I see that someone shared the "official Fujifilm list" of lenses to "get maximum benefit" from the 40MP sensor APS-C cameras.
Folks who use Fujifilm and are familiar with their lenses generally regard this list to be marketing nonsense. A few examples:
- The new 27mm f/2.8 R WR is one the list... but the older version of the lens that has the same optics isn't.
- The 16mm f/2.8, which is not generally regarded as one of Fujifilm's sharpest lenses, is on the list. But the much better 16mm f/1.4 WR is not.
- The 35mm f/2 is on the list, but the older 35mm f/1.4 is not. The two lenses are generally regarded as being optically equal or the f/1.4 is regarded as being very slightly sharper.
- The excellent 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4 lens THAT FUJIFILM SELLS IN A KIT WITH THE XT5 is not on the list. ;-)
- The 14mm f/2.8, which is one of the very best lenses that Fujifilm produces, is not on the list.
Most folks recognize that this is pretty much a list that appears to have been put together by Fujifilm marketing to encourage people to buy NEW Fujifilm lenses. :-)
As to whether or not it is worth going to 40MP on a APS-C sensor camera and whether lenses can work well with that... rather than wildly speculating it is better to wait and see how it turns out as folks get their hands on the camera.
(For my part, I made a few real-world photographs yesterday using the XT5 with the 27mm f/2.8 R WR and they show quite a bit of detail. I've briefly used the 50-140 and the 16-55, but only while going through the manual. I'm anxious to see how my other primes work, including the 90mm f/2 and the 80mm f/2.8 macro.)
Finally, as I've written a few times, most people with a 26MP camera from the previous generation, such as the XT4, probably aren't going to see life-changing improvements in the image quality or, for that matter, astonishing improvements in other aspects of their camera's performance. The XT5 and XH2 are "better," but the days of needing to get every single upgrade are behind us now. However, people just getting into Fujifilm, moving from a different model to XT, or who skipped a generation or more of updates are likely to appreciate a number of the improvements to AF, IBIS, and more... along with the higher resolution sensor.
newhaven wrote:
These are sharp lenses, but what apertures have been used? The xh2 has very small pixels. For best results you do not want to stop down very much.
It looks like you were careful about how you worded that, with is good!
If you are looking to see _improved_ image resolution from the 40MP sensor, you might want to optimize the likelihood of that by using a slightly larger aperture.
If you don't use the ideal (so-called diffraction-limited) aperture, you'll still likely get some improvement in detail and you'll also potentially get _slight_ improvements to things like gradients. In addition, the "grain size" of any noise will be slightly smaller and a bit less visible in larger prints, if that is an issue for you.
If I remember correctly, Lens Rentals shared an article about the value of higher MP on lenses that are less than optimal. I believe that their conclusion was, essentially, that any lens can benefit to some degree from higher resolution — though the magnitude and type of improvement will vary and may or may not be significant to all photographers. (For example, if you are mostly sharing your images online on social media and in emails, 24MP or 26MP is more than enough...)
JustShootMe wrote:
that's a better test , please don't shoot everything wide open , stop it down a bit and lets see the results.
I don't think the guy in the video mentioned what aperture he used but he was shooting landscapes. When I did mine this morning I did F/7.1 which I think is more than adequate.
The implication that Fuji is making inferior glass at the same time they are releasing more demanding sensors is quite the indictment for a brand you are such a staunch defender of.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I now have a XT5. (I posted a bit about initial impressions in another thread in the Fujifilm forum.)
I'm liking it a lot. There are quite a few places it will be useful in my own photography.
1. Street photography: mostly using small primes but occasionally using f/1.4 primes for night street work. Here, particularly, IBIS is going to be useful.
2. Travel photography: The camera is essentially as small as my XPro2 (less wide, a bit thicker and the "hump" makes it slightly taller), so it will fit in my under-seat bag on airlines along with my lenses and other non-photo stuff I want to keep with me.
3. Event photography: Here I'll use it most often with the f/1.4 primes and the 90mm f/2, along with the 16-55 f/2.8. and the 50-140 f/2.8.
4. Macro: While I have a great macro lens for my FF system, I do most of my macro photography handheld on Fujifilm with the 80mm f/2.8. The design of the rear screen is perfect for this.
5. Hiking/backpacking; I'll continue to do most of my landscape photography with my FF system, but I've used APS-C for landscape when hiking/backpacking on a few occasions when I wanted to keep my load lighter – and there results are reliably good for 20" x 30" prints.
I have now done just a bit of real-world photograph with the camera using the 27mm f/2.8 WR — my standard street photo lens. Results look great. Have done some test shots (as differentiated from "real" photography) with the 16-55 and the 50-140, and they seem good, too.
I'll likely be retiring the XPro2 shortly — it has been a great camera, but this is going to do a fine job of replacing it.
Whoa, I expected you to wait for the XP4 but I think this will work out for you well as I expect the XP4 will continue with it's rear screen design in the name of body differentiation. The body is a bit thicker due to the new battery but I think it's a good tradeoff as I like the new batteries a lot. I just pulled a couple out of a bag that hasn't been out in over a month and the batteries had lost only around 5% of charge. IBIS and som extra resolution is nice to have as well.
So here are my tests with the 90mm. I did the 35mm at my office so I don't have those handy to compare but I "think" the results are mostly the same. I just don't see a lot of improvement, if any at all. I generally prefer the output from the 26mp sensor but that isn't to say that the 40MP is a slouch. I'm guessing I'll grow to like and appreciate it more and I will reiterate, I'm happy with the H-X2 and all of the other upgrades that come with it. Was I hoping for more from the higher resolution sensor? Sure. Was I guarded in that hope? Yes.
First two images are with default sharpening in LR turned off and both scaled at 20%. I updated LR today.
Next two images are with default sharpening in LR turned on and both images sized to 1500 pixels on the long side.
Final two are heavy crops from the same area.
X-S10XF90mmF2 R LM WR lens90mmf/7.11s160 ISO0.0 EV
X-H2XF90mmF2 R LM WR lens90mmf/7.11s125 ISO0.0 EV
X-H2XF90mmF2 R LM WR lens90mmf/7.11s125 ISO0.0 EV
X-S10XF90mmF2 R LM WR lens90mmf/7.11s160 ISO0.0 EV
X-H2XF90mmF2 R LM WR lens90mmf/7.11s125 ISO0.0 EV
X-S10XF90mmF2 R LM WR lens90mmf/7.11s160 ISO0.0 EV
rbf_ wrote:
Whoa, I expected you to wait for the XP4 but I think this will work out for you well as I expect the XP4 will continue with it's rear screen design in the name of body differentiation. The body is a bit thicker due to the new battery but I think it's a good tradeoff as I like the new batteries a lot. I just pulled a couple out of a bag that hasn't been out in over a month and the batteries had lost only around 5% of charge. IBIS and som extra resolution is nice to have as well. ...Show more →
I realized that a) I don't know when an XP4 will be released, b) IF an XP4 will be released, or c) what its feature set will/would be. I also realized that over the years of using the XP2 I have gravitated more and more to using the EVF almost all the time. So it seemed like time to let the XPro system go and move to a full EVF system.
- - -
The rest of this is NOT a reply to rbf, but instead a follow up on the silly Fujifilm list of lenses that are (and by omission, not) supposedly ready for the 40MP sensor... and to the general question of whether Fujifilm lenses can provide sufficient detail to the APS-C 40MP sensor.
I was out for a walk late today, so I took the XT5 and stuck the old Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4 on it. This is one of the lenses that Fujifilm did NOT include on the infamous list of ostensibly suitable lenses, which some interpret to mean that it isn't "up to the challenge of the 40MP sensor." To make things more fun, I shot handheld. (Love the IBIS on the XT5 with these small primes.)
This is just a nondescript photograph of some autumn leaves, created only as a way to see how the lens performs — no intention of producing any kind of memorable photograph. So no need to comment on how swell or awful you all think the picture is. ;-)
This is handheld at 1/30 second at f/5.6 and ISO 400. First a scaled down version of the full image after my more or less normal post-processing workflow...
Next is a 100% magnification crop from just above and to the right of the image center where there are some leaves with nice, crisp edges. This image is a 144 ppi resolution, and if you want to sea it more or less at the accurate size, grab a ruler and resize your screen so that it is about 5.1" tall/wide....
(Depending on your monitor, how you have it set up, and whether you have changed the magnification of the FM display... you might not be seeing a true 100% size. Those of you with printers could keep the pixel dimensions the same while setting the resolution to 300 or 360 to see how this plays out in a print. Hint: You'll get a very small print that would come from a much larger full image.)
It seems pretty sharp to me. There's plenty of detail, and I don't think the image is failing to live up to the potential of the sensor, even with this handheld shot.
So, if Fujifilm thinks this lens isn't good enough (heh, right...) to work well on the 40MP sensor, I guess that other lenses will be even better? Or something?
- - -
One more thing. Earlier on this page someone wrote: "The implication that Fuji is making inferior glass at the same time they are releasing more demanding sensors is quite the indictment for a brand you are such a staunch defender of."
I was confused by that. I knew that I hadn't implied that Fujifilm "is making inferior glass" or otherwise providing an "indictment of" Fujifilm. So I looked back at all the other posts since that person's previous post... and I still can't see any other posts that say or imply any such thing.
Perhaps that poster can identify what this refers to?
Dan
NOTE: These images are on a server of mine and I may not keep them there permanently, so the links may eventually not work.
southwoodlaker wrote:
We normally know exactly what we need to order, but sometimes we order stuff we thought we need and the stuff did not meet the expectation and we return it. I think this is part of normal consumers purchasing process, especially with the current online shopping. I guess many people return stuff to Amazon and other online retailers due to all kind of reasons. Selfish is a bit harsh word in my opinion.
No, it is absolutely right. Purchasing something to try before you really buy is an abuse of the system.
Uploading direct to FM isn’t a valid showcase of these, given how much the site will compress them. You’d need to host externally and embed.
gunmetal wrote:
So here are my tests with the 90mm. I did the 35mm at my office so I don't have those handy to compare but I "think" the results are mostly the same. I just don't see a lot of improvement, if any at all. I generally prefer the output from the 26mp sensor but that isn't to say that the 40MP is a slouch. I'm guessing I'll grow to like and appreciate it more and I will reiterate, I'm happy with the H-X2 and all of the other upgrades that come with it. Was I hoping for more from the higher resolution sensor? Sure. Was I guarded in that hope? Yes.
First two images are with default sharpening in LR turned off and both scaled at 20%. I updated LR today.
Next two images are with default sharpening in LR turned on and both images sized to 1500 pixels on the long side.
Final two are heavy crops from the same area....Show more →
That guy wrote:
Uploading direct to FM isn’t a valid showcase of these, given how much the site will compress them. You’d need to host externally and embed.
My examples, posted and described above, are externally hosted and not additionally compressed.
In any case, if compression on this site has any effect it would mean that the original images are actually better than what we see here.
Still waiting for an explanation of what you meant when you earlier wrote:
"The implication that Fuji is making inferior glass at the same time they are releasing more demanding sensors is quite the indictment for a brand you are such a staunch defender of."
I can't find any posts that correspond with what you wrote. Perhaps you can share a link? Or maybe you meant to post that in a different thread or forum and got confused?
Makten wrote:
It's the same world. I could do like him, and I bet many people here do too, but I don't. I just think it's immoral and strange to "play" with things you don't need and that you don't intend to keep.
Wow who hired you as the photography purchasing ethics gatekeeper?
gunmetal wrote:
So here are my tests with the 90mm. I did the 35mm at my office so I don't have those handy to compare but I "think" the results are mostly the same. I just don't see a lot of improvement, if any at all. I generally prefer the output from the 26mp sensor but that isn't to say that the 40MP is a slouch. I'm guessing I'll grow to like and appreciate it more and I will reiterate, I'm happy with the H-X2 and all of the other upgrades that come with it. Was I hoping for more from the higher resolution sensor? Sure. Was I guarded in that hope? Yes.
First two images are with default sharpening in LR turned off and both scaled at 20%. I updated LR today.
Next two images are with default sharpening in LR turned on and both images sized to 1500 pixels on the long side.
Final two are heavy crops from the same area....Show more →
Yeah I expect it to be mostly the same with more detail if images are viewed at the same size, that's what we should expect. The jump from 26 to 40 isn't a massive leap , just more resolution. As long as it isn't worse , I'm not seeing it any worse than the previous sensor, just more pixels. I'm ok with that.
RoamingScott wrote:
The flagships are but you can still get a new Z7 for 1700 and and a new A7R3 for $2000ish on sale and the IQ of each smokes Fuji.
Anybody buying a 40 megapixel Fuji camera for landscape/non action applications would be far better off buying either of those instead.
Just buy old 50s or 50r, it still is better than any FF out there for the mentioned use case. Costs $2k now a days. May not have all the lenses but one doesn't need every lens.
Personally I want to see more examples of XT-5 for people shots using strobes. Hard to find them so far besides a few I have seen on Flickr. I don't know why. Same with Hasselblad X2D using leaf shutter, can't find them either.
Most if not all local retailers will charge a restocking fee of 15% on opened cameras. One in DC will allow exchange within 15 days. A new camera like the X-T5 won't be available as a rental right away and a camera store is not going to let you do anything but hold a new camera without purchasing it. So what is a buyer supposed to do if they are unhappy with their purchase?
bobby350z wrote:
Just buy old 50s or 50r, it still is better than any FF out there for the mentioned use case. Costs $2k now a days. May not have all the lenses but one doesn't need every lens.
Personally I want to see more examples of XT-5 for people shots using strobes. Hard to find them so far besides a few I have seen on Flickr. I don't know why. Same with Hasselblad X2D using leaf shutter, can't find them either.
It's not quite that simple, as of course FF has better AF, IBIS, more lens options, less weight, etc. But yes, there are lots of good options that aren't Fuji APS-C.
mdude85 wrote:
B&H can charge a restocking fee of 15% but that's only if the item isn't returned in the same condition as sold.
Adorama does not usually charge restocking fees, and of course, Amazon doesn't either.
But yeah I reckon some smaller retailers do.
I think the biggest problem is B&H (who I really like and use when Pictureline or Kenmore don't have). Just friday my CF Express card reader that I purchased "new" from them wasn't new. The seal had been sliced open by a knife and it wasn't even put together very well. I've had this happen with lenses from them as well. When I call them on it, they just say something to the effect of "that's strange. send it back and we'll exchange or refund."
Basically, as long as B&H/Adorama doesn't care, customers aren't going to think they're doing anything wrong or unethical.
