DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
Incredible that Fuji spent all that time developing a new AF system, what with all their blind fanboys.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
- Status
Sal Baker
Forum Pro
I always wonder about the thought processes that drive one to go to a Fuji forum and accuse the members of being Fuji fans.
Sal
DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
That's some fanboy talk right there.
Why would I want FF Sony and those bigger lenses? The results in jpeg from Fuji are great especially for the people shots I do? Fuji lenses also are a pretty good deal for the quality and build, especially on sale. I don't want to upgrade my camera every year anyways. More like every 3-5 years. I'd rather put my money in glass especially when the results are so great with the current bodies.
illumidata
Active member
Great point, and possibly the answer to my own personal conundrum. Thanks!
That resolution would work fine for me. I'm still in the waiting game but Gen 2 can't be far away.
Just curious, does their current sensor really hold you back? That may be a somewhat rhetorical question but I see the same complaints from people about a couple stops of low-ISO dynamic range in Canon's sensors. (And in many cases those people haven't a single gallery photo to share, or maybe just a few ducks/flowers shots, so I can't tell why - or if - the sensor poses any sort of actual problem for them.) There is always a temptation to hope that some upgrade will turn our photography into something better, but I suspect most of the time that hope doesn't pan out for long.
I've upgraded several times over the years and yet some photos I took with my earlier cameras are still favorites of mine.
Last edited:
I am having an itch for upgrading...
I was drawn to Fuji because of its low light performance almost 3 yrs ago. But I still hang on to the X-E1 because all the newer model has the same sensor. If I need speed and speedlight, I use the Canon 70D.
Next one has to be vastly superior...
5
57even
Guest
Between any of the sensors produced in the last 4-5 years.
Quantum efficiency and microlens design has been more or less optimised. Signal to noise ratio (equalised for resolution) is more or less as expected based on sensor size, and this applies across the board. The variation is a few percent.
This is because the current 4T photosite design has barely changed in the meantime.
The main difference happens downstream from the photosite. The architecture of the ADC and ISO amplifiers, which is the main distinguishing feature of Canon and Sony sensors. Sony use low-noise single stage amps and on-chip ADCs on all except their largest photosites so there is less read noise at low ISO.
This will provide improvements in DR but nothing much else.
Other than that, there is precious little difference between a D7000 and a D7200 apart from resolution. These cameras were released in Dec 2010 and March 2015 respectively. 4.5 years apart. Check the SNR results.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7200-versus-Nikon-D7000___1020_680
And much of the useful resolution improvement comes directly from losing the AA filter, not the increase in MP. (Compare MTF values for D810 and D800 with same lens).
Only DR is improved slightly because read noise doesn't scale with photosite size. Read noise is about the same for pixels on each sensor, so when matched for output size, the higher resolution sensor has a small advantage. Check the DR results.
BSI advantages did not really materialise - if you add the Samsung NX1 to the above plot...
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...Nikon-D7000-versus-Samsung-NX1___1020_680_976
SNR results are close to identical.
Quantum efficiency and microlens design has been more or less optimised. Signal to noise ratio (equalised for resolution) is more or less as expected based on sensor size, and this applies across the board. The variation is a few percent.
This is because the current 4T photosite design has barely changed in the meantime.
The main difference happens downstream from the photosite. The architecture of the ADC and ISO amplifiers, which is the main distinguishing feature of Canon and Sony sensors. Sony use low-noise single stage amps and on-chip ADCs on all except their largest photosites so there is less read noise at low ISO.
This will provide improvements in DR but nothing much else.
Other than that, there is precious little difference between a D7000 and a D7200 apart from resolution. These cameras were released in Dec 2010 and March 2015 respectively. 4.5 years apart. Check the SNR results.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7200-versus-Nikon-D7000___1020_680
And much of the useful resolution improvement comes directly from losing the AA filter, not the increase in MP. (Compare MTF values for D810 and D800 with same lens).
Only DR is improved slightly because read noise doesn't scale with photosite size. Read noise is about the same for pixels on each sensor, so when matched for output size, the higher resolution sensor has a small advantage. Check the DR results.
BSI advantages did not really materialise - if you add the Samsung NX1 to the above plot...
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...Nikon-D7000-versus-Samsung-NX1___1020_680_976
SNR results are close to identical.
MrChristopher
Senior Member
ScottD1964
Senior Member
H
historianx
Guest
But it's not quite the same sensor. X-Trans 2 (XE-2, XT-1, XT-10, X100S/T) has on-chip PDAF, whereas X-Trans 1 (XPro1, XE-1, XM-1) does not, they have CDAF.
And keep it at 16MP. My D7100s have 24MP on APSC and the Fujis are better in low light/high iso. The trade off is the 24MP sensor has a little more DR and headroom for PP. Maybe a 20MP sensor?
MrChristopher
Senior Member
Clayton1985
Veteran Member
I can't say that I'm completely up to speed on the terminology but I don't think fans and fanboys are the same thing.
Here's what could improve my X-Pro1:
OVF framelines visible even in bright light. That might be done by black lines when light is bright, by thicker lines, whatever. But I frame my shots, so I might be an exception.
An EVF with a faster refresh rate, bigger and more realistic. That might be done by cramming in the EVF used in the X-T1. But I use a viewfinder, not the rear LCD, 90 percent of the time, so I might be an exception.
A click when I am in manual focus with a third-party lens and I hit focus. That probably requires use of some focus-sensing pixels on the sensors. But I often shoot with third-party MF primes, so I might be an exception.
Camera JPGs at even less compression that the current Fine setting. That requires fast enough electronic throughput. But I often want to do minor adjustments on the camera JPG (although I always shoot the raw file, too), so I might be an exception.
Gee, I forgot to demand more pixels. I guess I am not a photographer.
OVF framelines visible even in bright light. That might be done by black lines when light is bright, by thicker lines, whatever. But I frame my shots, so I might be an exception.
An EVF with a faster refresh rate, bigger and more realistic. That might be done by cramming in the EVF used in the X-T1. But I use a viewfinder, not the rear LCD, 90 percent of the time, so I might be an exception.
A click when I am in manual focus with a third-party lens and I hit focus. That probably requires use of some focus-sensing pixels on the sensors. But I often shoot with third-party MF primes, so I might be an exception.
Camera JPGs at even less compression that the current Fine setting. That requires fast enough electronic throughput. But I often want to do minor adjustments on the camera JPG (although I always shoot the raw file, too), so I might be an exception.
Gee, I forgot to demand more pixels. I guess I am not a photographer.
5
57even
Guest
5
57even
Guest
Davidgilmour
Senior Member
The X100 has the best Fill flash ever
and some of the Fuji lenses are very very very very very good, almost the best.
ttran88
Senior Member
I'm wondering if it's possible to adapt XF lenses to Sony's bodies. Similar to what a lot of people are doing with Canon EF lenses.
MrFresno
Senior Member
No, you can't use Fuji XF lenses on other bodies. Fuji lenses do not have mechanical aperture and focus controls like legacy lenses do.
Which Sony bodies? Full frame, like A7, A7 II, A7R, A7R II? Canon EF and Nikon FX lenses can be used with adapters on Sony full-frame bodies.
Fujifilm XF lenses are for X bodies, which are APS-C. They could be adapted to be used with Sony APS-C bodies, like NEX 6, NEX 7, A6000 -- I'm not aware of any actual adapters on the market.
It is not true that only legacy lenses with mechanical aperture control, like Nikon AI and AI-S lenses, can be adapted to be used with present-day cameras. Current Canon EF and Nikon AF-S G lenses, which are electronic, can actually be used with, say, Sony A7, via adapters -- two suppliers being Metabones and Fotodiox. (I say so based on personal experience.)
Can't wait to use my Fujifilm XF 56mm f/1.2 R on my Sony A6000.
For cameras and lenses, I bow to the Japanese masters. For adapters, I bow to the Chinese masters. I'm a slave after all.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum