Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

end

Archive 2022 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

Robin Smith wrote:
Ouch. Intestinal?

That's an interesting prospect. ;-)

Jun 15, 2022 at 05:35 PM

MJKoski
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

R5 files are mangled in-camera already at base ISO. Sony 50MP 4:3 CMOS imager is tried and true base ISO champ which excels at super long exposures. 8min ISO100 without LENR? No problem at +20C. It goes easily to 15min at subzero temp.

R5 seems bad and noisy when it comes to long exposures. Saw examples of local photog who tested multiminute stuff. This was ~2 years ago. Firmware upgrades may have introduced more filtering and thus less noisy results.

Jun 19, 2022 at 07:30 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

MJKoski wrote:
R5 files are mangled in-camera already at base ISO. Sony 50MP 4:3 CMOS imager is tried and true base ISO champ which excels at super long exposures. 8min ISO100 without LENR? No problem at +20C. It goes easily to 15min at subzero temp.

R5 seems bad and noisy when it comes to long exposures. Saw examples of local photog who tested multiminute stuff. This was ~2 years ago. Firmware upgrades may have introduced more filtering and thus less noisy results.

"Mangled?" "Bad and noisy?"

Hyperbole much?

Jun 19, 2022 at 10:26 AM

woodstork
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

I went through this comparison with GFX100, Nikon Z7, and Panasonic S1R. My use cases drive which system(s) I kept. IQ and print enlargement potential are not as different as the specifications imply. Can make gorgeous very large prints from any of these systems. The field craft is easier for full frame systems and the post processing easier for GFX files. I’m an old fart, so easier field craft wins the day.

Jun 21, 2022 at 04:12 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

woodstork wrote:
I went through this comparison with GFX100, Nikon Z7, and Panasonic S1R. My use cases drive which system(s) I kept. IQ and print enlargement potential are not as different as the specifications imply. Can make gorgeous very large prints from any of these systems. The field craft is easier for full frame systems and the post processing easier for GFX files. I’m an old fart, so easier field craft wins the day.

A lot of folks should read and digest this post. The "use case" makes all the difference.

I had a long discussion with a colleague who moved from LF film to MF film to Phase One backs to Pentax and then Fujifilm miniMF a few years back. I was expressing my interest in the miniMF format at the time and my friend, who is both a very experienced photographer and well-acquainted with my work, pointed out the obvious: I relied on types of lenses and modes of shooting that were not compatible with the design of the larger sensor cameras at that point... and that both could produce excellent photographs.

I still keep hoping for the lenses that would persuade me that I could use a miniMF system, but my "use case" also currently rules out the larger system... and I, too, can make large and excellent prints from what I use.

Friends, including the one I mentioned, have made a different choice since their lens and other needs are well met by the Fujifilm system, and that makes sense to me, too.

Dan

Edited on Jun 21, 2022 at 11:06 PM · View previous versions

Jun 21, 2022 at 05:59 PM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

In person you can be certain that there are visible pant stains every time he types miniMF.

Jun 21, 2022 at 06:34 PM

Sauseschritt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

Luis Cunha wrote:
Yes, it must be identical, but as they are different machines launched at different times...

The GFX 100 and GFX 100S have the same sensor and got released pretty close to each other.

Fujifilm is famous for keeping their cameras updated, so the post processing should be the same.

The only thing I could think of that might have changed is that Fujifilm changed something about the sensor. The base sensor is however the exact same as everybody else.

So the only thing they could have changed would be the color matrix, or the microlenses.

I mean ... maybe ? Its not impossible. But still rather unlikely.

Thats why I would reasonably expect the output to be 1:1 the same between those two cameras.

P.s.: The reason I'm so sure they didnt change anything about the sensor itself is because if Sony would allow them in any way, you could be sure they would have added phase pixels to the 50 Megapixel sensor. No such luck.

P.s.: The output also pretty much stayed the same between most 16, 24 and 26 megapixel cameras on the Fujifilm X system. I say most because some of the cheap options had a Bayer color matrix instead of a Trans-X color matrix.

Jun 22, 2022 at 08:31 AM

molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

MJKoski wrote:
R5 files are mangled in-camera already at base ISO. Sony 50MP 4:3 CMOS imager is tried and true base ISO champ which excels at super long exposures. 8min ISO100 without LENR? No problem at +20C. It goes easily to 15min at subzero temp.

Canon has to resort to baking in the noise reduction, because they still can't develop a sensor that competes with Sony. Did Canon ever fix their banding issues?

Jun 22, 2022 at 08:54 AM

Jesse Evans
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

molson wrote:
Canon has to resort to baking in the noise reduction, because they still can't develop a sensor that competes with Sony. Did Canon ever fix their banding issues?

They had to bake in noise reduction that nobody has been able to demonstrate a difference in 😅

Jun 22, 2022 at 10:46 AM

molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

Jesse Evans wrote:
They had to bake in noise reduction that nobody has been able to demonstrate a difference in 😅

If your expectations are low enough, you'll seldom be disappointed.

Jun 22, 2022 at 12:49 PM

RoamingScott
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

gdanmitchell wrote:
"Mangled?" "Bad and noisy?"

Hyperbole much?

Ever owned an R5? I have. There is non-optional NR applied from base ISO to about ISO 500 because of the sensor's weaknesses, and it looks BAD.

Jun 22, 2022 at 02:17 PM

fotografur
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

RoamingScott wrote:
Ever owned an R5? I have. There is non-optional NR applied from base ISO to about ISO 500 because of the sensor's weaknesses, and it looks BAD.

Wow that's crazy. I never knew that.

Jun 22, 2022 at 02:54 PM

Jesse Evans
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

RoamingScott wrote:
Ever owned an R5? I have. There is non-optional NR applied from base ISO to about ISO 500 because of the sensor's weaknesses, and it looks BAD.

Do you have examples of this bad look?

Jun 22, 2022 at 03:05 PM

Jesse Evans
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

I currently have in my possession:

Sony A1
Sony A7sIII
Canon R3
Canon R5
Fuji GFX 100s

If anybody has ideas for what test criteria they would like to use to prove the horrendous nature of the R5 noise reduction, I’m happy to oblige.

It is almost, if not entirely, a nothingburger based on my experience with these cameras shooting landscape, wildlife, and portraits. I’m happy to be proven wrong tho.

Perhaps a test scene with a 4-7 stop under exposure?

The only camera in the bunch with a notable difference to the others is the GFX 100s in my experience.

Jun 22, 2022 at 03:16 PM

RoamingScott
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

Nope, dumped my test files when I dumped my Canon setup. The effect is similar to phone beauty filters, rendering details waxy at low ISOs where details should be at their most defined.

You need to divest some of those largely similar bodies before depreciation eats you alive!

Jesse Evans wrote:
Do you have examples of this bad look?

Jun 22, 2022 at 03:24 PM

Jesse Evans
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

RoamingScott wrote:
Nope, dumped my test files when I dumped my Canon setup. The effect is similar to phone beauty filters, rendering details waxy at low ISOs where details should be at their most defined.

You need to divest some of those largely similar bodies before depreciation eats you alive!

Well then who would be left to disprove statements like these :-)

Jun 22, 2022 at 03:31 PM

Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

Jesse Evans wrote:
I currently have in my possession:

Sony A1
Sony A7sIII
Canon R3
Canon R5
Fuji GFX 100s

If anybody has ideas for what test criteria they would like to use to prove the horrendous nature of the R5 noise reduction, I’m happy to oblige.

It is almost, if not entirely, a nothingburger based on my experience with these cameras shooting landscape, wildlife, and portraits. I’m happy to be proven wrong tho.

Perhaps a test scene with a 4-7 stop under exposure?

The only camera in the bunch with a notable difference to the others is the GFX 100s in my experience.

If you can see the difference between the GFX 100s and the R5, then you are already seeing the effects of noise reduction. The baked in noise reduction if you ignored it on tests would suggest that the R5 would perform very similarly to the GFX 100s that it doesn't suggests you can see the effects of the noise reduction.

Here are the photo dynamic range number for those cameras from photons to photos

Sony A1 - 11.36
Sony 7s III - 11.22
Canon R3 -11.91
Canon R5 - 11.85
Fuji GFX 100s - 12.33

Now you generally need about a stop of higher DR to see it. Bill Claff suggests that the Canon's are probably about two thirds of a stop higher (i.e., their DR score is inflated by .66)) on his DR score because of the baked in noise reduction. This would put the Canon R3 at 11.25 and the Canon R5 at 11.19. That puts your full frame cameras as all performing very similarly, and the GFX performing about a stop better. You should be able to see better performance from the GFX 100s (as you do) and you shouldn't be able to see differences in the FF cameras (and you don't), so your observations are exactly what you would expect if the Canon cameras are baking in noise reduction which hides their very slightly worse performance than the Sony A1.

Jun 22, 2022 at 04:03 PM

Jesse Evans
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

Steve Spencer wrote:
If you can see the difference between the GFX 100s and the R5, then you are already seeing the effects of noise reduction. The baked in noise reduction if you ignored it on tests would suggest that the R5 would perform very similarly to the GFX 100s that it doesn't suggests you can see the effects of the noise reduction.

Here are the photo dynamic range number for those cameras from photons to photos

Sony A1 - 11.36
Sony 7s III - 11.22
Canon R3 -11.91
Canon R5 - 11.85
Fuji GFX 100s - 12.33

Now you generally need about a stop of higher DR...Show more →

I agree, and I pointed that out the DR was inflated by NR here https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1757749/0#15950466

The more inflammatory claims from others in this thread is that the files are mangled in a noticeable way. Scott refers to them as a phone beauty filter, for example. They were so horribly mangled by NR that he sold the camera and deleted all of the horrific files. Makten says they're horrible too.

I'm not denying that the NR exists to inflate the PDR rating of the R5. Rather, I don't believe that there is any human perceptible impact from the NR on the files, most evidence indicates NR is applied to the near absolute blackpoint of the file (specifically to fool PDR and DXO DR tests) and doesn't have any noticeable impact on the files.

It's been 2 years now, and I have yet to see a compelling example of the R5 RAW signal processing's impact on files.

I've already tested my cameras in a lot of situations, and it's been fun, it's also taught me there isn't any difference that I can spot in the way I process files. Perhaps if I were more in to surrealist style processing with extreme pushes I might notice them. That is why I'm offering to put up a test between these cameras for those that have an idea for how to prove their claims :-)

Jun 22, 2022 at 05:00 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

When it comes to the question of whether and how today's digital cameras produce raw files, well, "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

Fujifilm, cough, would, cough, cough, NEVER, cough, do such, cough, a thing.

At this point, I'm pretty sure that just about all (and maybe literally all) camera companies are doing some processing of the image data between the sensor and the generation of the raw file, perhaps directly on the photo site luminosity data and perhaps indirectly by baking things like lens optimization data and NR into the files.

On a separate note, when folks hyperbolically characterize something that is actually pretty good and regarded as such by a whole lot of people using loaded language such as "phone beauty filters," "it looks BAD," and the like, they mostly just destroy their own credibility.

If their position held water they could probably just state it, back it up, and show some real evidence. I'm reminded of the legal aphorism: “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”

Lots of table pounding and yelling. I guess it is a symptom of the time we live in...

Jun 22, 2022 at 06:17 PM

RoamingScott
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Sensor GFX50R vs R5

A lot of words for no first hand experience. When in doubt, bloviate until everyone else loses interest.

What’s with all the goalpost moving? Anyone that has kept up with Canon knows they are “cheating” with their sensors by baking in NR to their RAWs at a much more aggressive rate than any other brand.

Just because you can’t see it, or see worms In Fuji files, doesn’t mean these things are fake or overblown. It means you lack a critical eye to critical detail. That’s fine, and at this point obvious. Calling the critique of such things “table pounding” is absurd.

gdanmitchell wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether and how today's digital cameras produce raw files, well, "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

Fujifilm, cough, would, cough, cough, NEVER, cough, do such, cough, a thing.

At this point, I'm pretty sure that just about all (and maybe literally all) camera companies are doing some processing of the image data between the sensor and the generation of the raw file, perhaps directly on the photo site luminosity data and perhaps indirectly by baking things like lens optimization data and NR into the files.

On a separate note, when...Show more →

Jun 22, 2022 at 06:46 PM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Fuji Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.