p.1 #1 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
I've been wanting to replace my X-T2. I am trying out at X-Pro3, which is for me personally something I like a lot but the older AF and lack of screen is hindering in some ways that I would use it. I was looking at photonstophotos and it looks like the X-T5 took a big hit to dynamic range. Did it in fact or is this some aspect of the testing that makes it look this way? Do you notice the dynamic range impact in your real life use? As it is, I have been considering a Zf and closing out all my Fuji stuff (which is a pretty large selection of lenses after using it since the X-E2 came out), so I'm worried the X-T5 will be a big disappointment in that regard, even if the rear screen and better AF would be useful to me.
Interesting. I see now that on Rtings the X-T5 also has improved DR. I wonder why photonstophotos has it so wrong.
---------------------------------------------
RoamingScott wrote:
I don’t understand why you wouldn’t try the X-T5 before switching brands.
Well, I would probably just buy the body and one lens and try it out.
p.1 #5 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
The 40mp xtrans has more DR than typically needed, and I’m regularly trimming it with the levels slider in post. I do shoot raw mostly. Compared to the 26mp xtrans, both noise and DR in the 40 seems similar to a tiny bit better. AF is now a significant jump better.
Agree with the above that given your “extensive” existing kit, it seems foolish not to at least try the XT5.
p.1 #6 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
marlinspike wrote:
I've been wanting to replace my X-T2. I am trying out at X-Pro3, which is for me personally something I like a lot but the older AF and lack of screen is hindering in some ways that I would use it. I was looking at photonstophotos and it looks like the X-T5 took a big hit to dynamic range. Did it in fact or is this some aspect of the testing that makes it look this way? Do you notice the dynamic range impact in your real life use? As it is, I have been considering a Zf and closing out all my Fuji stuff (which is a pretty large selection of lenses after using it since the X-E2 came out), so I'm worried the X-T5 will be a big disappointment in that regard, even if the rear screen and better AF would be useful to me....Show more →
I’ve been using the XT5 for two years now, largely for street and travel, with some handheld night street photography and a bit of landscape and wildlife photography, too.
I’m baffled by this report of a DR “hit” in the XT5. I don’t see anything like that at all.
(DR issues are only… “issues” if you are doing post-processing to recover shadow detail. And I can do that in spades with the XT5.)
The screen design of the XT5 is really excellent, at least in my view. It quickly tilts up and down in landscape mode, and it will also tilt in portrait mode — though only in one direction. It is quick and effective to deploy.
p.1 #7 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
I recently upgraded from an X-T2 to X-T5 and it was a good improvement especially in terms of AF. I thought it was really worthwhile and the IBIS is great. Loving it. I would at least try it and see if it works for you since you have all the lenses already.
p.1 #9 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
Yeah, not much here makes sense. You have a bunch of lenses...try the new body first and see how you get on with it. If not, divest.
The DR...whatever you're talking about...is not meaningful. The 40mp sensors are largely better in most regards than the 24mp sensors and even have more microcontrast straight out of the camera.
p.1 #10 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
I upgraded to the X-T5 from the X-T3 mainly because I wanted IBIS (it's not always necessary, but it's definitely a nice thing to have). I don't have any issues with dynamic range, but of course your use cases might be different than mine.
p.1 #11 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
I could care less what the charts show and would never base a buying decision on them. At least not without some verification based on actual observation. These types of measurements are just not necessarily representative of what you actually see. Take it as an input worth exploring. That said, I went to a table on photons to photos and see the X-T5 with slightly higher PDR than either the X-T2 or X-Pro3. So what is the big hit you are referring too?
p.1 #12 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
Be wary in general of the reports that some new, higher MP sensor body has "worse DR" than its lower MP predecessor.
These claims often come from a misapplication of the relationship between sensor photo site density and dynamic range (and noise.) The assumption is that increasing the MP must result in a decrease in DR and an increase in noise, all else being equal.
That is true if you compare two sensors from the same generation of technology. For example, some sensor with 30MP in 2018 probably did have less DR and more noise that a 16MP sensor of the same vintage from the same sensor manufacturer.
However, in a comparison like the one mentioned here, "all else is" NOT "equal." Between sensor generations the performance improves, and more typically when we go from a manufacturer's high MP sensor of some generation to its higher MP sensor of the following tech generation those performance metrics typically stay that same or improve.
That certainly seems to be the case with the move from the older 26MP Fujifilm sensor to the current 40MP sensors.
If you've been using digital for a while it is pretty obvious that today's high MP sensors have much better DR and noise control than those from the past. The first digital camera I used had a sensor with less than 1MP... and it also had very limited DR and really awful noise.
p.1 #13 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
Jack Flesher wrote:
If you have "a large selection of lenses" already, why would you bother buying the camera "and one lens" in order to try it out?
I meant I would buy the Nikon and 1 lens to try it out before I sold all that Fuji gear.
As far as why wouldn't I at least try the X-T5, to be honest it was mostly because photonstophotos reported the X-T5 as having about a half stop less DR at ISO 800 than the X-Pro3, putting it approx. 1.2 stops less than the nikon zf and it made me think it is only going to get worse for me. Based on the answers I got here I googled around and see no other testing site came to a similar conclusion and rtings is showing it having very competitive DR with the Nikon and Sony I was considering.
p.1 #14 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
SGinNorcal wrote:
I could care less what the charts show and would never base a buying decision on them. At least not without some verification based on actual observation. These types of measurements are just not necessarily representative of what you actually see. Take it as an input worth exploring. That said, I went to a table on photons to photos and see the X-T5 with slightly higher PDR than either the X-T2 or X-Pro3. So what is the big hit you are referring too?
I guess it's only material from about iso 500 and up, but I am often there.
I shouldn't be talking about how to read these charts since I don't take much stock in specifically looking at one measurement vs. the whole package of IQ, ergonomics, and color rendering.
But if you look at the DR at base ISO, you will see it is higher on the X-T5 even only be decimal points. Why the same sensor has different values on different cameras using the same sensor and processor makes me think there is variation between individual copies and small differences, say under 1.0 may not be real.
Back to the chart, the X-T5 base ISO DR is higher and achieves the same image quality at lower ISO. So this comparison suggests the X-T5 has better performance.
But I could be misunderstanding the curves data and will happily defer to others here.
p.1 #16 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
You're not really supposed to use Photons to Photos to compare different brands of camera, so I would definitely caution against comparing the Zf and the XT5.
You also said you're concerned about dynamic range at ISO 500+, but if you really need as much dynamic range as you can get, you want to be shooting at base ISO, not ISO 500+. Generally speaking higher the ISO the fewer stops of dynamic range the sensor can capture.
If you're regularly having to recover 8 stops worth of light in your photos, then you're probably doing something wrong, or you're not using the camera in the way that it was intended. If your work tells a story and has emotional depth and a POV then dynamic range is rarely a drawback.
p.1 #17 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
I understand there is a difference between the 'roll over' of the dual gain sensors, the 26mpx is 800iso and the 40mpx is 500. If so it's quite possiblethe 40 is worse than the 26 at 500iso, but why on earth anyone would base a comparison on results only at 500iso is beyond me. Sloppy test procedures, and if one test produces results at variance with several others then it is to be suspected, not respected. Especially if it reports differring results from one camera to another with the same processor and sensor.
Plenty of tests, and practical experience reported since the Xt5 came out to the effect that it is similar to the 26mpx sensor, and while aps-c is theoretically and in some cases measurabley 'worse' than full frame the differences are of no practical significance in everyday use, being only visible at impractical magnification and viewing distances. In deed anything back to the 24mpx sensors both of ff and crop is better than one can use normally. DR greater than you can display or print, and noise at reasonable iso figures virtually invisible in use, and far better than the 'grain' patterns you got from scanning even Kodachrome 25iso or Provia 100
p.1 #18 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
Having used both Nikon’s 45mp sensors and Fuji’s 24 and 40mp sensors, at ISO’s from base up, I can assure you there is very little difference in noise or DR up to 12,000. After that, noise is a little better on the Nikon BSI, yet noise is so prevalent in all of them past 6400, DR differences are virtually irrelevant. Frankly, I noted more color differences than anything else, and personally give the Fuji 40 an edge here, but again this is a subtle difference.
IMO, you are “tilting at windmills” worrying about this. Pick the camera that has the most best features you want, and go from there.
p.1 #19 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
Jack Flesher wrote:
Having used both Nikon’s 45mp sensors and Fuji’s 24 and 40mp sensors, at ISO’s from base up, I can assure you there is very little difference in noise or DR up to 12,000. After that, noise is a little better on the Nikon BSI, yet noise is so prevalent in all of them past 6400, DR differences are virtually irrelevant. Frankly, I noted more color differences than anything else, and personally give the Fuji 40 an edge here, but again this is a subtle difference.
IMO, you are “tilting at windmills” worrying about this. Pick the camera that has the most best features you want, and go from there. ...Show more →
I appreciate your response (along with those of many others). I guess maybe the tech has jumped a bit (my last body purchase was an X-T2, until this X-Pro3 I just recently bought but haven't had a chance to just much). I do have this so-far impossible dream of switching to jpeg now that all my photos are just for myself/family, and with the X-Pro3's profiles it seems like maybe with some experience I can make that dream come true (presumably the X-T5 would be the same or better).
Taking my own thread a bit off topic as it has now been answered many times, since you've shot Nikon, do you think it's equally good at achieving that goal, or would I definitely be sticking with RAW? They're the number one contender as they seem to have the next best lineup of lenses that are both pretty good and pretty compact/affordable, as opposed to having to choose between not very good lenses and amazing but very expensive lenses. (as far as why would I still change given what everybody has said, and the thing that is still nagging me is hearing how good the AF of Sony/Canon/Nikon has gotten, sadly no stores around where I could test).
p.1 #20 · X-T5 for former owners of the 26MP X-Trans - do you notice the dynamic range reduction?
marlinspike wrote:
Taking my own thread a bit off topic as it has now been answered many times, since you've shot Nikon, do you think it's equally good at achieving that goal, or would I definitely be sticking with RAW? They're the number one contender as they seem to have the next best lineup of lenses that are both pretty good and pretty compact/affordable, as opposed to having to choose between not very good lenses and amazing but very expensive lenses.
To be honest, trying to parse out The Very Best Brand is a losing proposition. All of the main manufacturers today produce excellent gear that is more than capable of producing absolutely outstanding phtotography of the sort you seem to be after. You could do it with Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm, Sony, and a few others and no one would be able to see any difference related to teh brand you chose.
Turn the whole process around. Instead of starting with “what brand is best,” start with “what do I want in my camera.” Do you want something small, or is size not so important to you? Do you like a particular sort of camera interface — lots of simplified, automated stuff or more manual controls? Do you like to use prime lenses, zooms, both? In other words, put functional questions ahead of brand questions.
As to who has “the best line-up of lenses,” that doesn’t really matter unless you are buying a… whole line-up of lenses. You are more likely to buy between one and perhaps 3-4 of them. Unless your needs are rather unusual, there’s a very good chance that those 1-4 lenses are available from all of the manufacturers, right?
As far as the jpg versus RAW question goes, that will reflect your own preferences as to how you work with photographs. If you are the sort who just wants to shoot pictures, take them out of the camera, and share them… then you may well be happy with jpg-only. There’s nothing wrong with that if it is your preference.
on the other hand, if you are looking at brilliant photographs online or in prints and you have some ideas about aspiring to that kind or output, you are almost certainly going to want to engage the raw-based workflow that includes post-processing. Don’t be fooled — very littel of taht impressive work you see is coming from a purely-jpg-based workflow that doesn’t “work” the files at all after they come out of the camera.
