-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Matt - you took the time to write up a detailed review and I appreciate that. But don’t you think that your conclusions working for one week with the cheapest lens the system has to offer are a tad unfair?I'm so sorry, I missed your post...Don't bother - I see what you mean. Strangely enough, this has not bothered me yet, even though I am put off by LoCA on other lenses.
Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
bokesan
Veteran Member
Thanks! The snow scene is an excellent test for purple fringing since it's even more noticeable against a white backdrop than against a blue sky. Looking at Jim's test (here: https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/off-axis-testing-of-the-fuji-45-2-8-and-50-3-5-gf-on-the-gfx-100s/), I think that GF 45mm would have shown some fringing in this scene, too.Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
The background bokeh detail looks quite ugly, indeed. I'll see if I can replicate that with my lens.
M
MattPointZero
Guest
Sure, but these are 'where I am at' with it, not conclusions - I think it would only be unfair if I were trying to suggest that it was some kind of ultimate judgement on the two systems, but I am at pains to make clear that isn't the case - and I mentioned several times that I recognise some of the issues will be firmware improved, and that the outcomes might be different with the newest lenses, I'd hate anyone to get the impression I can wholly review the systems. I also stress that I am not equipped to test per se. You are right, and I was trying to get that across - this is an update from someone who has just switched and is making an assessment based on initial use past the 'oh god this camera is gorgeous' stage. Some of it may change, some won't. I am also careful to only compare the 45P to the most equivalent GF45, which doesn't seem too unfair. There's probably more in here that is positive about the X2D than negative?Matt - you took the time to write up a detailed review and I appreciate that. But don’t you think that your conclusions working for one week with the cheapest lens the system has to offer are a tad unfair?I'm so sorry, I missed your post...Don't bother - I see what you mean. Strangely enough, this has not bothered me yet, even though I am put off by LoCA on other lenses.
Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
I think it is really important to keep emphasising - these are my findings, for my use, at this stage of ownership, and aside from the play at the mount and USBC socket, I absolutely don't suggest any of these things are shortcomings or failings, just system differences I observe going from one to the other. I am also still sat here staring at both systems torn about how I feel about them! I just hoped and intended it would be useful for others in a similar position - I had a few PMs asking for an update, so posted it here, I appreciate it won't be of value to everyone.
M
MattPointZero
Guest
Thanks! The snow scene is an excellent test for purple fringing since it's even more noticeable against a white backdrop than against a blue sky. Looking at Jim's test (here: https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/off-axis-testing-of-the-fuji-45-2-8-and-50-3-5-gf-on-the-gfx-100s/), I think that GF 45mm would have shown some fringing in this scene, too.Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
The background bokeh detail looks quite ugly, indeed. I'll see if I can replicate that with my lens.
Yes, agreed - this is a real torture test for a number of reasons, and I was really sad I didn't have both cameras to do a direct comparison when I was out for this, it would have been interesting. I went back through my catalog to find the most similar conditions I could when using the GF45, and couldn't find anything with colour fringing as pronounced, but also couldn't find a shot quite so extreme as this to compare with.
I really wish I had other lenses to test, but I don't. To be fair, no one is talking about the beautiful OOF areas of the new lenses, and I have heard a few 'meh' type comments about it. That's what I would like to see first hand - I have no qualms about any relative slowness of the X2D, I don't even mind the hunting too much - but if the final images are lacking in some aspects (bokeh etc), even if there are some colour advantages, it makes it harder for me to draw conclusions about.
Just remember that even if You had the V lens now those are available in only 2 variants... 55 and 38 mm No one I know have and tested the 90 2,5 v so far... I really would be interested to see the type of bokeh this lens might have specially in comparison with the 135 2,8 lens...Yes, agreed - this is a real torture test for a number of reasons, and I was really sad I didn't have both cameras to do a direct comparison when I was out for this, it would have been interesting. I went back through my catalog to find the most similar conditions I could when using the GF45, and couldn't find anything with colour fringing as pronounced, but also couldn't find a shot quite so extreme as this to compare with.Thanks! The snow scene is an excellent test for purple fringing since it's even more noticeable against a white backdrop than against a blue sky. Looking at Jim's test (here: https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/off-axis-testing-of-the-fuji-45-2-8-and-50-3-5-gf-on-the-gfx-100s/), I think that GF 45mm would have shown some fringing in this scene, too.Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
The background bokeh detail looks quite ugly, indeed. I'll see if I can replicate that with my lens.
I really wish I had other lenses to test, but I don't. To be fair, no one is talking about the beautiful OOF areas of the new lenses, and I have heard a few 'meh' type comments about it. That's what I would like to see first hand - I have no qualms about any relative slowness of the X2D, I don't even mind the hunting too much - but if the final images are lacking in some aspects (bokeh etc), even if there are some colour advantages, it makes it harder for me to draw conclusions about.
--
'If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs...' Kipling
www.imaginestudio.se
Would be nice to share those 2 RAW files also. I can imagine pp software also coming into play and applying different settings for different cameras and lenses.
In this case never could be "apple to apple" comparison because one of the lenses is 55 and the other is 80 mm. I definitely think that there would not be any reasonable comparison no matter of the used aperture...
yogi4fitness
Veteran Member
agreed but its more fair than comparing them wide open. That puts another variable in the comparison. I would wait for GF55/1.7 to come out and then compare at same aperture for a true apples to apples comparison. I am sure many are waiting for that comparison.
yogi4fitness
Veteran Member
Thanks for the objective writeup of the new XCD lenses.
bokesan
Veteran Member
Near-focus bokeh looks the same in my sample:Thanks! The snow scene is an excellent test for purple fringing since it's even more noticeable against a white backdrop than against a blue sky. Looking at Jim's test (here: https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/off-axis-testing-of-the-fuji-45-2-8-and-50-3-5-gf-on-the-gfx-100s/), I think that GF 45mm would have shown some fringing in this scene, too.Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
The background bokeh detail looks quite ugly, indeed. I'll see if I can replicate that with my lens.
XCD 45P, center
XCD 45P, top left corner
How did you manage to get those images with no focus bracking?Near-focus bokeh looks the same in my sample:Thanks! The snow scene is an excellent test for purple fringing since it's even more noticeable against a white backdrop than against a blue sky. Looking at Jim's test (here: https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/off-axis-testing-of-the-fuji-45-2-8-and-50-3-5-gf-on-the-gfx-100s/), I think that GF 45mm would have shown some fringing in this scene, too.Hang on, I'll see if I can find some of the things that bugged me.
Not just LoCa, but things that either drew the eye, or once pointed out to me I could not unsee. Some are easily correctable, and completely expected to a degree, and these are quick extreme examples, the snow is overexposed for example...but I have only limited examples to quickly share so an argument that they are not relevant might be fair - but still not things I saw on the fuji closest equivalent, the GF45
crops, of course
I can't find anything comparable to this in my GF images
I am sure there are lots of reasons why I have influenced the image outcome, so again, any criticism inferred can only be seen in relation to my subjective use - only proper testing could give you objective comparisons, and I am not equipped to do that
The background bokeh detail looks quite ugly, indeed. I'll see if I can replicate that with my lens.
XCD 45P, center
XCD 45P, top left corner
Well done.
--
the last word the last word - Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
blog.kasson.com
bokesan
Veteran Member
The 907x 50C has both focus bracketing and a remote releaseHow did you manage to get those images with no focus bracking?Near-focus bokeh looks the same in my sample:
XCD 45P, center
XCD 45P, top left corner
Well done.
I used the former with the minimum step size, 50µm artificial star at about 190cm distance. Order is from front towards infinity.- Chris
(BTW, does anyone else see a smiling Victor Hasselblad in the center top row images?)
Last edited:
I now understand.The 907x 50C has both focus bracketing and a remote releaseHow did you manage to get those images with no focus bracking?Near-focus bokeh looks the same in my sample:
XCD 45P, center
XCD 45P, top left corner
Well done.
Again, well done.
--
the last word the last word - Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
blog.kasson.com
For anyone interested in exploring some of the many factors which contribute to variations in image bokeh, a good overview of the subject is available from Zeiss in their publication: Depth of Field and Bokeh by Dr. Hubert Nasse. This and other Zeiss camera lens technical articles in both English and German can be downloaded here.
If you wish to jump straight to to the discussion of bokeh and factors which influence its appearance, page 25 begins the section: Bokeh – properties of blurriness... [excerpt below]
All the parameters listed here influence the phenomena [bokeh] outside the focal plane:
Many effects are attributed to the lens even though they are mainly caused by the subject in front of the camera. Differences between lenses are often very marginal but are then grossly exaggerated.
As the author indicates, evaluating bokeh in an image requires examination of multiple factors. The makeup and nature of subject matter contained in the image is one of many important considerations.
In addition to the parameters listed in the bullet points above, later discussion in the article examines the affect on the quantity and qualities of bokeh produced by specular highlights from specific types of surfaces; such as "glossy surfaces or drops of water" or "a reflective water surface". Water in any form (snow and ice crystals, atmospheric water droplets, etc.) will exhibit reflective and refractive optical properties. Ice crystals, for example, have a refractive index which differs from standard dry air and which can act as prisms [page 11].
If you wish to jump straight to to the discussion of bokeh and factors which influence its appearance, page 25 begins the section: Bokeh – properties of blurriness... [excerpt below]
All the parameters listed here influence the phenomena [bokeh] outside the focal plane:
- Picture format
- Focal length
- f-number
- The camera-to-subject distance
- Distance to the background or the foreground
- Shapes and patterns of the subject
- Aperture iris shape
- Aberrations of the lens
- Speed of the lens
- Foreground/background brightness
- Colour
Many effects are attributed to the lens even though they are mainly caused by the subject in front of the camera. Differences between lenses are often very marginal but are then grossly exaggerated.
As the author indicates, evaluating bokeh in an image requires examination of multiple factors. The makeup and nature of subject matter contained in the image is one of many important considerations.
In addition to the parameters listed in the bullet points above, later discussion in the article examines the affect on the quantity and qualities of bokeh produced by specular highlights from specific types of surfaces; such as "glossy surfaces or drops of water" or "a reflective water surface". Water in any form (snow and ice crystals, atmospheric water droplets, etc.) will exhibit reflective and refractive optical properties. Ice crystals, for example, have a refractive index which differs from standard dry air and which can act as prisms [page 11].
Last edited:
One thing I like about Phocus is its Luma curve. The curves are implemented as what Raw Therapee calls "control cage": the control point(s) that you establish with a click does not stay on the curve. Instead, when you move the point, it pulls the curve smoothly toward itself. (The technical term is a certain kind of spline?)
And - just opinion, as others here also say - Phocus gives you all the Hasselblad colors.
Phocus is the place to do exposure, highlight recovery, perhaps some Shadow Fill, the Luma curve, and first stab at white balance. If the shot used an XCD lens, Phocus does the lens corrections. Export a .tif and do everything else in your usual post-processing program (Picture Window Pro from Digital Light & Color). If I want deep black, I run the .tif through Raw Therapee for its Black slider, and then on to regular post-processing.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/41790885@N08/
And - just opinion, as others here also say - Phocus gives you all the Hasselblad colors.
Phocus is the place to do exposure, highlight recovery, perhaps some Shadow Fill, the Luma curve, and first stab at white balance. If the shot used an XCD lens, Phocus does the lens corrections. Export a .tif and do everything else in your usual post-processing program (Picture Window Pro from Digital Light & Color). If I want deep black, I run the .tif through Raw Therapee for its Black slider, and then on to regular post-processing.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/41790885@N08/
Last edited:
themediocreenthusiast
Veteran Member
Astonishing.. and perhaps my first time reading abt M1 Ultra vs highest resolution files in 2022 as I dont find much info online, May i ask how big are the files from X2D compared to 100S? Thats one of the main reason im sticking to 42-50mp sensors due to my older Mac before upgrading to MBA M1.
Thanks so much for sharing your honest user experience!
Similar threads
