Monthly Archives: August 2012

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO Lens Review with Sample Images and Comparisons

*Update* – I know this article pops up when you google the “Mamiya 500mm f/4.5 APO Lens”, well I also happen to own this lens and have begun review it starting with my Field Report from Costa Rica of the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO and Mamiya 500mm f/4.5 APO lenses (click to view).

Image taken at f/5.6 with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO Lens

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO @ f/5.6 on the PhaseOne 645DF with IQ180 

Telephoto lenses are not the first thing that comes to mind when you think of medium format cameras. Initially you think of their resolution, advantages and disadvantages in certain situations, and of course with the advent of digital, their price. However there is a long tradition of medium format cameras having telephoto lenses in their line up. The standard telephoto focal length for medium format is 300mm which is equivalent to approximately 200mm on a full-frame 35mm camera (specifically 193mm). However some companies have pushed the limits by creating 500mm lenses. Mamiya has made two, the 500mm f/4.5 APO and the older 500mm f/5.6 lenses. They have also made a 2x Tele-converter which works with their MF telephoto lenses. In this review we will look at the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO, Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 APo, and the 300mm f/2.8 APO with the 2x Tele-Converter.

Of course as we know, telephoto lenses are used for photographing wildlife, so I thought it would be funny to use an animal as my subject for the images in this test. And as it turns out, it is really really hard to make an owl not move for an extended period of time, so I went the taxidermy route. So a special thanks to the Connecticut Audubon Society for providing this ~100 year old owl for testing.

Physical Comparison

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO vs Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 APO Lens Size Comparison

As we can see here, there are some major physical differences between these two lenses. Most obvious is their size. The Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 APO is quite a bit smaller. After having hiked with it in Oregon, I can say that it is very carry-able for an extended period of time. The same cannot be said for the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO which weighs about 6.4 lb on its own. Also, theoretically the 300mm f/4.5 could be handheld, however the same cannot be said for the 300mm f/2.8. Both lenses are provided with tripod collars which like other telephoto lenses allow for them to be mounted at a position which places the center of gravity at a point which will make the lens and camera more balanced and stable. The Mamiya 300mm f/4.5  offers a slide out lens hood which is the same design as the Mamiya 210mm f/4 ULD lens. The Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 is also an autofocus lens and this should be considered when comparing these two lenses.

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO Lens Review

The Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO lens has a much more substantial lens hood which screws into the front of the lens (starts where the first black band is) and provides a significant amount of glare protection and is coated with black felt on the inside to decrease reflections. It also has some unique features. The Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 APO lens is Autofocus but it also has electronic aperture control. Mamiya does not make a teleconverter with electronic contacts so it is not possible to use the Mamiya M645 Teleconverter 2X N with the Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 lens. The Mamiya M645 Teleconverter 2X N is very well built and as we will see preforms very well optically when paired with the 300mm f/2.8 APO. The Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO, like all of the M645 lenses has a manual aperture ring. On the side of the lens there is a switch which can be flipped and then the aperture can be controlled via the aperture ring. The aperture ring is very solid and large and easy to use even when not looking at it.  Like many modern telephoto lenses, the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO lens has drop in filters and the original set was sold with filter pouch and standard filters. It accepts 52mm filters. The Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO can be used with the PhaseOne V-Grip AIR which makes it very easy to use in portrait orientation making it even more comfortable to use. For this review the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO was mounted on a Wimberly WH-200-S head which I purchased for use with the lens and mounted on my Gitzo Series 3 legs.

Functionality

The Mamiya 300mm f/4.5 operates as you would expect, it is an autofocus lens which also offers manual focus. You put the lens into manual focus the same way that you do on many of the other Mamiya Lenses by sliding the focus ring up or down. Of course the autofocus speed does not lend itself to action like sports or wildlife (most applications) photography but it does work well for nature, still life etc.

The Mamiya 300mm f/2.8′s aperture ring and tripod collar have already been commented on. Like many of the purpose-built manual focus lenses the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 has a very nice focus ring. It is covered in rubber which makes it easy to control. The focus throw is not very long, which is good if you are trying to focus on a moving subject, but at the same time the focusing ring offers enough resistance that it is possible to fine tune focus without too much of an issue. The f/2.8′s minimum focus distance is 3.5 meters or or around 11.5 feet. One of the great things about the PhaseOne 645DF is it’s focus confirmation feature. I have already addressed the usefulness of this feature in my initial report on the 645DF and IQ180. It works exceptionally well with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 allowing for accurate focusing however as you stop down the camera it will eventually become to dark for the camera to be able to confirm focus through the lens. This means that when shooting still subjects that you will have to focus at a wider aperture and then stop down. This also means that if you are shooting under changing lighting conditions and with moving subjects that it is possible to not realize you have stopped down past the point at which the camera can focus which can lead to errors in focus.

Image Quality

Image quality is what everyone really cares about. It will decide for you which lens better fits your needs. Full aperture series (f/2.8-f/22, f/5.6-f/45, f/4.5-f/22) are available on my Flickr page with 100% center crops of each of the images provided and labeled. Here we will look at examples which illustrate the different qualities of these lenses. All of these images were taken in M/UP mode to decrease vibration.

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 Aperture Comparison

Images taken with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO at f/2.8 and f/4 (Left and Right Respectively)

Full Image

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO Aperture Comparison 100% Center Crop

Images taken with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO at f/2.8 and f/4 (Left and Right Respectively)

100% Center Crops

As would be expected, the 300mm f/2.8 has some significant vignetting at f/2.8 however one stop down at f/4 there is significantly less vignetting. Looking at the two files, it would appear that the f/2.8 file is underexposed if looked at quickly, however exposure was kept constant for these shots and the darkness is entirely attributable to vignetting. f/2.8 also offers excellent bokeh which is pleasing to the eye and very good at isolating the foreground subject. Another effect of the 300mm f/2.8, just like with the Mamiya 80mm f/1.9N is the very shallow depth of field. When you look at the 100% sample of the f/2.8 file you can see that the center is very sharp (point of focus is around the beak / forehead / nose area of the head of the owl) and then the shallow DOF makes the sharpness fall off very quickly. Again, when stopped down to f/4 there is already an increase in the in-focus area along with vignetting being controlled and still pleasing bokeh which helps to isolate the subject.

Now we will compare the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO to the 300mm f/4.5 APO:

Mamiya 300mm lens comparison at f/8

Images taken with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO and 300mm f/4.5 APO at f/8.0 (Left and Right Respectively)

Full Image

Mamiya 300mm Lens Comparison 100% Crop

Images taken with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO and 300mm f/4.5 APO at f/8.0 (Left and Right Respectively)

100% Center Crops

Both of these images were taken at f/8. When comparing the two images you can see that the 300mm f/2.8 is more contrasty then the 300mm f/4.5. While very similar to my eye the 300mm f/2.8 exhibits more pleasing bokeh at f/8 then the 300mm f/4.5 APO. When looking at the 100% center crops of the f/8 comparisons, it becomes apparent that the 300mm f/2.8 is slightly warmer in its rendition of colors then the 300mm f/4.5 which is slightly cooler.  As far as I can tell, the 300mm f/2.8 is also sharper then the 300mm f/4.5. While the difference is very slight, it seems to me that the 300mm f/2.8 APO does a better job at rendering fine details then the 300mm f/4.5 APO at f/8.

The next set of images will look at the Mamiya M645 Teleconverter 2X N on the 300mm f/2.8 APO

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 Teleconverter Comparison

Images taken with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO and M645 Teleconverter 2X N wide open (f/2.8 and f/5.6 Respectively)

The Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO with the M645 Teleconverter 2X N yields of a focal length of 600mm which is approximately equivalent to a 400mm lens on a 35mm full-frame camera (exactly 386mm). As commented on before the effects of the vignetting on exposure are again apparent when comparing these two images where the image taken with the M645 Teleconverter 2X N where wide open vignetting significantly darkens the image. However as we will see just like without the TC as the lens is stopped down the effects of vignetting disappear. The TC does however maintain the sharpness and optical quality of the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO and as far as I can tell does not significantly effect image quality. It’s biggest disadvantage is in function where at smaller apertures it is too dark for the camera to accurately confirm focus (discussed above) which can create an issue for some field use.

Mamiya M645 Teleconverter 2X N with 100% Crop

Images taken with the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO and M645 Teleconverter 2X N at f/11 with 100% crop on right

When stopped down to f/11 (f/5.6 + TC) the vignetting issues experienced at smaller apertures are all but gone. As we can see here in this example, especially when looking at the 100% crop, the image is very sharp and there has not been any degradation in the image quality with the addition of the teleconverter. This shows how well designed the teleconverter is, which can also be used on other lenses, like the Mamiya 150mm f/2.8 N to yield a 300mm f/5.6 (if you need it in an emergency).

Conclusions

Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 Owl Final Image

Edited image from the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 with M645 Teleconverter 2X N shot at f/5.6

The Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO is capable of producing some stunning images in certain situations. It excels as a as a telephoto lens for portraits when shot wide open at f/2.8 where the subject is isolated in a dream like world because of the vignetting and shallowed depth of field. It is also excellent for applications where a significant telephoto magnification is needed because of its ability to work with the teleconverter without any noticeable differences in image quality. These make the 300mm f/2.8 a very versatile tool when applied correctly.

The 30mm f/4.5 APO has some advantages over the f/2.8. Firstly, its size lends itself to use in landscape photography since it is significantly more practical to carry. Secondly, its autofocus capability makes it all the more appealing. Also, its electronic aperture control should not be overlooked since it helps to keep your hands on the camera when shooting and not fiddling around with the lens.

I like the 300mm focal length on medium format cameras, as I have discussed before when reviewing the Hasselblad 300mm f/4.5 HC and for this reason both of these lenses have a place in my kit. They can both technically excellent images, however I will give a slight edge to the 300mm f/2.8 APO in terms of its renditions of fine details at smaller apertures.

Full aperture series from the Mamiya 300mm f/2.8 APO with and without the M645 Teleconverter 2X N and the 300mm f/4.5 can be seen here on my flickr.

As an aside the 300mm f/2.8 APO can be used with adapters on 35mm cameras. There are some examples of it with an adapter on my Nikon D4 here.


Hands on Experience: Leaf Credo 80 with Full Resolution Sample Images

Last week Digital Transitions was nice enough to host me all day while they had an event at which their Mamiya Leaf rep brought a Leaf Credo 80 digital back. Throughout this day, I was able to shoot with the camera for extended periods of time, and observe how it performed on both the PhaseOne / Mamiya Leaf 645DF but also on the Cambo Wide Anniversary Edition technical plate camera.

As you may have seen in my Initial Impressions Report I had some high hopes for this camera, after having been previously let down during my personal experiences with Leaf digital backs. This camera offers a number of improvements (and even a few little innovations) which certainly make it a big improvement over the previous designs. Its good to see that Leaf was able to learn a thing or two from PhaseOne and still apply some of their technology to the camera. It will has specific characteristics which will allow it to appeal to different people then those who would be shopping for a PhaseOne IQ180. That being said, it also has some limitations on features which the PhaseOne IQ180 has; this has allowed them to create a place for this camera in the PhaseOne / Mamiya Leaf lineup of cameras.

At the bottom of this article, there is a link to the dropbox folder which contains the full RAW images from the Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 discussed in this article, as well as the comparison files from the PhaseOne IQ180 and PhaseOne P65+ which are referenced.

Design

 

Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 Digital Back

The camera shares some of the same parts as the PhaseOne IQ series, that is to say an all aluminum body, and if you put them side by side, you see on the mount side of the back they are identical. That being said, the Leaf Credo is still built in Israel, and of course the PhaseOne IQ is made in Denmark. Leaf has distinguished their Aptus line of digital backs by their touch screens. They were not as high quality as the smaller screens on the PhaseOne P+ line of backs and offered a different interface. They have kept the touchscreen capabilities on the Credo line of cameras. They have used the same screen technology as the PhaseOne IQ series which means that they have gesture controls. However, Leaf has taken it a step further then Phase did and have gotten rid of the buttons all together from the back of the camera. The back is now one sleek sheet of glass. There are still the four corners which are now icons instead of the 4 button set up established by Phase. The power button and the status light have now been moved to the top of the camera. The power button is sort of irrelevant in its positioning because of the fact that you have to press it either way and as long as its not excessively difficult there isn’t going to be an issue. However, placing the status light, which lets you know if the Credo back is processing your files, ready to shoot, and so ons position can make a difference. Especially if you are a PhaseOne shooter you are used to looking at the digital back’s screen for everything. Leaf’s decision to move the status light to the top still works based on my experience. This is because, I found that the times when I was interested to see what this light was indicating were also when I was fiddling with dials or something like that, at which point the camera was not right up against my face. So, in this way looking at the top versus the back, although minor, may offer some improved functionality which could also help when using it on a tripod or with technical cameras depending on how you have the camera set up. This was one of the more minor changes to the system.

The removal of buttons from the back is interesting, and might not be something that everyone likes. Personally, I don’t mind the buttons on the IQ180 and honestly don’t think that there is any advantage to one over the other. That being said the Leaf Credo is certainly a bit cooler in this area. The icons are backlit which certainly would help with seeing them in darker environments. This is something that I absolutely love about my Nikon D4 since I am usually shooting it in excessively dark conditions being able to light up the controls is certainly a feather in the cameras cap. Again, whether this is a bonus depends on you, but I think it is nice to have a camera out there which offers this feature in medium format digital. The icons are also intelligent. By this I mean that they are only illuminated when there is something that you can do with them. A perfect example of this is the icon in the lower right hand corner of the Credo screen surface. This icon, is the contextual menu’s icon and it is only illuminated when there are sub-options for you to access.

The backs touch screen functions in exactly the same way as on the PhaseOne IQ series. However, they do not use the same software. For the Credo, Leaf has developed their own firmware which handles functionality slightly differently then the PhaseOne IQ’s software. I had always found the Leaf Aptus software to be cumbersome and counter-intuitive to getting anything done. I appreciate that like anything, once you learn it is easy, but it certainly has more of a learning curve then other cameras out there. Again, this has been totally changed with the Mamiya Leaf Credo, you can see this right away when you look at the new home screen. It again, steps forward by introducing an entirely new user interface for quicker and more efficient access to everything. It has been greatly clarified and functions in many ways like the IQ series’ software. Its changes are actually, slightly better if you ask me. Here Mamiya Leaf has innovated. Instead of scrolling up and down menus, Leaf’s software engineers have embraced the touchscreen display and created a system, not unlike Apple’s iOS system, in which you scroll to the side to access the different panes of the menu screens. An added benefit of this of the pagination of the menus rather then a system where you scroll up and down is that without pagination you are scrolling up and down and menu times don’t have a set or specific location that can be memorized. It is much easier to direct someone in the use of the camera, because you can say “scroll to the 4th page” instead of “scroll down until you it”. This works really well and helps more then anything else to make this camera as useable as others on the market. Here, Leaf took a cue from Canon’s multiple utility menus. As an aside, they also have created backgrounds to the pages which have lightly watermarked labels for what menu you are in. As you can see in the Youtube Video that we made when you are in the White Balance menu, there is a light “WB” watermarked on the background and this carries through to other means like the ISO screen (which is much more accessible in Leaf’s new software) as well as others. Another change is that, when you look at a picture on the back of the PhaseOne IQ series, the Histogram, Roll and Pitch, and Highlight warning are on the right side of the screen, on the Leaf Credo, they are now on the left side  All and all the user interface has been totally overhauled and is now something that is not a strike against the camera but a point in the cameras favor.

Other then that the body of the Mamiya Leaf Credo back is pretty much what you would expect and set up like the IQ series. Another one of the major grievances I had with the Aptus series digital backs, and a bit of a gripe I have had with Leaf is that they had made it virtually impossible to find a product shot of the camera which illustrates the fact that the battery hangs off of the bottom of the camera and is fully exposed, along with its electronic contacts to the world. Obviously, this means that this is someplace where dust and moisture could have gotten into the body and messed with your thousands of dollars of electronics. Also on a bit of a digression, the thankfully got rid of the open grilled fan on the side of the camera, opting for the passive cooling technology of the PhaseOne IQ series, which allows for better weather sealing. Aside from its obvious benefits to the help of the back, the internally stored battery is considerably more aesthetically pleasing and unquestionably increases its usability because of the battery’s repositioning. My gripe with Leaf was also resolved in this, and anecdotally when I questioned someone with the company about why they didn’t show the external battery attached to the Leaf Aptus digital back, their humorous response was “would you have?” which of course, could only be answered with a simple “no.” on my part. Also, now that the battery has been moved internally, instead of being on the bottom, covering the firewire port, the Credo is less prone to voltage issues which have been a problem in the past when shooting digital backs tethered. Even though there is an IEEE standard for firewire, like any standard, just because it exists doesn’t mean that it is met by manufacturers. Mac’s haven’t had the best track record with firewire voltage, and when using a Leaf Aptus digital back with PC’s you had to use a powered firewire hub. The Leaf Credo fixes this with its internal battery.

The camera features the same Firewire connection as the IQ series as well as the USB 3.0 port on the left hand side of the back placed below the card slot door and sync ports like the PhaseOne IQ series. USB 3.0 would seem to be the technology of the future. It is the type of USB connection which is featured on Apple’s new line of MacBook Pro’s  along with their proprietary thunderbolt ports. While the PhaseOne has included USB 3.0 in the IQ series, it has not yet been enabled in firmware. I am told that we will be hearing about USB 3.0′s future with the IQ series later this summer. Although, not to fear because there is a Firewire to Thunderbolt dongle available so you can still shoot firewire tethered on the latest generation of MBP’s. The battery in the new Mamiya Leaf Credo also acts as a regulator for the Firewire and USB connections. It will trickle charge the battery, however if you are running on a better powered laptop you can disable this function in the menus, and simply carry more batteries. Conveniently now the Credo uses the same batteries as the IQ series with a small exception. Unlike the PhaseOne IQ series, which shipped with 2600 milliamp batteries, the Credo will be shipping with 2900 milliamp versions of the battery…..or so my sources tell me.

Performance 

The serial number on the bottom of the camera that we had for testing at DT was number 000025 which shows where it stands in the production line, and it is in fact only the second Credo body to be brought to the United States. While it is still pre-production we were given the go-ahead to publish images taken with it for analysis of its performance and comparisons to other medium format digital backs out there, specifically its competition from PhaseOne.

Leaf has always been known for the special profiles which, through clever programming, have allowed for their files to become renowned for their skin tones by some. Personally, for me this sounds sort of gimmicky and like people have drunk the cool aide on it. But, that being said when looking at the sample images below, and as we discuss them, judge for yourself which you like better.

PhaseOne IQ180 and Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 Comparison Sample Images

Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 (Left) and PhaseOne IQ180 (Right)

PhaseOne 645DF with Profoto D1 lights and PhaseOne SK 80mm f/2.8 LS D at f/11 1/200th and ISO 50

Here are our first two sample images from the Leaf Credo 80 and PhaseOne IQ180. They both use the same 80 megapixel Dalsa chip, and the files were taken on the same camera with the same settings for both shots. This means that any differences are in the profiles and processing which the cameras did while recording the data captured when the photograph was taken. They were processed through capture one with absolutely no corrections to white balance, sharpness, contrast or anything else.
As we can see these images a very close. Certainly in terms of resolution and sharpness there is absolutely no difference. The PhaseOne IQ180 (right) seems to me to be a to have a tiny bit more contrast and a slight bit of saturation in the colors. For reference, I am looking at the eyes, scales to the right and carpet in the background when making these assertions. All and all very very close and nothing that couldn’t be changed in one to make it look like the other, so here we see no real difference.
Our next test images, were shot using a live subject’s hand to show off the skin tones capabilities of these cameras. This test was done for someone who came in, a PhaseOne P65+ user who works in fashion and wanted to compare the P65+, IQ180 and Leaf Credo 80. He knew he wanted the upgraded resolution offered by an 80 megapixel sensor but was now unsure as to whether he should be a PhaseOne or Leaf 80mp back. For me it would be a no-contest, however as he mentioned, he had heard things about the way that the Leaf digital backs handle skin tones and wanted to have some shots for reference to see if this was correct. Leaf made their name with their ICC profiles released for digital backs in 1992 with Leaf DCB. They have always focused on creating a range of profiles to accommodate and accurately render different skin tones.
PhaseOne P65+ and PhaseOne IQ180 and Leaf Credo 80 Sample Image Comparisons
PhaseOne IQ180 (Left) PhaseOne P65+ (Middle) Leaf Credo 80 (Right)
PhaseOne 645DF with SK 80mm f/2.8 LSD and Profoto Lights at ISO 50 f/11 and 1/200th
As you can see the 80mp files beat the 60mp PhaseOne P65+ in hand. They are more then acceptable files and of course all beat anything else out there in terms of resolution, dynamic range and so on. When looking at the 80mp files up against the P65+ we can see that they are worlds ahead. Looking at the joint above the ring we again can see that the Leaf and the PhaseOne are very close. As we observed above the PhaseOne seems to be slightly more contrasty and saturated then the file from the Leaf Credo 80. The Leaf Credo 80 seems to have recorded the skin tones in a much more neutral way which I suppose might make it more accurate and give you a blank slate to work from. Personally, having never compared a Leaf and PhaseOne file side by side would have been that the Phase and the Leaf results would have been flipped. I like to start with the a file when I am editing as natural as it can be and then work my way up to the results I want, the Leaf would certainly allow me to do this, but the PhaseOne IQ180 is right up there and certainly the Credo 80 File could be made to look like the IQ180 file and the IQ180 file could be made to look like the Credo 80 file with a little bit of work. That being said the Leaf certainly has a bit of an edge in the accurate skin tone reproduction category.  The P65+ isn’t even in contention here, seemingly possessing a slightly greenish hue to it.
Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 Sample Images ISO Series Performance
As you can see from this ISO series the Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 handles its entire ISO range very very well. This is not surprising since the PhaseOne IQ180, also handles its ISO range very well. Of course, by very well, I mean better then the higher ISO’s on previous MFDB’s. But since I own and use the IQ180 I can say with some confidence that these files look a little better coming out of camera then the IQ180 files do in noise performance. This could also be attributable to the fact that the cameras process the images differently as we talked about above. This is also a good transition into our next section, looking at the differences between the Mamiya Leaf Credo and the PhaseOne IQ series of MFDB’s. Especially if you look at the complete file (again, dropbox link below) you can see that, although there are significant impacts on the image quality at the higher ISO’s, if you step back and look at the file as a whole, its very impressive the way it these backs are still able to handle subtle graduations and shadows; of course not as well as the lower ISO’s. And it should be noted that this is still pre-release firmware so it is possible that in subsequent updates they will improve the cameras handling of high ISO’s before the camera starts shipping.
Compared to the Competition 
PhaseOne owns Leaf and is a majority shareholder in Mamiya. It seems that they will eventually merge them into one company (starting with Mamiya + Leaf becoming “Mamiya Leaf” which they have now decided to market jointly ) but no matter what they do the fact remains that these companies are not exactly competing anymore. This is more then apparent in the fact that they Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 and the PhaseOne IQ180 share the exact same sensor and more or less the same body work. However, there are still differences in the cameras, which will make one or the other appealing. On the surface, the differentiating factor between the PhaseOne and the Leaf is the price. So, what do you get for your extra ~$5,000. One major feature that should be noted is that the PhaseOne IQ series, includes the focus mask (which you know from Capture One) on the digital back itself. This is extremely helpful for checking focus in the field. This is especially helpful when using technical cameras, because you lack the ability to check focus through a viewfinder like on SLR style medium format cameras.
Another key difference is Sensor+. Sensor+ is PhaseOne’s technology, which allows for the use of the entire sensor, at lower resolutions to allow for an extended range of improved ISO performance. It lets the IQ180 get up to ISO 3200 at 20mp and significantly increases the shooting speed of the system. This feature is not included on the Mamiya Leaf Credo series of digital backs. The feature, may not be useful to some, especially if they are only shooting the camera in a studio where they will almost always be using the lower ISO’s. However, there are times when I have been caught in situations where I had the wrong camera, and it was nice to be able to pop the camera into Sensor+ and be able to still create useable shots in the ISO 800 to ISO 1600 range.
Now, going the other way, there are some things that the Mamiya Leaf Credo has that the IQ180 does not. The Mamiya Leaf Credo, as we discussed changes the button layout, and entirely removes them from the back of the camera. It also has a USB 3.0 connection on the left hand side of the camera, which is something that the PhaseOne IQ series does not have. Another interesting development, for the Hasselblad V mount version of this camera, is the ability to mount it vertically or horizontally, which had previously only been possible with the Aptus-II 12R with its internally rotating sensor. The Credo on the other hand can either be mounted in one direction or the other, which can be helpful depending on how you use your camera. I see it as less of an advantage when using a Hasselblad V series camera, but more so on technical cameras and for scientific applications where the cameras orientation can effect workflows and results.
There are also some features absent from the Credo which were available on the Aptus series of digital backs, other then the aforementioned rotatable sensor available on the V/AFi mounts of the Aptus. The flip up screen is also gone from the AFi interface, so if this helped you, you may be missing it. Unlike the Aptus series, the Credo cannot apply profiles in camera, i.e the ability to add metadata and so on. Another feature, one that will not be missed, is the old Leaf .MOS format is now gone. The Credo now uses the same format as the PhaseOne IQ ( IIQL/IIQS) and with that Leaf Capture is no more, and and the Credo is fully supported by PhaseOne’s excellent Capture One and it is also supported by Adobe Lightroom and ACR.
Conclusion
All and all the Mamiya Leaf Credo is a much better camera then its predecessors from Leaf. If you had been previously put off of Leaf for some of the issues addressed above, then it might be worth another look, since they have fixed some of the main gripes against the camera. Mainly, its all around exposure to the elements through its open fan on the side of the camera, and externally mounted battery and its poor user interface which had lead the Aptus series of digital backs to be considered by many as studio cameras. The Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 is certainly just as capable of being taken outside like PhaseOne’s digital backs, which have become known for their strength and physical durability.
Deciding whether this camera is for you, now comes down to features and price. The prices for medium format digital cameras are very high, Leaf’s less expensive option for a serious 80mp back for less money will help to open it up to those who had been put off by the slightly higher price of the PhaseOne IQ180, especially if they did not need its added features . If you do not need the features available for the extra money from PhaseOne’s IQ series, then the Leaf is worth a look. Certainly, if you like the way your Leaf back makes images at the moment the Credo is worth a look simply for its improvements ergonomically and functionality wise.
RAW Files
This is a link to the raw files used in this article which were captured with the Mamiya Leaf Credo 80 (also PhaseOne P65+ and PhaseOne IQ180). These files are for private use only and cannot be re-published anywhere else without written consent. By click on the link, you agree to these terms.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/uziquezt32yhrjy/z4PGro1cGv