A few more from this past summer. I love being able to crop to such a degree that while I am discarding nearly 60-80% of the information from the raw file, I can still get a decent image as I did with the kiteboarding shots below. I can only imagine the benefits that the 100MP sensor allows in this regard.
Jon
GFX 50SGF23mmF4 R LM WR lens23mmf/9.09s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX 50SGF23mmF4 R LM WR lens23mmf/11.01/550s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX 50SGF250mmF4 R LM OIS WR lens250mmf/4.01/1500s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX 50SGF250mmF4 R LM OIS WR lens250mmf/6.41/2400s400 ISO0.0 EV
GFX 50SGF250mmF4 R LM OIS WR lens250mmf/9.01/4000s100 ISO0.0 EV
jbush wrote:
A few more from this past summer. I love being able to crop to such a degree that while I am discarding nearly 60-80% of the information from the raw file, I can still get a decent image as I did with the kiteboarding shots below. I can only imagine the benefits that the 100MP sensor allows in this regard.
Jon
Very true. With the GFX 100S, you can crop down to the miniature "full frame" format and still have a 61MP image with more detail and dynamic range than any full frame camera can produce.
molson wrote:
Very true. With the GFX 100S, you can crop down to the miniature "full frame" format and still have a 61MP image with more detail and dynamic range than any full frame camera can produce.
Agreed. I'm not good enough to always frame the image exactly as it's going to appear in its final form. There's always a lot of talk here about how an XX MP sensor is perfectly fine for a WxH print, but those guys must be much more skilled than I am. I'll take the safety factor any day.
mmm55 wrote:
There's always a lot of talk here about how an XX MP sensor is perfectly fine for a WxH print, but those guys must be much more skilled than I am.
Have you ever noticed how many of those mathematical approaches to determining "optimum" sensor vs. print sizes seem to come from the armchair experts, who never actually make photographs (or just post banal snapshots of their toddler or their cat)?
How large you can print has much more to do with the subject matter and intended use of the print than it does with sensor size or pixel count, and most experienced photographers know that.
I'm not sure if these are the same things. I'm talking about, for example, a 50% crop from a 100MP sensor vs a 50% crop from a 50MP sensor (with the same physical dimensions). Surely there is more information in the crop from the 100MP sensor than the crop from the 50MP sensor, is there not? Ken seems to be talking about downsampling, which, unless I misread it, seems very different.
jbush wrote:
I'm not sure if these are the same things. I'm talking about, for example, a 50% crop from a 100MP sensor vs a 50% crop from a 50MP sensor (with the same physical dimensions). Surely there is more information in the crop from the 100MP sensor than the crop from the 50MP sensor, is there not? Ken seems to be talking about downsampling, which, unless I misread it, seems very different.
Jon
Ken's pontifications are best viewed as being for entertainment purposes only (even according to Ken himself...).
A few miles from our house is an abandoned horse farm. We've watched this go from an active farm to an empty shell in just the last three or four years. Development of new housing is ongoing nearby, so it's possible this property might go in that direction also. GFX 50S II and GF 35-70.
jbush wrote:
I'm not sure if these are the same things. I'm talking about, for example, a 50% crop from a 100MP sensor vs a 50% crop from a 50MP sensor (with the same physical dimensions). Surely there is more information in the crop from the 100MP sensor than the crop from the 50MP sensor, is there not? Ken seems to be talking about downsampling, which, unless I misread it, seems very different.
Jon
take 2x longer lens on gfx50 and has same resolution picture, no need any crop,simply
leonasj wrote:
take 2x longer lens on gfx50 and has same resolution picture, no need any crop,simply
Well of course, but I don't have access to a 2x GF 250mm lens so my point was really that with the 100MP sensor cropping makes it even easier to get the long reach without big (expensive) glass. :^)
jbush wrote:
Well of course, but I don't have access to a 2x GF 250mm lens so my point was really that with the 100MP sensor cropping makes it even easier to get the long reach without big (expensive) glass. :^)
Jon
no need overpriced and not spectacular heavy and big GF250. there are canon sigma and other far better optically lenses via af adapter and they 2-3x cheaper,lighter and faster...
