so
called "Full Frame"?
Click to expand...
I like that one. Expecially if the new Mamiya has a mirror box sized to 36x48, instead of 45x60.
BJL said:
Maybe we should follow the roll film camera
tradition and call it 4x5 (cm).
Click to expand...
Too confusing. First, the aspect ratio isn't 5:4, it's 4:3.

Second, if you say 4x5 to the sorts of photographers who would be looking at a 22mp camera, the first thing they're going to think of is 4x5 inch large format.

How about 3D4D (for 3 dozen 4 dozen).

On second thought, that's about as bad as lights, which are measured in T's (where a T is 1/8 inch). A T8 fluorescent tube is 1 inch in diameter. LED's actually come in a T1-3/4 package, (yes, 1 and 3/4 eights or 5.5mm, more or less). That makes the new format T11 T15 ;)

The more I think about this, the more I like "double frame".

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
For me, medium format regain it's charme using the old, good, waist level viewfinder. Such a big camera as the ZD must have this, because you will use it on the tripod (or, as, I do, attached to a telescope for astrophotography).

Not having it is just a -1 point.

Otherwise, the camera is stunning

---

---> Matteo Barducci
 
I know! How about 4/3 extreme or 4/3 extended.

We could even mark it as 4/3E

I think it's getting more "standard" than the original 4/3. Only one camera-maker and one sensor maker do 4/3. There are several makers of 4/3E.
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
P.S. Do we need a better name for this 36x48 format? How about
Double Frame, since it exactly doubles up on the 24x36mm of so
called "Full Frame"?
Click to expand...
I like that one. Expecially if the new Mamiya has a mirror box
sized to 36x48, instead of 45x60.
Click to expand...
 
Matteo Barducci said:
For me, medium format regain it's charme using the old, good, waist
level viewfinder. Such a big camera as the ZD must have this,
because you will use it on the tripod (or, as, I do, attached to a
telescope for astrophotography).

Not having it is just a -1 point.

Otherwise, the camera is stunning

---

---> Matteo Barducci
Click to expand...
--

I really believe there are things nobody would see if I didn't photograph them. - Diane Arbus
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
How do I make my film photos less "digital"?
Replies
16
Views
58K
alex_virt
A
A
  • Photo Photo
St. James Cemetery, Toronto (Mamiya C220 & Fomapan)
Replies
2
Views
25K
alex_virt
A
barre
  • Question Question
To clean the sensor of the Mamiya ZD
Replies
4
Views
5K
MJ_Photo38
MJ_Photo38
A
Mamiya K/L 90mm via 45mm macro ring on GFX
Replies
4
Views
5
Alexander6x6
A
E
Personal reflections on past ownership of MF.
2
Replies
30
Views
9K
AshleyMC
A

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top