The WR indicates the newer version. It's supposed to be optically great but still slow to focus. I have the XF 50mm F1.0, and that lens has been great for portraits and low-light events.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
XT5 vs GFX100s
- Thread starter bobby350z
- Start date
Greg7579
Forum Pro
You guys would not believe me if I told you I have never once in my life tried a drug. I've never even smoked a joint. I might have had a couple of puffs when I was 17, but I can't really remember.
I think saying I have never done drugs is a safe statement and true.
Alcohol? That's a different story....
I'm thinking of doing some cannabis eatables but have never tried it.
It's not unreliable if you understand all the places where scaling is taking place.
Timothy Leary said that if you can remember the 60's, you weren't there.
I believe you, Greg.
Greg7579
Forum Pro
Yes, I know - I'm not knocking DPR on this at all. My only point is that when people out there click on 100 Zoom, we don't know what they are seeing or making judgments off of.
I don't understand the web-based tech that would explain this, but in LR when we tell it to view at 1:1 full res, it scales perfectly with how we have our monitors set up in windows. 6K monitors scale at 25% in windows. I think 4K was 175% (can't remember).
But on the internet inside of DPR, it doesn't know what monitor you are using or what your windows setting is once you click on that link to view at full zoom because that takes you outside of the normal web interface for the site. The rest of DPR scales beautifully when you are in normal views.
I said that wrong, but it is a scaling problem that applies only to view at 100% zoom, and not to the rest of the interface.
Ap0ll0n
Senior Member
Ok! That clarifies what I had also asked before. So I don't think we should be looking at this photo in that case. It has been amusing and the rest hopefully helpful to folks that don't know the difference.
Greg7579
Forum Pro
Bobby, I have to say that this is fun and it is a good talk board topic but these comparison shots on DPR of different sensor size cameras with different lenses using small jpegs with all kinds of settings that are not equivalent.... I don't know man....Why you need exif? Then you know right a way which is which.I only linked 4k versions as I usually don't strip exif from my files on export. I can post full res files but then you know which is which in < 1 sec.
No tripod for these. I never use tripod for people shots. AF on the same eye using Fuji's awesome eye AF system.
Remember you can see the diff due to DoF differences. I should have tried the GFX shot at f2.8. I know there are contrast, skin tones differences but I am surprised on how small they are. It is $1500 cam vs $5000 camera. Lens wise $1 vs $3k.
But hey . . . I like it.
Why not click on the external link and view that way? I never ever used that dpr window which pops up on clicking on the pictures.
yogi4fitness
Senior Member
Very smart Bobby!
Greg7579
Forum Pro
I don't understand. What are you talking about? I click on the image and then I click on Full Zoom.
when people post an image from their own sites, there is always a link under the image. Click that link and it will show you what at the full size the person wanted you to see. Now I am not saying this will fix all the problems. It depends on where the image coming from and what size it was posted. But atleast the dpr 100% thing won't get in the way.
I can't stick 110mm f2 on the XF. Same is also true in reverse. If I wanted to shoot XF, FF, MF at 85mm FF equivalent focal length, what lens do you suggest should I use? Shouldn't it be 56mm, 85mm and the 110mm?Bobby, I have to say that this is fun and it is a good talk board topic but these comparison shots on DPR of different sensor size cameras with different lenses using small jpegs with all kinds of settings that are not equivalent.... I don't know man....Why you need exif? Then you know right a way which is which.
No tripod for these. I never use tripod for people shots. AF on the same eye using Fuji's awesome eye AF system.
Remember you can see the diff due to DoF differences. I should have tried the GFX shot at f2.8. I know there are contrast, skin tones differences but I am surprised on how small they are. It is $1500 cam vs $5000 camera. Lens wise $1 vs $3k.
But hey . . . I like it.
DavidMillier
Forum Pro
This how I view DPR files at 1:1
When you click the "original size" link, it opens a new browser tab automatically and loads the file. If you click "original link" for two different images, it opens them in different tabs and you can compare them easily by flicking back and forth between the tabs. Or you can open a tab, right click the image and "save as" if you want to download the files and use your own viewing software (like LR's X-Y comparator).
I never use the DPR viewing tool, I don't see any IQ difference between the tab view and the downloads. All this talk of DPR spoiling the image quality seems so much hot air to me.
--
2024: Awarded Royal Photographic Society LRPS Distinction
Photo of the day: https://whisperingcat.co.uk/wp/photo-of-the-day/
Website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/
DPReview gallery: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/0286305481
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmillier/ (very old!)
Last edited:
DavidMillier
Forum Pro
Nothing in life is perfect unless you are as accurate a tester as Jim. There is nothing amusing about this series of comparisons, I find them quite shocking.
But I am getting the clear message from you that you made up your mind in advance that the GFX is going automatically to be vastly superior and you have no intention of being dissuaded of that by mere evidence. So these examples which show that the the cameras produce remarkably similar results, are just going to be dismissed and laughed away.
I'm mightily impressed by the 40MP APS-C files. I expected the GFX to absolutely slaughter it, but to my eyes, while the medium format has the edge, the differences are quite subtle, almost close to negligible.
Were I completely camera-less at this point in time, with a bunch of cash lined up to spend on new gear, I would certainly be inclined to pursue further comparisons and take a closer look at the APS-C system. The advantages of smaller formats in convenience, portability and flexibility, cost, are undeniable, MF relies on far superior image quality, but I'm not seeing it here.
It very much looks to me from this comparison, that with today's modern sensors, the advantage largely goes to the sensor with the highest pixel count. The sensor size may not be so important. Medium format has the edge, not because of the sensor size per se, but because the big sensor allows more pixels, and more pixels allows more detail. But here I'm seeing that even a massive 2.5x the pixel count advantage doesn't seem to make that much difference. And noise and DR advantages at base ISO don't really seem to be that useful any more, because all sensors are so thoroughly scrubbed of noise.
The question I am left with after this demo is why aren't the GFX results much, much better, rather than hardly better at all? The sensor is 3x the area and has 250% more pixels. It should annihilate the 40MP sensor, but it doesn't. Have we reached the era of diminishing returns where you pay 10x the price for a 5% improvement? How big do you have to print to be able to see any difference at all?
It would be very interesting to see the comparison with the 50MP MF sensor...
--
2024: Awarded Royal Photographic Society LRPS Distinction
Photo of the day: https://whisperingcat.co.uk/wp/photo-of-the-day/
Website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/
DPReview gallery: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/0286305481
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmillier/ (very old!)
Last edited:
As requested.
I know some will always challenge the validity of comparison shots from some point of view or other but I have provided two JPG's, one from my GFX 50s ii and the other from the X-T5.
I'm not going to argue the case for either as I'm more than happy with each system in its own right. To my eye, the differences are clear, especially in a shot like this with lots of foliage. The scale of that difference is down to the viewer.
What I WILL say is there a lot more to GFX files than just straight up sharpness and resolution. The dynamic range differences are stark and once you start playing with shadows and highlights the GFX files come into their own. I could have edited a couple of RAF files to demonstrate this but I have no doubt my methodology would be shot down because each file was not true to form.
View attachment 4c3f6a3405c847219e4e5e0b50624303.jpg
I know some will always challenge the validity of comparison shots from some point of view or other but I have provided two JPG's, one from my GFX 50s ii and the other from the X-T5.
I'm not going to argue the case for either as I'm more than happy with each system in its own right. To my eye, the differences are clear, especially in a shot like this with lots of foliage. The scale of that difference is down to the viewer.
What I WILL say is there a lot more to GFX files than just straight up sharpness and resolution. The dynamic range differences are stark and once you start playing with shadows and highlights the GFX files come into their own. I could have edited a couple of RAF files to demonstrate this but I have no doubt my methodology would be shot down because each file was not true to form.
View attachment 4c3f6a3405c847219e4e5e0b50624303.jpg
Last edited:
Ap0ll0n
Senior Member
Good afternoon Daniel
First, may I just say I love your photos and find you have a great ability of isolating a subject. Many folks can learn from you on that front.
About Fuji X vs GFX, I can see why you may think that about me. Let me inform you I have been a Fuji X user since the X100, and eventually since the XT5, came out, and having shot over 100k photos on them, I have some clue of what that system can do. I have also done my own and looked at more than the couple of GFX comparisons shown here, some of which I posted in this forum very recently. And I hope you realize I was replying to a blind test, Before the OP confirmed which photo belongs to which camera. So I agree with you that I have made up my mind, just Not in advance.
And nobody is laughing away at anything by the way, which I believe is evident via my courteous and objective exchange and discussion with the OP. Not sure why you would think all that.
Finally, of course nothing is perfect but, in case it wasn't obvious, I was supporting that the last two photos were doing a disservice to the XT5, not the other way round.
Thank you for your thoughts and opinion.
Greg7579
Forum Pro
I first said it 7 years ago, then 5 years ago and many times since. I don't use those terms though.
DPR doesn't spoil the image. But in my opinion, they need to remove that 100% zoom function nor figure out a way to make it scale correctly because my images look like garbage on there and so do yours when I click on that function.
Many people have formed judgements on other people's images based on viewing a trashed-out view that looks horrible compared to what you see when you view the actual full-size high-quality jpeg at full res.
I have always thought it was a very serious problem on a photography web site.
Either remove the function or fix it. It is dreadfully misleading and 99% of the people on here don't know what they are looking at when they use 100% zoom.
DavidMillier
Forum Pro
Use the "original image" link.
Michel van Lint
Senior Member
The GFX has spoiled me with its sharpness and its ability to retain more information in the highlights and shadows. The colors and contrast also "feel" different. All of this is mostly visible to me when editing. The GFX provides more leeway for editing. I can zoom in further. The transition of color between neighbouring pixels feels less abrupt. Of course, there is also the depth of field,
There was a time when I started wondering if there was something wrong with my X-T5, because it wasn't sharp. I have a tendency of running the photos through Topaz AI to give it that extra sharpness when zoomed in at the pixel level. Photos with flash appear sharper, perhaps because of the added contrast caused by side lighting.
I am happy with the X-T5, but every time I use it, I wonder if I should have been using the GFX. The GFX has raised the bar.
However, when I randomly look at my own edited photos, especially full screen, than I have to admit I cannot easily see the difference. Sometimes I am mistaken which camera was used.
That said, I will choose the GFX if best image quality is preferred and when possible, because it gives me more detail and more editing options to salvage a picture if required... Once you have seen what the GFX offers, it is hard to let go.
There was a time when I started wondering if there was something wrong with my X-T5, because it wasn't sharp. I have a tendency of running the photos through Topaz AI to give it that extra sharpness when zoomed in at the pixel level. Photos with flash appear sharper, perhaps because of the added contrast caused by side lighting.
I am happy with the X-T5, but every time I use it, I wonder if I should have been using the GFX. The GFX has raised the bar.
However, when I randomly look at my own edited photos, especially full screen, than I have to admit I cannot easily see the difference. Sometimes I am mistaken which camera was used.
That said, I will choose the GFX if best image quality is preferred and when possible, because it gives me more detail and more editing options to salvage a picture if required... Once you have seen what the GFX offers, it is hard to let go.
Last edited:
SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,405
- Reaction score
- 2,395
I wrote earlier I prefer the glow on her in the first compared to what others said the more separation the better bokeh the more contrast the more even skin tones on the second.
For glow I'd put a Zeiss Pancolar 50/1.8 zebra version on a Gfx probably the 50MP. It's the most glowy 50mm I've ever had. There's a blog where as it's m42 it was adapted to Gfx.
For landscape detail, 100MP Gfx for me every day of the week, twice on sunday.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum