Home · Register · 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 | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

XT5 to have 40mp sensor

  
 
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


LeonD60 wrote:
Any thoughts on the how the 40mp XT/XH sensor will compare to the 50mp GFX sensor?

I'm asking from an image quality and not a performance perspective.


No way to know, as the 40 MP sensor is purely speculative at this point. No one has a product number to look at the specs. Even the idea of a 40 MP XT5 is just a rumor.

Although, as a rule of thumb, a larger sensor is usually better at noise handling, tonality and transitions between light and dark, and reducing aberrations such as lens diffraction.

But those differences won't be apparent in all situations, and probably not even in most situations.




Jun 28, 2022 at 09:31 AM
Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


gdanmitchell wrote:
A decent way to think about it is that it would be sort of like using a 160MP sensor and then cropping to produce an image that is half as wide and half as tall. (The 33x44 sensor is roughly equivalent to four 1.5x APS-C sensors.)

You cold look at it the other way, too. Taking four carefully positioned 40MP APS-C images and stitching them together could give you the equivalent of one 160M miniMF sensor image. (The current 100MP sensor comes close to doing this when compared to the current 26MP APS-C sensors.)

As to the general "how does it
...Show more

Still failing to understand that image quality is so much more than resolution.



Jun 28, 2022 at 10:23 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Makten wrote:
Still failing to understand that image quality is so much more than resolution.


Still making absurd and unwarranted assumptions rather than addressing real issues.



I'm well aware that "image quality" is a complex and many faceted subject affected by a range of things: the visibility of differences in real world use, the sort of subjects that one photographs, how one photographs, the skill and vision of the photographer, and more.

I was responding to a specific question from a specific poster by proposing one particular way of thinking of the comparison.

The quality of dialog in this forum would improve a whole lot if you would knock of the personalizations and focus on the issues. It would also be useful to recognize that the answer to all photography questions is not "Bigger Sensor!" Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. As you might say, there's so much more to the questions of how to compare sensors and systems.

However, from all indications, I expect that you'll continue to... fail to understand that the discussion of cameras and photography is so much more than insulting the other posters.



Jun 28, 2022 at 10:53 AM
Odinsoffphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Fuji needs better glass way more than they need more megapixels.


Jun 28, 2022 at 01:48 PM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


I think Fuji has often struggled to attract landscape photographers and professional shooters and perhaps the 40 MP sensor is an attempt to wrestle some of those people away from Sony and Canon. But it also really needs to make improvements to autofocus, which might be a matter of new firmware more than a new sensor.

But again, an XT5 with a 40 MP sensor is just a rumor; it's very possible that such a sensor will only be available in an XH2.




Jun 28, 2022 at 02:20 PM
bobby350z
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Odinsoffphotography wrote:
Fuji needs better glass way more than they need more megapixels.


Like better than what GF lenses offer.



Jun 28, 2022 at 03:00 PM
MJKoski
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


There are some real gems. That 23/2 in X100V is hands down best APS-C lens I have ever used. The combo beats most 24MP FF setups with less than spectacular lenses. GF45 is kind of GFX equivalent lens.

More compact cameras please. Like GFX45 with...drumroll...45mm f/2.8 lens.



Jun 28, 2022 at 03:05 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


gdanmitchell wrote:
Still making absurd and unwarranted assumptions rather than addressing real issues.

I'm well aware that "image quality" is a complex and many faceted subject affected by a range of things: the visibility of differences in real world use, the sort of subjects that one photographs, how one photographs, the skill and vision of the photographer, and more.

I was responding to a specific question from a specific poster by proposing one particular way of thinking of the comparison.

The quality of dialog in this forum would improve a whole lot if you would knock of the personalizations and focus on the issues.
...Show more

You responded to a general question about image quality, with an answer that only took resolution into account. As usual.
If one wants better image quality, a larger sensor is almost always a good idea.



Jun 28, 2022 at 03:50 PM
RoamingScott
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Makten wrote:
You responded to a general question about image quality, with an answer that only took resolution into account. As usual.
If one wants better image quality, a larger sensor is almost always a good idea.


Get on this level




Jun 28, 2022 at 04:19 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

rbf_
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


MJKoski wrote:
There are some real gems. That 23/2 in X100V is hands down best APS-C lens I have ever used. The combo beats most 24MP FF setups with less than spectacular lenses. GF45 is kind of GFX equivalent lens.

More compact cameras please. Like GFX45 with...drumroll...45mm f/2.8 lens.


The new 18 and 33 f/1.4 primes are great.



Jun 28, 2022 at 10:44 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


RoamingScott wrote:



Get on this level

http://photographylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Chamonix-4x5-Camera-in-the-Field-960x640.jpg


I probably will at some point.



Jun 29, 2022 at 08:21 AM
bobby350z
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Makten wrote:
I probably will at some point.


Same here. I have been thinking of 4x5 for sometime. It is just that I don't have time for all the film processing stuff and it is not going to be cheap.

These guys aren't that from me, just it is too expensive and no real world samples or reviews from what I know.
http://largesense.com/




Jun 29, 2022 at 09:13 AM
Sauseschritt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


mdude85 wrote:
Although, as a rule of thumb, a larger sensor is usually better

Its the same size as always. APS-C. 24x16mm (approx).

Sensors arent growing. The sensor size of a system doesnt change, ever. Its builtin into the lenses, the lens mount, etc.

So why do people keep refering to smaller pixels as "larger sensor" ? This is a clearly absurd useage of language.

And no, smaller pixels just means less performant, plain and simple. Thats why smaller sensors are less performant, after all, because they have to have smaller pixels if you want the same resolution.

And, otherwise, if smaller pixels would yield better performance - why wouldnt they just give us Gigapixel sensors ? Even if reading such a sensor would take a minute people would still do it if the overall performance would be better. Which of course its not.



RoamingScott wrote:
Get on this level

Single image on a 4x5 or worse 8x10 inch large format costs what, $100 with film by now ? No thanks.



bobby350z wrote:
http://largesense.com/

*shrug* Well, some day such things will be useable, a long time later maybe even affordable.

If you can get hundreds of Megapixels if not Gigapixels from such a thing, it will be of interest for people who want to print REALLY large.



Jun 29, 2022 at 09:45 AM
RoamingScott
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Sauseschritt wrote:
Its the same size as always. APS-C. 24x16mm (approx).

Sensors arent growing. The sensor size of a system doesnt change, ever. Its builtin into the lenses, the lens mount, etc.

So why do people keep refering to smaller pixels as "larger sensor" ? This is a clearly absurd useage of language.

And no, smaller pixels just means less performant, plain and simple. Thats why smaller sensors are less performant, after all, because they have to have smaller pixels if you want the same resolution.

And, otherwise, if smaller pixels would yield better performance - why wouldnt they just give us Gigapixel sensors ? Even
...Show more

A single 8x10 sheet is about 20 bucks. No clue what processing them costs. I'll stick to my $40/roll all in 35mm, which is still insanely expensive compared to the old days.



Jun 29, 2022 at 09:56 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Sauseschritt wrote:
Sensors arent growing. The sensor size of a system doesnt change, ever. Its builtin into the lenses, the lens mount, etc.

So why do people keep refering to smaller pixels as "larger sensor" ? This is a clearly absurd useage of language.

And no, smaller pixels just means less performant, plain and simple. Thats why smaller sensors are less performant, after all, because they have to have smaller pixels if you want the same resolution.

And, otherwise, if smaller pixels would yield better performance - why wouldnt they just give us Gigapixel sensors ? Even if reading such a sensor would take a
...Show more

Oh. My.

Sensors are growing. Photo site density is increasing.

Sensors are growing larger because fabrication systems have lower error rates and because it is now possible to produce large sensors at much lower price points that in the past.

At the same time it is ALSO possible to make sensors with smaller photo sites.

In one sense, you are sort of correct to suggest that a smaller photo site could have lower performance than a larger photo site. It is undeniable that the number of photons collected by a smaller area is lower. But that's not the whole story, and you must know this!

If your claim that using smaller photo sites lead inevitably to a loss in sensor performance were true, by now the 50MP and higher sensors that rely on smaller photo sites would be unusable, and those sweet 3MP sensors we had back around 2000 would be way better!

Maybe it occurs to you that there is a potential weakness in this argument? ;-)

In fact, the "overall performance" of modern, high-density sensors IS "better" than that of the older low-density sensors. It is abundantly clear that the performance of the 50MP FF and the 24MP APS-C sensors that I use today is way better than that of the first digital sensor I used, in a camera that had less than 1MP resolution. It is better than that of the 8 MP APS-C sensor in the first DSLR I owned. It is better than that of the 12 MP sensor of the first FF camera I owned. (Even the 24MP APS-C sensor exceeds the performance of that 12 MP sensor.)

You are correct that if we take two sensors of a given size with different resolutions but otherwise using the exact same level of technology... that the lower resolution sensor will have the potential to collect "more light" per photo site, providing a potential benefit in DR and noise for the lower resolution sensor.

But that's not the real world scenario. Successive generations of sensor design produce increasingly better quality of data such that photo site density can be increased while maintaining or even improving the quality of the data collected by the sensor.

It is way past time to stop beating this "image quality will suffer if we increase photo site density" drum.




Jun 29, 2022 at 10:09 AM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


Sauseschritt wrote:
Its the same size as always. APS-C. 24x16mm (approx).

Sensors arent growing. The sensor size of a system doesnt change, ever. Its builtin into the lenses, the lens mount, etc.

So why do people keep refering to smaller pixels as "larger sensor" ? This is a clearly absurd useage of language.



The question posed in the thread was how the 40mp XH sensor will compare to the 50mp GFX sensor. Those are in fact two different sized sensors (APS-C vs medium format).







Jun 29, 2022 at 11:46 AM
Sauseschritt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · XT5 to have 40mp sensor


gdanmitchell wrote:
Sensors are growing larger because fabrication systems have lower error rates and because it is now possible to produce large sensors at much lower price points that in the past.

That mostly means sensors for a given size get cheaper and cheaper.

Until something new and expensive is invented, like the backlit technology.

Which we can see for example in the Fujifilm GFX100S and GFX50S II - the price difference between those two seems to be exclusively the increased cost for the newer sensor with backlit technology.


gdanmitchell wrote:
If your claim that using smaller photo sites lead inevitably to a loss in sensor performance were true,

I said no such thing. Obviously advancement of technology makes it possible to have smaller photosites with same or better performance.

The problem is simply have there been technological improvements that will allow a 50% increase in pixels, as it happends to be between 26 and 40 megapixels, without loss of noise to signal.

Besides large photosites are still used with current technology. A while ago I came across a sensor for astronomy - the real deal, the multimillion many meter in diameter optical ones - and it had a pixel size of 15 µm. If it was a full frame sensor, it would produce a 2400x1600 image. Of course it was also large format, so it actually had 100 Megapixels. Thats what people use when maximum performance is demanded.


gdanmitchell wrote:
But that's not the real world scenario. Successive generations of sensor design produce increasingly better quality of data such that photo site density can be increased while maintaining or even improving the quality of the data collected by the sensor.

You can never have better than 100% performance, no matter what you do. Thats why improvements in sensor technology get smaller and smaller.




RoamingScott wrote:
A single 8x10 sheet is about 20 bucks. No clue what processing them costs. I'll stick to my $40/roll all in 35mm, which is still insanely expensive compared to the old days.


Hmm I remember seeing it for 70 bucks (dollars). Probably depends upon the type. Or the price has fallen again (it was years ago).




mdude85 wrote:
The question posed in the thread was how the 40mp XH sensor will compare to the 50mp GFX sensor. Those are in fact two different sized sensors (APS-C vs medium format).

Oh OK, then I misread and need to read more carefully in future.




Jun 30, 2022 at 02:39 AM
1       2      
3
       end






FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password