Fuji X70 Digital Zoom

pda4you · Jan 16, 2016

Wondering how they keep the full image resolution. I really am intrigued by this feature. The native 28mm then the 35mm and 50mm zoom. This is a super slick idea, if the IQ remains.

So how do they swing keeping the 16mp quality?

Mike

0lf · Jan 16, 2016

Fujifilm [Global]

At Fujifilm we create innovative products and deliver effective solutions in a wide variety of fields to serve society, contribute to the quality of life, and enhance environmental sustainability.

www.fujifilm.com

pda4you · Jan 16, 2016

Interesting, so "May Degrade" sounds like will degrade, I guess we will have to see by how much. This is a POWERFUL feature. IMHO.

Mike

Xplate · Jan 16, 2016

pda4you said:
Interesting, so "May Degrade" sounds like will degrade, I guess we will have to see by how much. This is a POWERFUL feature. IMHO.

Mike

Great feature for "Street" since IQ is not top of the list. If it gives about 98% of native IQ, I would be ecstatic. But I'm just a "walk around snapshot guy", not a pixel peeper. The thought that I could click on 35/50 mm has a lot of appeal and peace of mind in that I won't regret not having a little more reach if I need it.

Sal Baker · Jan 16, 2016

pda4you said:
Wondering how they keep the full image resolution. I really am intrigued by this feature. The native 28mm then the 35mm and 50mm zoom. This is a super slick idea, if the IQ remains.

So how do they swing keeping the 16mp quality?

Mike

They don't. The images are cropped and then interpolated back up to 16mp file size (not 16mp resolution). The GR does the same except the cropped RAW files are saved at the reduced size for interpolating later if desired with more capable software.

PS bicubic and other interpolation software does a better job because it can render the image more carefully on a PC. In-camera interpolation has to be instantaneous so no doubt a more primitive form of pixel doubling is used. Certainly useful but there's no free lunch when so much image data is thrown away.

Sal

pda4you · Jan 16, 2016

Xplate said:
Great feature for "Street" since IQ is not top of the list. If it gives about 98% of native IQ, I would be ecstatic. But I'm just a "walk around snapshot guy", not a pixel peeper. The thought that I could click on 35/50 mm has a lot of appeal and peace of mind in that I won't regret not having a little more reach if I need it.

Xplate · Jan 16, 2016

Sal Baker said:
pda4you said:

Wondering how they keep the full image resolution. I really am intrigued by this feature. The native 28mm then the 35mm and 50mm zoom. This is a super slick idea, if the IQ remains.

So how do they swing keeping the 16mp quality?

Mike

Click to expand...

They don't. The images are cropped and then interpolated back up to 16mp file size (not 16mp resolution). The GR does the same except the cropped RAW files are saved at the reduced size for interpolating later if desired with more capable software.

PS bicubic and other interpolation software does a better job because it can render the image more carefully on a PC. In-camera interpolation has to be instantaneous so no doubt a more primitive form of pixel doubling is used. Certainly useful but there's no free lunch when so much image data is thrown away.

Sal

Sal,

I know you don't know for certain, but generally how much degradation can one expect?

Sal Baker · Jan 16, 2016

Xplate said:
Sal Baker said:

pda4you said:

Wondering how they keep the full image resolution. I really am intrigued by this feature. The native 28mm then the 35mm and 50mm zoom. This is a super slick idea, if the IQ remains.

So how do they swing keeping the 16mp quality?

Mike

Click to expand...

They don't. The images are cropped and then interpolated back up to 16mp file size (not 16mp resolution). The GR does the same except the cropped RAW files are saved at the reduced size for interpolating later if desired with more capable software.

PS bicubic and other interpolation software does a better job because it can render the image more carefully on a PC. In-camera interpolation has to be instantaneous so no doubt a more primitive form of pixel doubling is used. Certainly useful but there's no free lunch when so much image data is thrown away.

Sal

Click to expand...

Sal,

I know you don't know for certain, but generally how much degradation can one expect?

0lf · Jan 16, 2016

Xplate said:
Sal Baker said:

pda4you said:

Wondering how they keep the full image resolution. I really am intrigued by this feature. The native 28mm then the 35mm and 50mm zoom. This is a super slick idea, if the IQ remains.

So how do they swing keeping the 16mp quality?

Mike

Click to expand...

They don't. The images are cropped and then interpolated back up to 16mp file size (not 16mp resolution). The GR does the same except the cropped RAW files are saved at the reduced size for interpolating later if desired with more capable software.

PS bicubic and other interpolation software does a better job because it can render the image more carefully on a PC. In-camera interpolation has to be instantaneous so no doubt a more primitive form of pixel doubling is used. Certainly useful but there's no free lunch when so much image data is thrown away.

Sal

Click to expand...

Sal,

I know you don't know for certain, but generally how much degradation can one expect?

--
xplate

I am sure the results will be totally usable at 35mm (1.25x digital zoom) considering what I get from a G7x at 160mm (1.6x digital zoom). Not sure about 50mm since the picture will be interpolated from only 5Mpixel.

Lets hope fuji implementation is better than from sony. On RX1 you completely loose control over focus point management when digital teleconverter is engaged.

kielbasa · Jan 17, 2016

I'm only wondering why Fuji decided to use 28mm. I know that Ricoh GR succeded on the market but generally 28mm is too wide for everyday shooting, it's not too universal. Would be much better if it started from 35 or 50mm and we would be able to reach 70mm portrait with Digital zoom.

pda4you · Jan 17, 2016

kielbasa said:
I'm only wondering why Fuji decided to use 28mm. I know that Ricoh GR succeded on the market but generally 28mm is too wide for everyday shooting, it's not too universal. Would be much better if it started from 35 or 50mm and we would be able to reach 70mm portrait with Digital zoom.

I agree but tend to be a narrow shooter. My perfect for this gear would be around 40mm EQV or so. A perfect balance IMHO. I had the Coolpix A for a minute and 28 was limiting.

That is why I was so interested in the 35 and 50mm "zoom" on this one.

Mike

Sal Baker · Jan 17, 2016

pda4you said:
kielbasa said:

I'm only wondering why Fuji decided to use 28mm. I know that Ricoh GR succeded on the market but generally 28mm is too wide for everyday shooting, it's not too universal. Would be much better if it started from 35 or 50mm and we would be able to reach 70mm portrait with Digital zoom.

Click to expand...

I agree but tend to be a narrow shooter. My perfect for this gear would be around 40mm EQV or so. A perfect balance IMHO. I had the Coolpix A for a minute and 28 was limiting.

That is why I was so interested in the 35 and 50mm "zoom" on this one.

Mike

I've read that 18mm 2.8 is a size lens that works for pocketable APS-C cameras. Anything longer or faster requires a larger lens. All these cameras have similar crop modes to simulate longer lenses but they turn the nice 16mp sensors into 5-8mp cameras. Seems like a waste to me, might as well buy a smaller sensor camera at that point.

Sal

kielbasa · Jan 17, 2016

But x100T has 35mm equivalent with the same sensor size. Is it that much bigger than 28mm so it won't fit into a pocket ?

pda4you · Jan 17, 2016

Yes no question but I will take the hit on larger lens size. 28 means you have to get pretty close. I spent a lot of time just photographing with a 50mm and really enjoy shooting around that range.

But I know others will disagree.

I am hopeful the zoom quality on this one is decent then it is a best of all worlds.

Mike

0lf · Jan 17, 2016

kielbasa said:
But x100T has 35mm equivalent with the same sensor size. Is it that much bigger than 28mm so it won't fit into a pocket ?

The X100T lens is definitely bigger.

Plus, from reports, it is optically better at f/2.8 than the X100 lens at the same aperture.

RichThomasTacoma · Jan 17, 2016

There was a recent article in another blog featuring a wandering lensman discussing the digital tele conversion (DTC) feature of the OMD-EM1 (and EM5ii) from Olympus. The post included 100% crops from the in-camera DTC on the EM1. Based on the 100% crops, if Fuji has comparable capability with their DTC provision in camera, I think there's almost no chance to recognize the 35mm equivalent DTC output from the X70 vs. a true 35mm equivalent lens, and little chance to recognize the 50mm DTC output. I believe the DTC on the EM1 is a 1.5x factor, and based on the cropped demos in the blog and my own experience with my EM1, the X70 35mm DTC would be no problem (1.25x), while the difference with the 50mm DTC involves "uprezing" by 1.78x and might be a stretch at 100% view, but not much of a stretch. The proof will be in checking this feature on production cameras, but I'm not as put off by this feature as some on this thread, and look forward to seeing examples from production cameras.

pda4you · Jan 17, 2016

RichThomasTacoma said:
There was a recent article in another blog featuring a wandering lensman discussing the digital tele conversion (DTC) feature of the OMD-EM1 (and EM5ii) from Olympus. The post included 100% crops from the in-camera DTC on the EM1. Based on the 100% crops, if Fuji has comparable capability with their DTC provision in camera, I think there's almost no chance to recognize the 35mm equivalent DTC output from the X70 vs. a true 35mm equivalent lens, and little chance to recognize the 50mm DTC output. I believe the DTC on the EM1 is a 1.5x factor, and based on the cropped demos in the blog and my own experience with my EM1, the X70 35mm DTC would be no problem (1.25x), while the difference with the 50mm DTC involves "uprezing" by 1.78x and might be a stretch at 100% view, but not much of a stretch. The proof will be in checking this feature on production cameras, but I'm not as put off by this feature as some on this thread, and look forward to seeing examples from production cameras.

Cool - yep this is a top feature IMHO. If the results are good, I will buy one.

Mike

Sal Baker · Jan 17, 2016

pda4you said:
RichThomasTacoma said:

There was a recent article in another blog featuring a wandering lensman discussing the digital tele conversion (DTC) feature of the OMD-EM1 (and EM5ii) from Olympus. The post included 100% crops from the in-camera DTC on the EM1. Based on the 100% crops, if Fuji has comparable capability with their DTC provision in camera, I think there's almost no chance to recognize the 35mm equivalent DTC output from the X70 vs. a true 35mm equivalent lens, and little chance to recognize the 50mm DTC output. I believe the DTC on the EM1 is a 1.5x factor, and based on the cropped demos in the blog and my own experience with my EM1, the X70 35mm DTC would be no problem (1.25x), while the difference with the 50mm DTC involves "uprezing" by 1.78x and might be a stretch at 100% view, but not much of a stretch. The proof will be in checking this feature on production cameras, but I'm not as put off by this feature as some on this thread, and look forward to seeing examples from production cameras.

Click to expand...

Cool - yep this is a top feature IMHO. If the results are good, I will buy one.

Mike

I hate for you to be mislead. You can crop any image and up-ez it, with any camera. But it's not the same as real lenses. Resolution decreases dramatically (why bother with a 16mp sensor?) and subject isolation and bokeh are flat (like an iPhone). If anyone really thinks cropping solves everything, why do they make different prime FL's and zooms? If it doesn't matter, any small sensor camera can be cropped.

Sal

A Beahm · Jan 17, 2016

Sal Baker said:
pda4you said:

RichThomasTacoma said:

There was a recent article in another blog featuring a wandering lensman discussing the digital tele conversion (DTC) feature of the OMD-EM1 (and EM5ii) from Olympus. The post included 100% crops from the in-camera DTC on the EM1. Based on the 100% crops, if Fuji has comparable capability with their DTC provision in camera, I think there's almost no chance to recognize the 35mm equivalent DTC output from the X70 vs. a true 35mm equivalent lens, and little chance to recognize the 50mm DTC output. I believe the DTC on the EM1 is a 1.5x factor, and based on the cropped demos in the blog and my own experience with my EM1, the X70 35mm DTC would be no problem (1.25x), while the difference with the 50mm DTC involves "uprezing" by 1.78x and might be a stretch at 100% view, but not much of a stretch. The proof will be in checking this feature on production cameras, but I'm not as put off by this feature as some on this thread, and look forward to seeing examples from production cameras.

Click to expand...

Cool - yep this is a top feature IMHO. If the results are good, I will buy one.

Mike

Click to expand...

I hate for you to be mislead. You can crop any image and up-ez it, with any camera. But it's not the same as real lenses. Resolution decreases dramatically (why bother with a 16mp sensor?) and subject isolation and bokeh are flat (like an iPhone). If anyone really thinks cropping solves everything, why do they make different prime FL's and zooms? If it doesn't matter, any small sensor camera can be cropped.

Sal

The GR can emulate a 35mm FOV within reason, especially given that the camera produces a RAW file. This is ultimately a much better solution than what the X70 will apparently provide with an interpolation of JPEG files. Fuji is making a mistake here IMO- provide a RAW file cropped instead.

You're right though that it's not a great solution. If you're going to take that approach, it would be better to start with something like the Sony RX1Ri with its resolution and greater control over depth of field.

pda4you · Jan 17, 2016

Sal Baker said:
I hate for you to be mislead. You can crop any image and up-ez it, with any camera. But it's not the same as real lenses. Resolution decreases dramatically (why bother with a 16mp sensor?) and subject isolation and bokeh are flat (like an iPhone). If anyone really thinks cropping solves everything, why do they make different prime FL's and zooms? If it doesn't matter, any small sensor camera can be cropped.

Sal

Have no fear - I will have to see the result. I get it - but thanks for your concern.

Mike

Fuji X70 Digital Zoom

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Active member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts