ZED - no particular reason for this post.

Some of you may be wondering how I'm getting on with the Zed (Zee) and whether I will be selling all my APS-c gear now?
The answer is just fine; I love it, haven't regretted the ridiculous outlay, and I'm looking forward to slowly reaping its rewards over several years. It isn't doing the things I really bought it for, but it is rewarding me in ways I hadn't considered, essentially a quality, from the DOF and rendering that just looks lovely.
I still haven't done it justice, but that's a good thing - lots and lots of learning and lovely surprises to come and a feeling that I took the picture, not the camera - it certainly doesn't suddenly work miracles, probably the opposite in fact; it's a tricky thing to get right.
But not only am I not selling up the Ks, I'm still coveting the K3 (which I kind of skipped with this purchase) and I think I should have another K5ii or 's'
The Zed has very specific uses for which no other camera will do, but the little Ks are beautiful things and I simply wouldn't be without them
BTW, I'm not some kleptomaniac, I do actually need two or three bodies for the event photography

Oh, just to add to this, I do still wonder if I should have just gone on loads of holidays with fabulous scenery, or bought all those little things like GPS modules, studio lights and batteries, broncolor parabolic brollies, etc. etc that I now can't afford. But who knows?

Only you

Hi Mark

Like many here, have been coveting both the D and the Z in a purely salivatory capacity thus far... Particularly interested in your thoughts on what it does particularly well (the "specific uses where nothing else will do" bit), as well as what it doesn't quite (the "isn't doing the things I really bought it for" bit)... Do tell as and when you have a mo...

Best

Holidays & scenery are one thing, brollies and lights are another (I'd prefer the holidays & scenery - everybody uses brollies & lights... boring!).

As someone who has always (last 20yrs) shot medium format film using several formats/systems, I can only comment that bigger is usually better. It's not just the results, turning up with a bigger camera often has an impact all it's own (you get noticed shooting a Pentax 6x7).

A 'zed' is a substantial investment (I've only got as far as a P67->645 adapter for my 67 lenses), it helps if you have a revenue stream from the system (but I wouldn't want to shoot boring weddings). It's difficult today to get the most out of medium format image quality (who _needs_ a 50 MP file? - how big does the print have to be?), but there's much more to it than 'just' IQ.

I enjoy shooting medium format film (I shoot more exposures on it than I shoot on my K-5). If I hadn't already spent a considerable amount building 6x4.5, 6x6 & 6x7 systems over the years, I'd consider buying a 645Z (as long as I had a PC capable of managing the images - I don't - not a problem with film). I don't need one, I probably wouldn't get the best out of it, but I would enjoy every exposure - and that counts for a lot.

Once you've shot medium format, it makes smaller formats seem much less significant.

John.

I was expecting it to be a game-changer in terms of high ISO and macro, but the K5iis is so good in the dark and retains its colour better at high iso that the difference in ISO performance is only marginal really. The z scores on retained detail of course, after you've crunched the noisy image down to normal size it certainly looks better, but I don't want to crunch a Z file down I want to use it big and for that I'm back to normal ISO range.
And for macro, I didn't consider the pixel pitch being about the same as the K5 so very high magnification, whether a flea or the moon, is actually more difficult than on the K format, particularly in view of the lack of accessories and lenses lying around for the Z.

What is a pleasant surprise is the ability to hoik up the shadows even more than the K5, so images can be under-exposed, not to avoid clipping so much as to create a softer transition to highlights. (so not strictly under-exposed, just a lot of apparently useless shadows) a God sky for example. No need for HDR.
And the images whether with the 55 or the 120mm just look like they've been taken with a 77Ltd - really 3 dimensional even stopped down with studio lights. I never see purple fringing anymore, because the lenses are actually quite slow and don't need to be wide open anyway.
If you're careless the images are often soft and disappointing, more so than a smaller format, but again, that just makes you slow down and take care and rewards you when you nail it. Showing the client a little thumbnail on the camera and then zooming and zooming and zoooming until their tiny, perfectly focused eye fills the screen is priceless
It feels lovely in the hand and at events, when people see it, nobody has any doubts that they could have got uncle Bob to do it
I knew it wouldn't perform miracles, but I kinda hoped it would, or that the images would be considerably better! but of course, only the photographer can do that and if he's good enough (not me yet) this camera will be up to the job (although that annoyingly talented guy would make an iPhone perform miracles too).

I should add that I loved the 645N film camera so much it made this decision much easier. Most of the things I have described are right there on the N. The ergonomics and wow-factor, that indefinable quality to the pictures, the careful approach and rewards therein. Clients want instant feedback of course, so I never used film commercially, but I still wish someone would ask me to.

I agree with most of Darkmunks comments, I purchased mine purely for landscapes, and my portrait and nude work to which it excels on all 3, the detail is stunning, I don't go over 3200 ISO and haven't found the noise to be much of a problem, perhaps I need to look much much closer

I've just had a 45" x 30" enlargement done of a frosty scene, the detail / colour is absolutely superb and I to get the best from it I will need to find someway of mounting this, but that one print's already bringing the prospect of more work and I agree with the comment re enlarging a ladies eye to the extend of all the iris details on the back of the camera

Thanks both... Very thoughtful and illuminating summaries... Have been mulling over a short term hiring/loaning option for a while (already have the lenses from my original 645 film camera), so fingers crossed... Will post results as and when it materialises...

Best