My review: Fuji X-T1 vs the Nikon Df

Started Jun 16, 2014 | Discussions thread
shigzeo Senior Member • Posts: 1,834
Re: My review: Fuji X-T1 vs the Nikon Df

Dheorl wrote:

shigzeo ? wrote:

photoreddi wrote:

Beat Traveller wrote:

I'm slowly growing to despise Compact Camera Meter. It's gradually achieving DXO levels of screen-grabbing to make pointless judgements void of context about the superiority of one camera over another.

There are so many other ways to make pointless, incorrect and sometimes silly judgements, many of them making up a large portion of some of DPR's forum threads. The Compact Camera Meter can be useful if it's used appropriately and not used to support personal preferences with misleading comparisons.

It's biggest problem is that it doesn't show 'equivalence'. You get a smaller camera or a larger camera, but the effect of the lenses you put on the sensors inside those don't show up at all. Yes, you can get great compact interchangeable lens cameras now. But you cannot get the same look you can get with the larger formats and even modest speed lenses.

Nikon do have a problem though: their dSLRs are too big. Their lenses are what they are. By and large, equivalents in m43 and APS-C do not exist when mated to native sensors; if they do, they prove to be just as large as the FF lenses to which they are most closely compared.

Although if you don't care about razer thin DoF then all of this is largely just hot air and I definitely don't see what use there is displaying it along with camera size.

The reason is that fast FF lenses get compared unfairly to lenses that deliver images that produce completely different images. It isn't all about DOF, but if the idea is that a crop sensor lens is smaller, then it should be compared to an equivalent lens that gives an equivalent look.

Thus, an 18-55/2,8 APS-C lens should be compared to a 28-70/4 or 28-85/4 not an f/2,8 lens, which gives a totally different result. All things equal, lenses giving equivalent focal lengths AND DOF will be roughly the same size. Sometimes, they will be much larger in APS-C or m43 simply because in order to achieve the same look, you have to have much much faster glass/more expensive glass.

I prefer slower lenses. On FF, I own f/1,8/85mm at fastest. It is roughly the same size as the Fujifilm 56/1,2 and gives pretty much the same look. If Fujifilm made a 56/2, then its equivalent FF lens would be an 85/2,8.

Lenses that give more DOF at widest aperture usually are smaller and cheaper. With mirrorless, since lenses are made to mimic FF standards, they have to use much more expensive designs in order to keep up with rather meagre lenses.

The real coup would be if Nikon designed an FE/FM style mirrorless F mount camera. Apart from a longer flange distance, the camera and system would be the same size as the X-T1, but would feature cheaper lenses, many of which are at least as good as the Fujifilm lenses. What doesn't match up is the zooms. You get printable, great results from any zoom on the market today, but Fujifilm's 18-55/2,8-4 is overall a better lens than the 24-85/3,5-4,5 which is its closest competitor. Of course, DOF/FOV is off between those two. If Nikon made a 28-85/4-5,6 lens, it would be the same size as the Fujifilm.

 shigzeo's gear list:shigzeo's gear list
Leica SL (Typ 601) Fujifilm GFX 50S Leica M10 Leica APO-Summicron-M 90mm f/2 ASPH +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow