Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.2 #1 · Fujifilm GFX 50R Medium Format for only $3,499! ($1000 Off) | |
gdanmitchell wrote:
Test subjects usually are.
Regarding the rest, the specific subject of that test was to see if we could detect any system resolution advantage from going to the larger sensor system. That is why we were very careful about focus and camera stability and why we chose a subject with a great deal of detail (all those leaves and branches) and a dynamic range that fell well within the range of both cameras.
Pointing out that the test didn't test the things that the test tested is, well, perhaps argumentative? I never claimed that the test said anything beyond what it says. In fact, the image samples were shared (both in person as prints and online, accompanied by printable examples) with the sources fo the files anonymized and randomized so that no one knew which samples were which.
So the specific points I make about differences in the matter addressed by the test are valid.
Note also that my primary point is not that there is no difference. It is that a) the difference is very small and b) that it was only visible at very large print sizes.
As to the other factors (dynamic range, noise, high ISO performance, etc.) a few points seem worth considering — and these do NOT come from the test I did. I've mentioned them almost every time I've posted on this, so I'm not confident that some folks will get it if I do it once more, but here goes.
1. A camera with a larger sensor will, if all else is equal, have the capability to produce lower noise, higher system resolution, increased dynamic range, and so forth.
2. The Fujifilm GFX cameras perform very well and produce excellent image quality, as do other cameras using the 33x44mm miniMF format.
3. Photographers need to consider the magnitude of those improvements and the baseline against which they are measured.
4. Photographers need to assess the pluses and minuses of moving from one format to another relative to a range of parameters: cost, size, weight, lens availability, other camera performance issues besides image quality, the potential for improving real-world final photographic results in the work they do, etc.
5. Photographers will come to different conclusions based on those assessments. For some a larger format will make sense. For some it will not.
6. Lens availability is a significant issue for many but not all photographers. For those whose photography can be done just as well with the existing lens options for the Fujifilm GFX system it may not be an issue at all. For photographers whose photography has come to rely on the range of lenses available for FF systems this can be the deciding factor.
7. High MP FF camera systems from various manufacturers already produce outstanding image quality, so the performance baseline is already rather high when comparing FF to miniMF systems. (This does not suggest that there is no difference, only that it is perhaps between very good and a bit better than very good.)
A simple way of looking at this is to say that, for example, a photographer using a FF system needs to decide whether his/her ability to produce photographs of excellent quality will be increased or decreased by moving to a larger sensor system, and at the cost of making the change. For some (such as Steve) the answer is that it is worth making the switch. For some (like me) the disadvantages current outweigh the advantages.
Finally, if someone can produce an unbiased, blind test of the other parameters and conduct in the way that I did — open to any possible true results — I imagine that I can Steve and many others would welcome this.
As always, YMMV.
Dan
...Show more →
Well simply put if, "the specific subject of that test was to see if we could detect any system resolution advantage from going to the larger sensor system," the test should have had a lot more fine detail to be detected. The test was what it was, but IMO, it was a pretty poor test subject to use to try to examine resolution advantages. I don't expect you to acknowledge the weaknesses of your test, but I do think it is important to point out those weaknesses, so that other people can properly evaluate the test. It is not argumentative. It is providing context which you did not provide for the tests. You are right that I would welcome further testing, and I hope other people can do that. What is particularly important now is comparing high pixel density FF cameras with the high pixel density 44 X 33 sensor in the GFX 100. I think there the resolution advantages will be much more clear. Jim Kasson has done some of these tests already if you want to check out his blog. The small but clear advantages of the GFX 50s and 50r that he was able to demonstrate become very clear and substantial with the new sensor.
Dan is right, however, whether these differences matter to you and whether you can justify the much higher price will be a very personal decision that some people can justify and others cannot.
|
