Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              80      
81
       82       83       end
  

Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
  
 
rbf_
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #1 · p.81 #1 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)



Has anyone seen the new Cambo Actus for GFX mini view camera Cambo released? Just found this and it looks only a couple of weeks old.

https://blog.cambo.com/2017/03/02/cambo-actus-gfx-for-fujifilm-gfx50s/



Mar 19, 2017 at 11:51 PM
nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #2 · p.81 #2 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

Take a look at the Fuji GFX, D810, a7rII and K-1, then making rations from the three FF cameras but dividing the dxo DR numbes by the photonstopotos we get a multiplier of about 1.25. Then taking the 12 the GFX earns by a factor of 1.25, it appears the GFX will have about 15.25 stops in DXO terms. Not sure how accurate that is, but seems to hold.

If this is true, we'll see, but I was hoping for closer to 16 stops, if not 16.



Mar 20, 2017 at 01:25 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #3 · p.81 #3 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


nehemiahphoto wrote:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

Take a look at the Fuji GFX, D810, a7rII and K-1, then making rations from the three FF cameras but dividing the dxo DR numbes by the photonstopotos we get a multiplier of about 1.25. Then taking the 12 the GFX earns by a factor of 1.25, it appears the GFX will have about 15.25 stops in DXO terms. Not sure how accurate that is, but seems to hold.

If this is true, we'll see, but I was hoping for closer to 16 stops, if not 16.


You can't determine DXO score so precisely from these measurements. The two measurements are correlated but not perfectly. In fact there is a fair bit of variation. He actually has a plot of the relationship between the scores. What is important is that it looks like the GFX will have about a third of a stop more dynamic range than the D810 and about half of a stop more than the A7rII. Not a huge difference, but enough to notice in some situations.



Mar 20, 2017 at 02:06 AM
nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #4 · p.81 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Steve Spencer wrote:
You can't determine DXO score so precisely from these measurements. The two measurements are correlated but not perfectly. In fact there is a fair bit of variation. He actually has a plot of the relationship between the scores. What is important is that it looks like the GFX will have about a third of a stop more dynamic range than the D810 and about half of a stop more than the A7rII. Not a huge difference, but enough to notice in some situations.


Right on Steve, I found some variation, but estimated about 1.25 multiplier across the metrics. I could have taken a larger sample than 5 cameras though. But at base ISO for the A7rii we are looking at 13.9 according to DXO, while the ISO 64 on the d810 has a 14.8, which is already almost a stop. I think the GFX50 will be about a half stop better than the d810, or closer 1.5 stops better than the a7rii, which has real implications for some applications.



Mar 20, 2017 at 02:13 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #5 · p.81 #5 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


nehemiahphoto wrote:
Right on Steve, I found some variation, but estimated about 1.25 multiplier across the metrics. I could have taken a larger sample than 5 cameras though. But at base ISO for the A7rii we are looking at 13.9 according to DXO, while the ISO 64 on the d810 has a 14.8, which is already almost a stop. I think the GFX50 will be about a half stop better than the d810, or closer 1.5 stops better than the a7rii, which has real implications for some applications.


Having both the D810 and D750, I am very impressed with the DR of both at base ISO's. I must admit there is diminishing returns with DR if I move to the GFX. This is base ISO's of course and as the ISO increase the D750 is better, but I am very impressed with the GFX overall




Mar 20, 2017 at 03:07 AM
nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #6 · p.81 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


charles.K wrote:
Having both the D810 and D750, I am very impressed with the DR of both at base ISO's. I must admit there is diminishing returns with DR if I move to the GFX. This is base ISO's of course and as the ISO increase the D750 is better, but I am very impressed with the GFX overall



I agree with you Charles. The d750 is better than the A7rii, especially regarding highlights. It's actually noticeable. I am a bit disappointed though, to me, one of the big reasons to bump up sensor sizes is DR.



Mar 20, 2017 at 03:23 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #7 · p.81 #7 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


nehemiahphoto wrote:
I agree with you Charles. The d750 is better than the A7rii, especially regarding highlights. It's actually noticeable. I am a bit disappointed though, to me, one of the big reasons to bump up sensor sizes is DR.


The other aspect is the very smooth tonal graduation with mini MF. I have still many old film MF shots with my Hasselblad and the difference compared with my 35mm film shots is large. It is not just DR, but the overall completeness in feel to images that often is hard to quantify. Of course for many photographers there is absolutely no need to upgrade including myself



Mar 20, 2017 at 03:31 AM
Henry Lydecker
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #8 · p.81 #8 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


I very (very) briefly tried out the GFX 50S at my Digidirect in Sydney. I just used the 63mm lens, as if for some reason I could justify the cost of a "budget" digital medium format, the 50ish mm equivalent lens would be essential for me. The camera handles very well, despite the chunkiness of the sensor/lcd assembly. I was surprised how big the lenses were in person, I expected them to be smaller. But they still aren't that big for medium format digital.

From my super quick impressions, here are the pros and cons vs the A7rII:

Pros
-Larger sensor advantages
-More comfortable grip
-Nicer viewfinder for big nosed folk
-VASTLY better rear screen for image review
-Raw files require less editing (for me)
-Colours are nicer out of camera
-aperture control on lenses is always great (take note Sony/Zeiss)

Neutral
-Aspect ratio better or worse depending on subject

Cons
-Price
-Size
-Auto focus seems much slower/less reliable
-Much more annoying viewfinder blackout
-Somehow less responsive in some ways?

Many of these cons could go away with more use and firmware updates. Over all I was surprised how similar the images were to those I can get from my A7rII. Which is great for me :P But I do have a feeling in use and with more time the GFX 50S could be really great for the "slower" shooting that digital MF has traditionally occupied. And it was surprisingly good for casual candid photography.

These images were processed lightly from raws in lightroom, starting with the "classic chrome" profile.


GFX 50S Test 1 by Henry Lydecker, on Flickr


GFX 50S Test 2 by Henry Lydecker, on Flickr

I know this isn't a good comparison, but here's a photo in similar light conditions taken with my A7rII at Digidirect, with the Batis 85 at f/2.8


Zeiss Batis 85 Test 2 by Henry Lydecker, on Flickr



Mar 20, 2017 at 04:43 AM
nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #9 · p.81 #9 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


charles.K wrote:
The other aspect is the very smooth tonal graduation with mini MF. I have still many old film MF shots with my Hasselblad and the difference compared with my 35mm film shots is large. It is not just DR, but the overall completeness in feel to images that often is hard to quantify. Of course for many photographers there is absolutely no need to upgrade including myself


Yes. I am interested in this too. I remember reading Ming didn't initially believe the d810 was worth the upgrade from the d800, but the smoothness of tonal gradations had been tweaked by Nikon to be significantly more natural to the point where it was absolutely appreciatable, but as you say, this would be very subtly when viewing and hard to quantify.

I have noticed a certain smoothness with different FF cameras, and in obvious many lenses. The extreme tonal smoothness is spectacular, and spacial transitions are key



Mar 20, 2017 at 05:28 AM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #10 · p.81 #10 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


I got my GFX a few days ago and I am very impressed. This is my first Fuji camera though so I am still sorting out a few detail. AF is slower than my A7r ii but not by much. Despite studio scene test on Dpreview, I have to say that resolution of GFX is significantly better than my A7r ii. Using 63/2.8 on GFX vs Sony 50/1.4 on A7r ii on landscape scene at closer to infinity distance shows significant differences in detail at 100% cropped all over the frame.
So far I am very impressed but still trying to figure out all the various color profile on Fuji and ideal setting on Fuji for me. I am still waiting for the 120/4 and the zoom to arrive hopefully in the next couple of days.



Mar 20, 2017 at 07:43 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #11 · p.81 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


nehemiahphoto wrote:
I am a bit disappointed though, to me, one of the big reasons to bump up sensor sizes is DR.


DR is related to but not determined by sensor size. Fundamentally it comes down to the difference between the saturation point (full well capacity) and the noise floor. Larger pixels can store more charge, but at the same time it can increase read noise, so the net gain is less than expected.

nehemiahphoto wrote:
But at base ISO for the A7rii we are looking at 13.9 according to DXO, while the ISO 64 on the d810 has a 14.8, which is already almost a stop. I think the GFX50 will be about a half stop better than the d810, or closer 1.5 stops better than the a7rii, which has real implications for some applications.


The D810 sensor is special, being the only 4th generation Exmor in production. The increased well depth over the 3rd generation (D800/A7R) is responsible for the increased DR (along with the base sensitivity of ISO 64).

The 5th generation Exmor is a BSI version of the 3rd generation pixel structure, this is why the A7RII doesn't have the DR of the D810 (but does have increased sensitivity in low light). I believe the 6th generation is supposed to have the increased well depth too so we should see a similar bump in DR when those sensors make it into a production camera.

Long story short, I wouldn't upgrade to the GFX for DR alone, as we could see a 35mm sensor with new technology this year whilst the GFX line will take longer to benefit from this (due to the slower product cycle of MF).



Mar 20, 2017 at 08:57 AM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #12 · p.81 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


here are some samples.

GFX with 63/2.8 @ f8, iso 100 on tripod, cable release


A7r ii with Sony [email protected], ISO 100 on tripod, cable release


Both single focus to the same building, imported raw file into PS for resize and conversion to jpg only. Both with AWB.

Here is the 100% crop to 800x800 pixels. I did not resize GFX file to the same size as A7r ii before cropping.

Left A7r ii, right GFX




Mar 20, 2017 at 09:08 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #13 · p.81 #13 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Matt Grum wrote:
DR is related to but not determined by sensor size. Fundamentally it comes down to the difference between the saturation point (full well capacity) and the noise floor. Larger pixels can store more charge, but at the same time it can increase read noise, so the net gain is less than expected.

The D810 sensor is special, being the only 4th generation Exmor in production. The increased well depth over the 3rd generation (D800/A7R) is responsible for the increased DR (along with the base sensitivity of ISO 64).

The 5th generation Exmor is a BSI version of the 3rd generation
...Show more

I think it all depends how much you care about DR. If you care about it enough to consider buying a D810 for its increased DR, then you might consider a GFX for its gain over the D810 which would give you about the same gain over the D810 as the gain for the D810 over 3rd (or 5th) generation Exmoor sensors. As I understand it, the 6th generation Exmoor is likely to be a BSI version of the 4th, so likely will have similar DR (but likely lower high ISO noise) than the 4th generation. So, if you care about DR the Fuji will still give you a higher level even over the 6th generation Exmoor sensors, but whether that increase is enough to care about is a different matter. Personally, although I have ordered the GFX I don't see the increase in DR as being that big of a deal. Helpful every once in awhile, but not something I would order the camera for. Others, however, will certain feel otherwise.



Mar 20, 2017 at 12:49 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #14 · p.81 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


suteetat wrote:
here are some samples.

GFX with 63/2.8 @ f8, iso 100 on tripod, cable release
http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k485/ballade1/test4_zpsddqpeuy8.jpg

A7r ii with Sony [email protected], ISO 100 on tripod, cable release
http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k485/ballade1/test5_zpsfn1exmdz.jpg

Both single focus to the same building, imported raw file into PS for resize and conversion to jpg only. Both with AWB.

Here is the 100% crop to 800x800 pixels. I did not resize GFX file to the same size as A7r ii before cropping.

Left A7r ii, right GFX

http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k485/ballade1/test-collage_zpsqnxo43nw.jpg


Thanks for these samples, but the A7rII look a bit more exposed making it hard to compare. Can you try to equalize the exposure? I think if you do the files will look a lot more similar, but those are very nice samples from the GFX regardless, and I appreciate the effort to post these.



Mar 20, 2017 at 12:54 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #15 · p.81 #15 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


I got my adapters for the Nikon F and Mamiya 645 for the GFX today. I hope to be able to check out a number of F mount lenses and a couple of Mamiya 645 lenses on the demo unit at Midwest Photo. I have a Milvus 21, 85, & 135; an Otus 28 & 55; and a ZF2 35 f/1.4 in F mount. I also have a Mamiya 55 f/2.8 and 110 f/2.8. I will check out the Milvus 135 for sure as I think it is most likely to work of the F mount lenses, and I will check out the Mamiya lenses which will definitely work, but I want to check the performance. If any one is interested in any of these let me know and I will be sure to take them along when I go.


Mar 20, 2017 at 08:11 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #16 · p.81 #16 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Steve Spencer wrote:
I got my adapters for the Nikon F and Mamiya 645 for the GFX today. I hope to be able to check out a number of F mount lenses and a couple of Mamiya 645 lenses on the demo unit at Midwest Photo. I have a Milvus 21, 85, & 135; an Otus 28 & 55; and a ZF2 35 f/1.4 in F mount. I also have a Mamiya 55 f/2.8 and 110 f/2.8. I will check out the Milvus 135 for sure as I think it is most likely to work of the F mount lenses, and I
...Show more

Nice! I'm interested in if any ~50 mm lens for 24x36 would give a sufficient image circle at 33x33. That would kind of be the same as an 80 mm on 6x6.



Mar 20, 2017 at 08:26 PM
nehemiahphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.81 #17 · p.81 #17 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Matt Grum wrote:
DR is related to but not determined by sensor size. Fundamentally it comes down to the difference between the saturation point (full well capacity) and the noise floor. Larger pixels can store more charge, but at the same time it can increase read noise, so the net gain is less than expected.

The D810 sensor is special, being the only 4th generation Exmor in production. The increased well depth over the 3rd generation (D800/A7R) is responsible for the increased DR (along with the base sensitivity of ISO 64).

The 5th generation Exmor is a BSI version of the 3rd generation
...Show more

I didn't know those sensor specifics so thanks for the info. So what type of DR would you expect on the next gen of Sony ff cameras?



Mar 20, 2017 at 10:14 PM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #18 · p.81 #18 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Steve Spencer wrote:
Thanks for these samples, but the A7rII look a bit more exposed making it hard to compare. Can you try to equalize the exposure? I think if you do the files will look a lot more similar, but those are very nice samples from the GFX regardless, and I appreciate the effort to post these.


For some reason, relatively, Sony matrix metering seems to be 2/3-1 stop higher (assuming T stop on Sony 50/1.4 and Fuji 63/2.8 is the same and iso 100 is actually equal). Shutterspeed on Sony was always about 2/3-1 stop slower.
This morning light is a bit more even. Same setting using aperture priority, matrix metering again. Shutterspeed was 1/100 on Fuji and 1/50 on Sony. In photoshop, I reduced exposure by -0.8 on Sony.
WB was auto on both, using adobe standard for both. I think exposure is closed enough now that it should not be a factor. I think Fuji still out resolved Sony by quite a bit though.

Here is Sony


Here is Fuji


Fuji on the left and Sony on the right


Of course, some of the difference could also be because of the lens. However, in the past I find Sony 50/1.4 very sharp in the center but weaker near the corner. But I think Fuji out resolved
Sony both at focusing point (cluster of buildings in the bottom 100% cropped) and all over the frame.


Edited on Mar 21, 2017 at 05:25 AM · View previous versions



Mar 21, 2017 at 01:38 AM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #19 · p.81 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Steve Spencer wrote:
I got my adapters for the Nikon F and Mamiya 645 for the GFX today. I hope to be able to check out a number of F mount lenses and a couple of Mamiya 645 lenses on the demo unit at Midwest Photo. I have a Milvus 21, 85, & 135; an Otus 28 & 55; and a ZF2 35 f/1.4 in F mount. I also have a Mamiya 55 f/2.8 and 110 f/2.8. I will check out the Milvus 135 for sure as I think it is most likely to work of the F mount lenses, and I
...Show more

I am waiting for Nikon F, Leica M and adapter for my Hasselblad 120/4 CF. Not sure when that will arrive though. I definitely would like to see how Fuji will play with Nikon 105/1.4, Zeiss 135/2 apo and Leica 50/2 apo among other things.




Mar 21, 2017 at 01:44 AM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.81 #20 · p.81 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Have not had much chance to play with GFX yet but here are a couple of shots that I took with 63/2.8.

evening by Suteetat S, on Flickr
Love the way I could work on the shadow. I increased shadow +100 for the foreground on ACR then
adjusted shadow a bit more in PS afterward and the noise level still remains very low.

hua hin2 by Suteetat S, on Flickr

Here is a link for the full size of the last picture.
https://flic.kr/p/RRbL7L



Mar 21, 2017 at 01:49 AM
1       2       3              80      
81
       82       83       end






FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              80      
81
       82       83       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password