Then we can smile how wrong Fuji opinion is because they don't know performance of Fuji lenses
They are not bringing as much revenue compared to the lenses on the list.
The nagging feeling that you should be using more expensive lenses.
No difference attributed to changing a 26 Mpx body to a 40 Mpx body.
Nothing. Some lenses are better than others, nothing changed. The Mpx count of the sensor is irrelevant.
I am speculating but I'm speculating having studied optical physics at degree level. I add that not as any kind of flex or rudeness just as a qualification of why I speculated. The resolution of materials is usually the reason why higher res sensors are a struggle with older lens designs.Possible? Do you have any evidence this IS the case?
It COULD, I guess, mean that. But it doesn’t mean [present tense] that, until or unless you can demonstrate it through suitable carefully conducted tests. By the way I have no expertise in this field. But I am sceptical when people make bold statements without backing them up.
You’ve lost me here. Are you saying it’s great but could have been even better if Fuji hadn’t mismatched lenses and sensor? Which you’ve speculated about but not demonstrated in any way.
It'll likely even be better than with an older sensor. Newer lenses resolve highrr lpi and can extract the full detail of the new sensor.
I'll still buy an old lens or two I'll just buy them cheaper
It would be great if you could expand a little on the underlying optical physics theory that explain the “clashing” between the lines per inch resolved by the lens and the resolution of the sensor.I am speculating but I'm speculating having studied optical physics at degree level.Possible? Do you have any evidence this IS the case?
It COULD, I guess, mean that. But it doesn’t mean [present tense] that, until or unless you can demonstrate it through suitable carefully conducted tests. By the way I have no expertise in this field. But I am sceptical when people make bold statements without backing them up.
You’ve lost me here. Are you saying it’s great but could have been even better if Fuji hadn’t mismatched lenses and sensor? Which you’ve speculated about but not demonstrated in any way.
It'll likely even be better than with an older sensor. Newer lenses resolve highrr lpi and can extract the full detail of the new sensor.
I'll still buy an old lens or two I'll just buy them cheaper
I believe there isn’t a discrete threshold that a lens crosses and it can resolve a sensor. Were are looking at more like a continuous distribution.
Nowhere have they indicated that older, or non-listed lenses will give poor results, should be avoided, or special treatment is needed.
A number of posters view that advice as a marketing ploy to promote new lenses. I don’t agree. They are of course fully entitled to this opinion, but shouldn’t exaggerate or distort it to something which it isn’t, or become unnecessarily indignant.
Fuji have issued some info or guidance. Use it as you see fit, or take it with a pinch of salt if that’s how you feel. I will continue using my 16-80 and 16mm prime with the larger sensor. Happy New Year everyone.
One of the first times I recall clearly hearing someone talk about resolving issues Lens and MP on a camera was watching the yTube reviewer Christopher Frost. In reference to a cropped Sensor Camera with 32MP from another brand. That being the last time I clearly recall him talking about such. I didn't fully get any real details then and I don't really see that being done yet in the case of Fuji's lens and cameras.
Not ironic at all, the 16-80 is their current kit/travel lens and will work absolutely fine, the alternative would have been the much older 18-55 which is well-regarded but also not on the list.
Very cynical viewpoint. Unjustified by the actual facts.
Really? I have the X-T5 and 2 lenses not listen. I’m not in the least worried or thinking of ditching those lenses.
Completely agree
Trying to use an analogie again to explain. If you imagine taking a picture of a grid of black lines on a piece of white paper. Lets say they are 1cm appart and 0.1mm thick. In order to get that image to the sensor the lens must be able to optically transmit that through an array of lens elements with good enough clarity. In order to represent the optical image transmitted through the lens array the sensor must be capable of resolving the signal so a 0.1mm line must be large enough the individual sensor sites in the lens can represent it.
If not pixel peeping at 100%, why need 40MP sensor?
Somewhat off topic IMO. Might have been better to start a new thread.
If old lens can't resolve 40MP sensor, Firmware should provide small RAW (26MP RAW) option. When consumer used 26MP RAW for old len, may get similar file size & IQ as 26MP sensor.
No. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a camera with 40mp sensor.
I think this a bit misleading. It's not "nothing". It is true to state that some lenses are better than others. That's always been true. It's true of Fuji's lens range today. And it cuts straight to the OP's question about lenses on Fuji's list and those not on the list. OTOH, if it were "nothing" and the mpx count of the sensor were irrelevant, no-one would make higher res sensors and no-one would buy them.
Thanks for good advice. However, less options in future if almost Fujifilm next camera (except X-H2s) use 40MP BSI-CMOS sensor.
Don't be naive. I big part of this is marketing. I wouldn't use a word like "ploy". This connotes that too much scheming is going on.
Some of them - heavier, larger and missing manual focus ring.
It is called marketing. Marketing is the art of half truths to pry the uninformed consumer's wallet open. Nothing wrong with that - it is the basis of capitalism. Like any publicly held company, it is Fuji's responsibility to its shareholders to make money. Now a company doesn't make much money but saying - "forget our best and newest most expensive lenses, you don't really need them to get the most out of our shiny new toys" - now do they?
