p.2 #1 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
BeatX wrote:
lol those sample images was not supposed to be looking nice or interesting. I made them to showcase if there are differences in fine details between both sensors.
Scenery I choose is perfect for this, don't You think?
My photographs which I think are good from artistic pov, can be seen in my Flickr gallery.
I think if you're going to bother making a thread meant to critically compare two things, you should put in the effort required to foster a meaningful discussion.
I'm not even convinced your focal plane is the same in these two pics, but who could even tell.
You don't have to post artistic photos for a thread like this, either, that's not what I meant. These are just so badly captured that no meaningful discussion can be had around them.
p.2 #2 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
RoamingScott wrote:
I think if you're going to bother making a thread meant to critically compare two things, you should put in the effort required to foster a meaningful discussion.
I'm not even convinced your focal plane is the same in these two pics, but who could even tell.
You don't have to post artistic photos for a thread like this, either, that's not what I meant. These are just so badly captured that no meaningful discussion can be had around them.
p.2 #3 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
BeatX wrote:
Sure thing chief, You win
You seem bizarrely desperate to beat this drum, so if you must do so over and over, it would be nice if you did it in a way that demonstrably proves your thesis.
But yes, these two out of focus photos do look roughly the same, so YOU win!
p.2 #4 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
RoamingScott wrote:
You seem bizarrely desperate to beat this drum, so if you must do so over and over, it would be nice if you did it in a way that demonstrably proves your thesis.
But yes, these two out of focus photos do look roughly the same, so YOU win!
Sorry for OT, but you provoked me to answer
You are trying to play an online psychologist who has examined my mind, knows my intentions and thoughts.
I don't know if it's a matter of complexes or an exaggerated ego - but I'm sorry, my friend, you don't know me, you don't know anything about me, and you write from the position of a judge who knows the ultimate truth and his word must be the last.
But why should I write to you how wrong you are about me, since you always know best about everything and, it seems, about everyone.
Instead of appreciating that I am the only one who he devoted his time and energy to conduct such a test so far /even if completly amateur/ you are picking on some little details, that the photos are supposedly boring, that they have a different perspective () blah blah blah.
Dude, what is Your problem?
You want to discourage me from contributing further in this thread - congratulations, you succeeded - point for you
If you have a problem with the technical quality of the experiment I conducted, you only need to write about it once and not argue like children in a sandbox.
Can you do this experiment better? Great, I'd love to see the results of such test performed by a specialist
Just for comparison - see what direction an identical discussion on this forum went, in such a friendly atmosphere: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4756550
Compare the posts from dpreview to your eternal complaints, irritating tone from the position of a person who thinks he knows everything and is always right.
Bro, I recommend you more distance from yourself and to the others.
And definitely replace those senile complaints with more smiles.
It will only be good for your health
Anyway, this is my last post to you, I've been on internet forums too long to kick with the horse.
p.2 #5 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
I disagree they weren’t in focus. The 100% crops the op posted from the full files were not optimal and further degraded by the FM upload system. I DL’d both raws and opened them in C1. I found good focus in the rigging and weather vanes in several of the boats centrally, and those are what I used in my comparison. Also good focus in shadows under the walkways that I dug into for noise comparison. All in all, I feel the raws were good comparison files, and again thank the op for sharing them!
p.2 #6 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
Yah, these same shots are on multiple forums with similar back story. I couldn't figure out if the differences were resolution or focus. All I did was zoom into the area of the back of the closest boats. Looking at the "Suzuki" on the outboard motor, the XHS looks quite a bit better. Then looking at the shades of black between the cover on the boats next door, the XH2 blacks are richer and have more range. But like I said, hard to say if that's resolution or if the focus was better at that point in the shots.
p.2 #7 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
I'm working on some evening/nighttime photos from a recent trip to Paris taken with my X100V. Most were shot at 1600 ISO so the resolution has been kind of "meh" at the pixel level, especially in the shadows.
But the amount of detail and reduced noise I've been able to tease out just from LR's Enhance Detail feature has been remarkable. (I've tried C1 with even better results, but I just prefer the UI and cloud access of LR). It's like a completely new image.
I'm sure that if you took these files and upscaled them to 40 MP using this feature, they'd have way more perceived detail than a native, un-enhanced 40 MP (or more) file. So that's yet another factor to consider -- how these post-processing tools, especially those that incorporate AI, will impact your choice of camera.
p.2 #8 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
I also disagree that the posted images are out of focus and I think the chosen scene and method are about as well done as anyone can do without test charts in a studio setting. The ropes on the boats make a good test for fine detail. The up-scaling method may not be perfect, negatively impacting the perceived sharpness. Or it could be going the other way around and adding detail where there is not. But, I think the scenario is realistic as it may emulate someone trying to maximize their print size from a lower resolution image. And that person may be wondering what the benefits are to purchasing a camera with a higher native resolution versus up-scaling. At the end of the day I think it is a fair test.
The difference between 26mp and 40mp is not very great in terms of linear resolution. Assuming perfect optics, this would mean a difference of about 20-25% in terms of linear resolution. Now the Viltrox 27mm 1.2 has been tested as one of the highest resolving lenses for the Fuji X system and assuming that the posted images were shot at an "optimal" aperture of f5.6 or lower, this should be about as good as you can currently get for testing resolution. However, with the pixel pitch of these new 40mp sensors, optics may still not be good enough to resolve fully at that density. But I'll let someone else with more technical expertise speak to that.
So what does that leave us in practice? Too my eyes, better sharpness at greater enlargements, smoother edges, and better separation of tightly packed parallel details (think text, texture of wood, or grass). The difference in reality is pretty small and likely only noticeable with the largest prints viewed up close.
I'm not going to argue that 24/26mp may still be "the sweet spot" for many people. But 40mp I think has its merits when it comes the rendition of certain scenes with lots of fine details and pushing print sizes up.
Having looked at similar tests on a larger format system such as 24mm x 36mm (35mm), the difference between 24mp and 45mp is still pretty small. I think the difference is very slightly greater than what we are seeing from APS-C 26mp and 40mp which could come down to how well the optics can resolve at a given pixel density (and slightly greater jump in resolution), but this also is an apples vs oranges comparison.
Also I have seen some folks say that diffraction becomes a problem with higher resolution sensors. This is only a factor if you are trying to maximize the resolution of the sensor. Diffraction is always there. If you take an image that is "diffraction limited" at a higher f-stop and if you print your 40mp image at the same size as you would your 26mp image, they should look the same in theory. You aren't losing anything additional to diffraction, but your image quality ceiling has increased if your technique allows for it.
p.2 #9 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
The reason brick walls and other two-dimensional subjects (charts, dollar bills, etc) are often used for these tests is that we don't have to wonder if what we're looking at is in focus.
But in this case, the boats seem to be in focus (and assuming the photographer locked focus on the boats using AF, I don't see why they would be out of focus -- plus, if the focus point is not on the boats then where is it?).
It's just that the boats are very far away from the camera and it's a cloudy day, so there's not much contrast.
Plus, we're looking at unprocessed raw files which have not been sharpened. Once you start applying sharpening to them, the apparent differences between 40 mp and 26 mp will become a bit more noticeable, because the sharpening algorithms apply contrast to fine edges.
Once you start upscaling and downscaling files, you introduce variability. The details are being manipulated by algorithms, so you're getting farther and farther away from the original file that the sensor rendered.
Apr 18, 2024 at 09:37 AM
foto16 Offline • • [X]
p.2 #10 · X-Trans 26Mpix vs 40Mpix, differences in resolving fine details
For those who are interested, there is a YT comparison of resolutions between the 40MP X100VI and 26MP X100V:
) blah blah blah.