uhoh7
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499) | |
adamdewilde wrote:
uhoh7 wrote:
Great shots Charles and as usual, real world information 
The ISO performance looks wonderful.
I am trying get and idea of the "exchange rate" between that 63/2.8 and A7rii with a comparable frame.
For example let's take the new FE 50/1.4 which is meant to be great WO.
Imagine that 50/1.4 WO on A7rii where ISO 6400 is needed.
Where would this put the 63/2.8, roughy?
Frame? 63 is more or less 50 (forgive my ignorance on the crop x)
DOF? I'd think the 1.4 will have less, no? If so how far does the Sony need to stop down to equal F/2.8 on the Fuji?
and most important, what ISO will the fuji need in such low light? And how is the noise level going to compare to 6400 on the iii?
I understand we don't know the last really(or do we?), but best guesses appreciated from anyone
I'm excited we will see this new camera in your hands
Despite what people think... f/stops will be fixed light wise, even on larger sensors. Yes it's true that the 63/2.8 will have similar DOF to an f/2 lens. But the rendering characteristics will be lens specific and the light gathering will stay the same.
So the 50/1.4 FE assuming it's a T/1.4 lens (which I don't find it to be, that or Sony lies about it's ISO, but more on that later).. And assuming the 63 is truly a T/2.8 than that would mean you need two extra stops of ISO.. So it starts to look like the Sony has a clearer advantage in low light just due to the lens selection. Sure people can say bigger sensors let in more light. But it's per-pixel light that matters not total light over an area, so light gathering will not change.
*(off topic but not really). The ISO on the Sony tends to be a full stop of lies ahead of the Leica SL. Basically if you set the Leica and the Sony up with the same shutter and same ISO (A7II, A7sII, A7rII I've tested them all). The Leica SL will be 1 and a bit stops brighter using the same exact lens. This isn't new news, Canon and Nikon don't match either. But Leica has consistently been more correct with their ISO numbers than other companies (from my experience). So if you take this and apply it to the GFX. Perhaps someone should test the true ISO values of both cameras before using inaccurate numbers like ISO settings to determine noise levels. And yes I know this sensor is the same as the one found in the X1D and other MFD cameras. But it doesn't mean Fuji didn't measure the light themselves and set their own ISO values. So even ISO 400 on the GFX might not match the noise of ISO 400 on the X1D keeping in mind the same sensor was used. Also using the same lens helps, as then you get the f/stop lies out of the way.. As f/stops are not t/stops.
To answer the other questions. The 63mm will equal a 50mm lens, but unlike the S-system, this camera has a different aspect ratio. So it's not going to be apples to apples. And you'd need to stop the 50ZA down to f/2 to get a similar DOF. But you're going to get a completely different look. I've noticed medium format lenses at 2.8 tend to have more of a f/5.6 crispness to the in focus subject, and a f/2 bokeh w/bokeh balls that seem the size of an f/1.4 equivalent mm lens. If that makes sense to you.. Of course this is lens specific, but I've used quite a few and this is my general feeling.
Charles.K said that he feels the 63mm is similar to the 50APO. I wouldn't disagree with him, as I find the 50APO to have a very similar feel as medium format. In fact, the 45/2.8 S lens is basically a 35/2 APO on the S-body. Which is why I think I loved both lenses so much. Great rendering. Now if you can get that out of the GFX w/kit prime, that would be stellar. And value wise OMG the whole set is the price of the 50APO 
TY Adam, love to get your considered take
I very much appreciate all the replies, very interesting.
I pick ISO 6400 on the A7rii, because that is pretty useable to my eye, while higher is not so nice.
So it sounds like ISO 12.5K will get the Fuji into the same light with the 63/2.8 as the A7rii with 50/1.4 WO at 6400, correct? Wait alundeb says 25K?
Ballpark, how does 12.5K on the Fuji compare to noise on r2 @6400? Charles' high ISO shot looked very clean to me.
I would guess the 50/1.4 will have a slimmer DOF, no?
Sorry I'm sure these answers were inferred, but my aging brain.....
I guess the next logical question is: what if I want big DOF?
Consider the 50/1.4 at F/11. Where do I need to go on that 63/2.8 and is diffraction gong to be better or worse at that point? Maybe F/16 would make it?
Lee, cool calc, but where is one that has the fuji sensor pre-pluged or which MF rig will be identical for DOF? ahh 645Z.
I can use the 645D which is a little bigger sensor. Way tighter DOF for the FF, wow, at 63/2.8 vs 50/1.4. And the MF is not far behind at the other end, really. You don't need to go all the way to F/16 to get FF at F/11
|
