Evection wrote: Geoff D F wrote:
If you are comparing 100mp vs 45mp images at 100 per cent then it is an apples to oranges comparison.
While MF is famous for its resolution, that is mostly pushed by reviewers who need to attract attention by saying every latest thing is better than everything else. While the difference is there, I wouldn't regard it as huge. One of my largest prints was made from a 24mp Sony and ancient Canon FD 20mm f2.8.
While the GFX generally does better, you have to get pretty close to see the difference and know what to look for.
The size jump from FF to digital MF is a lot smaller than from 35mm to 645, and FF digital is already more than sufficient for quite large prints.
I should preface this by mentioning I'm what you'd call a "pixel-peeper".
Large prints are easier than their reputation suggests. I've made and sold them with a Canon 2000D + EF 50/1.8 (back when I was starting out and didn't have any money). 24mp as well, but with dynamic range from hell (forget about ISO above 400) and atrocious optics (that double-gauze design should only ever be used at f/4 and narrower).
I made it work, as long as I was out under the sun. Clients liked it; I didn't. A successful sale is supposed to be a celebration, but honestly, I looked at my work somewhat ashamed. Point is, most clients are not pixel-peepers, they have low standards and large prints are usually looked at from afar (many billboards are really 4-5mp). However, if you care about your work, you stare at it, you have higher requirements. "One's worst critic", etc.
I care about resolution as long as the lenses can fully resolve it (2 out 3 GFX lenses I tested failed that test wide open. The 55 can also resolve it, but only stopped down to 2.8. The 80 is below my current standards, even though it's more than sufficient for a lot of commercial work).
I pixel peeper too and, while entertaining, I do try to remind myself that a sharp image is not necessarily a good image. As I said, if you are comparing 100mp images to 45mp images at 100 per cent it is an apples to oranges comparison because the 100mp image will be a far greater enlargement. Try doing your comparisons with the 100mp image enlarged to 60 per cent versus 54mp at 100 per cent and then see if the Fuji lenses under perform.
Sep 04, 2025 at 09:39 PM
Previous versions of Geoff D F's message #16884663 « GFX seems to lack top-tier primes? »
