Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
ilkka_nissila wrote:
In the past Fuji has applied in-camera high-ISO noise reduction even to RAW files, resulting in visible smearing of detail at high ISO; even with their own raw converter this was clear with the X100S. However, I don't know if they do that today. The dpreview X-T5 vs. R7 studio comparison does seem to give the clear image quality edge to Fuji as there is less aliasing with the high-resolution X-Trans sensor. Good work on Fuji's part there.
Clearly, a 40 MP 1.5x sensor can give good image quality and 39 MP 1.6x would not change that appreciably. But Canon uses different technology in their sensors than Fuji, and Canon's dual-pixel autofocus means the number of actual photosites would be twice that, or 78 MP in a 1.6x crop sensor area. Whether this would be too noisy is up to the implementation, then. A stacked sensor with fast read time would likely be a bit noisier than a conventional sensor with slower read time. (The X-T5 sensor is not stacked.)
Since now we have compact long focal length lenses available at reasonable prices from Canon (and also other manufacturers), I don't see much benefit in pursuing the development of a high-performance APS-C camera for the purposes of supertelephoto images of birds and such subjects. If you need greater portability and lower price, you can make the compromise by using a longer focal length, smaller aperture lens as an alternative to using a shorter but faster lens with APS-C. Fuji has the 40 MP X-T5 (and they have a stacked sensor 26 MP model) but has focusing on APS-C made them the most popular wildlife camera brand? No, it hasn't. The manufacturers who chose to focus on 2x and 1.5x sensors are there in the marketplace but they are not as popular as Canon, Sony, or Nikon, who put their best development efforts on their full-frame cameras. ...Show more →
I don't think Fuji applies any noise reduction to their RAWs. Bill Claff monitors this closely at photons to photos and he doesn't report any noise reduction in their RAW files. It is actually Canon that has a bit of noise reduction in some of their RAW files (but not files from the R7) that Bill caught and reported. IMO, however, it is minor and not really worth spending much time considering.
Sony built sensors still have a slight advantage over Canon bulit sensors, but that advantage has gotten smaller each year. I don't think it is enough to spend much time considering at this point. Especially the newer Canon sensors. The sensor in the R7 is still a bit of an older Canon sensor, but I expect a new one with the R7 II and I think the difference between its performance and the Sony made Fuji 40MP sensor will be quite small and again from my point of view not worth spending much time discussing.
I think you are right that for a lot of people the introduction of long, smaller, slower aperture, lighter, and inexpensive telephoto options for FF cameras has quelled much of the interest for APS-C cameras for shooting things like birds. If you have a good FF camera with a stacked BSI sensor like the Sony A1 or A9, the Canon R5 II, R1, or R3, or the Nikon Z8 or Z9, then adding an APS-C camera for shooting birds is going to be the more expensive route to go. Buying a lens with the same capabilities as an APS-C camera and lens is going to cost you less if you already have one of those very wildlife capable cameras.
It is of course different for Fuji and Olympus that do not have FF cameras. They both have developed stacked BSI sensor cameras for their smaller format cameras and lenses to match those cameras in an effort to compete. In the end, however, a Fuji X-H2S and their 500 f/5.6 or an Olympus OM-1 Mark II and their 150-400 f/4.5 Pro is not going to cost less much less than the Sony A1 and their 400-800 f/6.3-8 or the Canon R5 II and their 200-800 f/9, or the Nikon Z8 and their 800 f/6.3 PF. The Sony and Nikon options are a bit more, but you get a bit more capabilities and if you just go down to the 200-600 type lenses and add a 1.4X TC instead of their more premium lenses those systems do compete for costs with the smaller format systems.
Canon might surprise me, but because of this reality (a smaller sensor camera with a stacked BSI sensor still results in an expensive camera and still requires an expensive lens) I don't expect the R7 II to have a stacked sensor and be designed for wildife and bird photographers. Instead, I expect it will compete at a lower cost segment with the non-stacked sensor X-T5 and X-H2. I do expect Canon to update the sensor with their newer technology for sensors. I expect that sensor to have at least the pixel density of the Fuji 40MP sensor cameras. I hope they upgrade the EVF to at least 3.7 million dots with 100% magnification. Of course good optics are important for a viewfinder so I hope they do a good job there as well. I might well be disappointed, however.
For me, I want the R7 II as a potential backup to my R5 II, so what it will really be competing with for me is the with the R8 II. It will be most interesting to me how those two cameras compare. It isn't just me, however, because the R7 serves as my wife's primary camera as well. So her thoughts about the R7II vs. the R8 II will be the primary criteria when we replace the R7. So for me the capabilities of this camera for wildlife shooting matter, but they are not even close to the primary driver as I anticipate this camera.
|
