Lenses not certified for 40mp …why exactly?

[Pangolin99]

What’s not happening with lenses not on the ‘certified for 40mp’ list? What actual differences should I expect? Would I need to increase my exposure time to compensate, expect increased vignetting, aberrations, or a generally soft image across the frame? Physically, what’s going on? Has anyone tried a Viltrox lens on the X-T5 or X-H2?

 

[roberthd12]

What’s not happening with lenses not on the ‘certified for 40mp’ list? What actual differences should I expect? Would I need to increase my exposure time to compensate, expect increased vignetting, aberrations, or a generally soft image across the frame? Physically, what’s going on? Has anyone tried a Viltrox lens on the X-T5 or X-H2?

Based on viewing YT tests and reading several articles, the older lenses work just fine on the 40mp sensor. You should expect no discernible dropoff in output quality. Maybe autofocus speed is less on the older lenses, but photo quality is strong.

--
Roberthd12
https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertdicks2/

 

[RobRoy22]

What’s not happening with lenses not on the ‘certified for 40mp’ list? What actual differences should I expect? Would I need to increase my exposure time to compensate, expect increased vignetting, aberrations, or a generally soft image across the frame? Physically, what’s going on? Has anyone tried a Viltrox lens on the X-T5 or X-H2?

None of the above. There is no ‘certified’ list, nor a ‘non-certified list’.

 

[Truman Prevatt]

What’s not happening with lenses not on the ‘certified for 40mp’ list? What actual differences should I expect? Would I need to increase my exposure time to compensate, expect increased vignetting, aberrations, or a generally soft image across the frame? Physically, what’s going on? Has anyone tried a Viltrox lens on the X-T5 or X-H2?

The 33 f1.4, 18 f1.4 WR and 23 f1.4 WR have linear motors for rapid AF which will help with AF tracking. They have been designed to minimize focus breathing and focus breathing can be an issue in video and limit the functionality of a lens in video. The 90 f2, 50-140 f2.8 and 200 f2 also sport linear motors.

I have no idea how Fuji determined its "list" but I expect video and focusing speed and accuracy was one of the criteria. Of course some of it could be to stimulate GAS so they can recover the NRE on these newer lenses faster. Most Fuji lenses will be just fine on the XT5/XH2. They will give higher resolution and better tonal gradation smoothness on the XT5/XH2 than the previous generation cameras.

 

[jaberg]

None of the above. There is no ‘certified’ list, nor a ‘non-certified list’.

Technically correct.

While not labeled a certification, Fujifilm has provided a list of lenses that they deem capable of fully resolving to the 40MP sensor. Close enough to certification for the purposes of the OP’s question.

The lenses not on this list will continue to work as well as they ever did and will produce images of quality for all but the armchair optical engineers. You don’t need to throw your old lenses away, nor should you fear buying a lens that isn’t on the list so long as it otherwise suits your purpose.

 

[Rand 47]

None of the above. There is no ‘certified’ list, nor a ‘non-certified list’.

Technically correct.

While not labeled a certification, Fujifilm has provided a list of lenses that they deem capable of fully resolving to the 40MP sensor. Close enough to certification for the purposes of the OP’s question.

The lenses not on this list will continue to work as well as they ever did and will produce images of quality for all but the armchair optical engineers. You don’t need to throw your old lenses away, nor should you fear buying a lens that isn’t on the list so long as it otherwise suits your purpose.

Finally some sanity on this issue. Thank you! The fact that Fuji is shipping the 40 mp cameras with a “non-listed” lens as a kit should be a hint that it ain’t no big deal.

I run a small fine art printing operation. I can tell you first hand, from all of the thousands of files I’ve evaluated and tweaked, and soft-proofed and printed, that it’s way more likely that any given photographer will either enhance, or destroy image quality through their “editing” than anything you could possibly detect that is caused by using either a “listed” or non-listed Fuji lens on one of their 40 mp sensors.

Rand

 

[RobRoy22]

None of the above. There is no ‘certified’ list, nor a ‘non-certified list’.

Technically correct.

While not labeled a certification, Fujifilm has provided a list of lenses that they deem capable of fully resolving to the 40MP sensor. Close enough to certification for the purposes of the OP’s question.

The lenses not on this list will continue to work as well as they ever did and will produce images of quality for all but the armchair optical engineers. You don’t need to throw your old lenses away, nor should you fear buying a lens that isn’t on the list so long as it otherwise suits your purpose.

I disagree. Certification has a specific and important meaning, and it’s not an accurate reflection of Fuji’s advice notice. This is not mere semantics. And OP is speculating on a range of imagined possible problems, none of which will occur. Somewhat alarmist IMO.

I’m well aware that there are no problems to be expected from the use of older lens, and those not listed on the ‘optimal list’. And there has already been much discussion of this point in other threads on this forum.

If users have any doubts they should try themselves.

 

[io_bg]

What’s not happening with lenses not on the ‘certified for 40mp’ list? What actual differences should I expect? Would I need to increase my exposure time to compensate, expect increased vignetting, aberrations, or a generally soft image across the frame? Physically, what’s going on? Has anyone tried a Viltrox lens on the X-T5 or X-H2?

The 'certification' thing has been already well explained, but I thought I should jump in as well.

First of all, the list Fuji has created shows mostly newer, high-end lenses. They want you to think your older mk 1 lens won't work well on 40 mp so you must get the latest (and more expensive) optic. The list is mostly useless as some great lenses are not on the list (e.g. the 16/1.4, while the worse optically 16/2.8 is included), or might be self-contradicting (the 27 pancake WR is on the list, while the first version which has exactly the same optics is missing).

Exposure will work just the same on any camera or lens. Megapixels won't change the way light works. Same goes for vignetting - a lens will exhibit the same level of corner darkening on 12, 24 and 40 mp - and for aberrations, they'll just be more visible at 100% on 40 mp.

Lenses that were great on 16 mp will still be great on 40 mp for most purposes, unless you're pixel peeping at 200% or printing super large and need that corner-to-corner sharpness for whatever reason. This also applies to third-party lenses.

 

[RobRoy22]

In the interests of accuracy, can we be clear.

Fuji have published a list of lenses which will give optimal results combined with the 40mp sensor.



Nowhere have they indicated that older, or non-listed lenses will give poor results, should be avoided, or special treatment is needed.

A number of posters view that advice as a marketing ploy to promote new lenses. I don’t agree. They are of course fully entitled to this opinion, but shouldn’t exaggerate or distort it to something which it isn’t, or become unnecessarily indignant.

Fuji have issued some info or guidance. Use it as you see fit, or take it with a pinch of salt if that’s how you feel. I will continue using my 16-80 and 16mm prime with the larger sensor . Happy New Year everyone.

 

[robert1955]

What’s not happening with lenses not on the ‘certified for 40mp’ list?

There is no point at which Fuji said lenses were not certified for 40mp. We can stop here [but probably won't]

 

[Mark VerMurlen]

We need to keep in mind that when mass manufacturing parts, there are tolerances specified for how accurate a part is made. A glass lens element can be ground to be highly accurate to its ideal specifications or there can be more lee way given to the manufacturing process. Tighter tolerances often mean higher cost because the machines making the parts have to be more accurate or take more time. Tolerances build up with each glass element and with the positioning accuracy within the lens body. Each deviation from ideal means light is not focused as precisely so the image will be softer. So even though a newer model lens looks the same as an older model lens, it's very possible that the newer lenses have smaller tolerances and will thus perform better than older lenses.

I believe the engineers at reputable companies when they give guidance. So if you absolutely need the best image quality, then take their advice on which lenses work best with the new 40mp cameras. As noted, the standard kit lens is not on the list, so it's safe to say that most people won't notice any issues with it. Kit lenses have never been known to be the best lenses. They are usually the most cost effective.

 

[Doug MacMillan]

Finally, a voice of reason.

Some folks need to brush up on their reading comprehension. I remember a segment of my SAT tested for it.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Drop off is not the issue. All lenses will be better on a higher pixel count sensor.

 

[Doppler9000]

In the interests of accuracy, can we be clear.

Fuji have published a list of lenses which will give optimal results combined with the 40mp sensor.

The use of the term “optimal” is inapt here - it is neither an accurate nor a clear descriptor. “Optimal” would imply that images captured at either more or less than 40 MP would be somehow worse than those captured at 40 MP.

Nowhere have they indicated that older, or non-listed lenses will give poor results, should be avoided, or special treatment is needed.

A number of posters view that advice as a marketing ploy to promote new lenses. I don’t agree. They are of course fully entitled to this opinion, but shouldn’t exaggerate or distort it to something which it isn’t, or become unnecessarily indignant.

Fuji have issued some info or guidance. Use it as you see fit, or take it with a pinch of salt if that’s how you feel. I will continue using my 16-80 and 16mm prime with the larger sensor . Happy New Year everyone.

 

[michaeladawson]

None of the above. There is no ‘certified’ list, nor a ‘non-certified list’.

Technically correct.

While not labeled a certification, Fujifilm has provided a list of lenses that they deem capable of fully resolving to the 40MP sensor. Close enough to certification for the purposes of the OP’s question.

The lenses not on this list will continue to work as well as they ever did and will produce images of quality for all but the armchair optical engineers. You don’t need to throw your old lenses away, nor should you fear buying a lens that isn’t on the list so long as it otherwise suits your purpose.

Even what you say can be a bit misleading. Here is what Fuji actually wrote on the topic.

Fuji’s Logic

Hypotheticals ? Lmao. If you think Fuji making a list of their own lenses that can’t resolve their own 40MP sensor is hypothetical then I rest my case.

www.dpreview.com

Key in their statement is a reference to edge to edge performance.

 

[RobRoy22]

In the interests of accuracy, can we be clear.

Fuji have published a list of lenses which will give optimal results combined with the 40mp sensor.

The use of the term “optimal” is inapt here - it is neither an accurate nor a clear descriptor. “Optimal” would imply that images captured at either more or less than 40 MP would be somehow worse than those captured at 40 MP.

Yes you are right on that point. Wrong word. Does that negate what I am highlighting though?

Nowhere have they indicated that older, or non-listed lenses will give poor results, should be avoided, or special treatment is needed.

A number of posters view that advice as a marketing ploy to promote new lenses. I don’t agree. They are of course fully entitled to this opinion, but shouldn’t exaggerate or distort it to something which it isn’t, or become unnecessarily indignant.

Fuji have issued some info or guidance. Use it as you see fit, or take it with a pinch of salt if that’s how you feel. I will continue using my 16-80 and 16mm prime with the larger sensor . Happy New Year everyone.

 

[DelnT]

Optically speaking at the resolution of this kind of sensor its possible that the lines per inch resolved by the lens and the actual resolution of the sensor clash.

That means practically the lens can't resolve in as high a resolution as the sensor can deliver.

This doesn't mean any old lens won't work. The metaphor would be a great signal into a poorer amp will still sound great just not 'as great' as it could have. In this case you'll get a great image with an old lens just not at the sensors full potential. It'll likely even be better than with an older sensor. Newer lenses resolve highrr lpi and can extract the full detail of the new sensor.

I'll still buy an old lens or two I'll just buy them cheaper

 

[michaeladawson]

In the interests of accuracy, can we be clear.

Fuji have published a list of lenses which will give optimal results combined with the 40mp sensor.

The use of the term “optimal” is inapt here - it is neither an accurate nor a clear descriptor. “Optimal” would imply that images captured at either more or less than 40 MP would be somehow worse than those captured at 40 MP.

Yes you are right on that point. Wrong word. Does that negate what I am highlighting though?

No. But neither does it help to dispel the belief by some that lenses not on the list don’t resolve 40 MP on an APS-C sensor.

 

[DelnT]

I'm with Mike on this I think people worry unduly. I only bothered with new LM lenses because of focus motors not lens resolution. Most Fuji lenses old or new have great quality/character.

 

[RobRoy22]

Optically speaking at the resolution of this kind of sensor its possible that the lines per inch resolved by the lens and the actual resolution of the sensor clash.

Possible? Do you have any evidence this IS the case?

That means practically the lens can't resolve in as high a resolution as the sensor can deliver.

It COULD, I guess, mean that. But it doesn’t mean [present tense] that, until or unless you can demonstrate it through suitable carefully conducted tests. By the way I have no expertise in this field. But I am sceptical when people make bold statements without backing them up.

This doesn't mean any old lens won't work. The metaphor would be a great signal into a poorer amp will still sound great just not 'as great' as it could have. In this case you'll get a great image with an old lens just not at the sensors full potential.

You’ve lost me here. Are you saying it’s great but could have been even better if Fuji hadn’t mismatched lenses and sensor? Which you’ve speculated about but not demonstrated in any way.

It'll likely even be better than with an older sensor. Newer lenses resolve highrr lpi and can extract the full detail of the new sensor.

I'll still buy an old lens or two I'll just buy them cheaper