Exchange Sony A7R IV with GFX 50S?

Started 2 months ago | Questions thread
Greg7579
Greg7579 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,063
Re: Double standards

Thoughts R Us wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

Velocity of Sound wrote:

Erik Kaffehr wrote:

It is obvious that larger size has an advantage. But the 44x33 mm sensor is just 1.68 times the area of the the 24x36 mm sensor. Going from APS-C is 2.25X, a much larger step. The 1.68X size is equivalent to 2/3EV advantage.

I am a dual-system shooter with µ4/3 (Olympus) and Fuji's GFX system. The µ4/3 system (and the 4/3 system before it, which I was shooting with for about a decade prior to "upgrading" to the newer mount) were always trashed based on sensor size. It's a bit better these days but people talked about APS-C as being far superior to 4/3. Yet the size difference (based on a multiplier) between 4/3 and APS-C is about the same as the difference between "full frame" and "mini medium format." If there's a significant difference between 4/3 and APS-C then there must be a significant difference between "full frame" and medium format.

So it's been very interesting from my perspective to see the way that both systems are treated. µ4/3 is still trashed for its size and all of the downsides that people assume must come with it (many of which are overblown, in my opinion). I figured the GFX system would be universally exalted but it's not the case. Many "full frame" shooters claim they don't see a significant difference, and there's not a significant difference in sensor sizes. It comes across as a double standard. (Both 4/3 and GFX systems earn ire from APS-C and "full frame" shooters for having the 4:3 ratio.)

To me it indicates that the standards and views are not held universally. They are tweaked so that "full frame" is the preferred format by the photography community and many review sites. I don't find it fair or particularly intellectually honest. But then photography is an interesting mixture of art and science, and at the end of the day this is about business rather than pure science. There's little fairness in business, I suppose.

If you follow all this carefully like I do, the language, attitude and leanings of the camera press (and many DPR posters) is amazing when it comes to talking about MF in relation to FF. When Erik says that our GFX / Hassy sensor is "just 1.68 times the area" of FF, one can see the immediate bias and leanings of the argument. That is not to pick on Erik. But that is the kind of bent language the press constantly uses in subtle ways. And then they put it (like Erik did) in terms of 2/3rds stop EV. Well, I guess that is one way to describe it if you are determined to negate the differences that are clearly there. It is a play on words and there seems to be this almost pathological need in the camera press to convince people that FF matches or is at least "very" close to MF. I don't buy it....

But you know what I did buy? The GFX 50r and then 11 months later the GFX 100.

But like I always say, all those high-res new FF cameras are great. (I just bought the Q2 by the way.) There is no need to try to make them sound the same as the much larger MF sensor. 1.68x is not a small comparison number on sensors that big.

It is all mostly nonsense in my opinion and yes, there is a double standard and pure FF fans try to play both ends of the argument. I have seen it thousands of times. Their argument is: FF = MF. FF>>>APSC. FF >>>>>> MFT. If you repeat it enough times on DPR, maybe someone starts to believe it that is thinking of buying MF.

But hey, this is a camera equipment forum and people are allowed to argue about camera gear.

As you allude to, there's nothing wrong with a good gear debate. Kind of like debating sports.

But it is interesting that DPR removed the comments section for their piece proclaiming the A7RIV as the "best camera for landscape photography"...I wonder why? Perhaps they were getting too much negative blowback on a very flawed conclusion? Maybe they never intended comments in the first place? The only other articles without comments are the promotional pieces paid for by a particular manufacturer. Perhaps this is meant more as a promotional piece?

The Sony is a good camera, no doubt. But also if one is talking about incremental differences, the number of megapixels, in the IV, is only 1.45 times that in the III model. Yet some fall over themselves to declare 61 MP as this fantastic number.

For me the bottom line is that the Fuji GFX 100 should most definitely have been included in the list, and once included, it would have won.

Also, the Fuji GFX 50s is also a superior camera for pure landscape photography.

The Sony may be the best Sony, it may be the best FF mirrorless, it may be the best FF for landscapes, it may be the best for landscapes in a particular price range, but it is not the best camera for landscape photography.

I had no idea that DPR negated those comments, because I made a lot of them on that thread but didn't check back.  I think it is obvious that DPR has a pro-Sony and Nikon FF marketing bias to some degree, or maybe it is their business model for other reasons.  Hey, it's their company.  Maybe they just want to push FF as the practical solution for most people.  That is legitimate as long as they give some appearance of being fair, which they did with the GFX 100.

That said, it is pretty obvious to all that they are not interested in hyping up GFX and Hassy MF as much as they are high-res FF (especially Sony).  That is pretty obvious.

But I am very good at reading the English language, and I have a finely-tuned radar for picking up on the editorial tone and direction of DPR reviews, editorials and opinion postings by their staff.  They are entitled to their opinions and they are allowed to push an agenda or products just like any other media conglomerate in the world always does.

I like DPR a lot, and I'm very glad they have these Boards for us all to Pontificate and opinionate on.  And I think the moderation is fair and allows us some latitude, especially on the MF Board.

I'm not as passionate about brands or sensor size as I used to be.  I just like camera equipment and I like reading about camera equipment.  These cameras are all so damn good now....  And besides, the products DPR obviously push are legitimately very excellent (Sony, Nikon, high-res FF, etc...).

Lusting after camera gear is not considered to be a sin by the major religions of the world. I checked with several religious scholars on this important point.  Therefore I am free of sin in that regard...  But I am loaded with sin in other regards and am fortunate and thankful to own serious amounts of Fuji APSC and MF gear, love my new Leica high-res FF Q2, and I lust after the Sony alphasevenarefour (a sinless lust stimulated by DPR!).

😎

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm Fujifilm X100F Leica Q2 Fujifilm X-H1 +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow