sebboh Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.5 #1 · p.5 #1 · Landscape Photog needs help deciding on M 3/4 system | |
sebboh wrote:
I don't see that fuji has more of a FF look than the a6000 at all,
curious80 wrote:
I never said Fuji has more FF look than A6000. I was talking specifically about some of the Fuji 35mm 1.4 images.
i think the fuji 35/1.4 is the best native normal lens right now for aps-c (in terms attractive look, not necessarily cross the frame sharpness). i don't think it looks as nice as a c/y 35/1.4 on aps-c though and i don't see anything particularly FFish about either of them. aps-c shots look the same to me as slower lenses on FF for the most part.
sebboh wrote:
but the fuji lenses are generally a little better, a little faster, and a little bigger than the sony lenses (e.g. fuji 18/2 vs sony 20/2.8, fuji 23/1.4 vs ZA 24/1.8, fuji 35/1.4 vs sony 35/1.8 OSS, fuji 56/1.2 vs sony 50/1.8 OSS, the zooms follow the same pattern too).
curious80 wrote:
Which is exactly what I said that the difference OP is seeing in A6000 vs Fuji image threads might partly be because Fuji images are benefiting from faster, higher quality native lenses.
it's possible, but seems unlikely to me. i think the same shots taken with the fuji equivalents and processed similarly would look pretty much the same (honestly, i think most modern lenses draw the same boring way). in any event, the OP's most used lens would be the same on both the a6000 and the fuji so the better native lenses would only be an issue later on if he decides he wants to expand his lineup. for landscape pixel peeping the xtrans sensor would still bug me though.
|