Switching from Nikon FF to Fuji MF

[Erik Kaffehr]

I have tried D850. Upgrading from D810, and to keep using my lenses, D850 was the best upgrade option for me. However, I didn't like the noise and DR performance improvement over the D810. And because of more resolution, pixel size got smaller and anything over ISO 640 was not to my liking.

--
http://www.mf-photography.com

Manzur you are so right.

Even though sensor development benefits present themselves, nevertheless latest sensor with less MP shows its benefits vs latest sensor with more MP.

As seen in :

D810 36MP vs D850 45MP

GH5s 10MP vs GH5 20MP.

We will see similar when Gfx has 100MP : sure more MP more detail however more noise iso medium to high, less DR, more "crunchiness" : less smooth tonal transitions gradation, more harsher compared to 50MP Gfx.

Hi,

I would say that DPReview test shots contradicts that:

Nikon images in comparison view, scaled to 36MP.

Panasonic images in comparison view

The reason for both the GH5s and the the Sony A7IIs is that both are made for video. Video doesn't need more than 4K and that is around 10 MP.

Using the adequate sized sensor they can have OLP filtering that is adequate for video.

Also, on older cameras video was sub sampled that is pixels and lines were skipped, so perhaps 75% of the pixels were thrown away.

So, large pixels make sense for video, but no sense for stills.

The Nikon D850 yields some advantage in detail:

Nikon comparison view for detail.

The samples shown here are in comparison mode, that is scaled down the largest common size.

If we compare two image with different megapixels at actual pixels, it is a apples to oranges comparison as actual pixels represent different magnification.

Best regards

Erik





--
Erik Kaffehr
Website: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net
Magic uses to disappear in controlled experiments…
Gallery: http://echophoto.smugmug.com
Articles: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

 

[Manzur Fahim]

I have tried D850. Upgrading from D810, and to keep using my lenses, D850 was the best upgrade option for me. However, I didn't like the noise and DR performance improvement over the D810. And because of more resolution, pixel size got smaller and anything over ISO 640 was not to my liking.

 

[Erik Kaffehr]

I have tried D850. Upgrading from D810, and to keep using my lenses, D850 was the best upgrade option for me. However, I didn't like the noise and DR performance improvement over the D810. And because of more resolution, pixel size got smaller and anything over ISO 640 was not to my liking.

 

[Manzur Fahim]

Hi,

I would guess that you compared the D810 and the D850 and actual pixels, that would put the 850D at disadvantage.

I only compared them while editing when I saw noise creeping up in D850 files quicker than it does on D810 files. When I edit, I mostly have the images at 100% or even 200% when editing tiny skin blemishes.

Regarding the Fuji GFX, I would think that is a very good camera. But, it has a larger sensor, collecting more photons. That is not about pixel size but sensor size.

Yes, a larger sensor, which gives each pixel in Fuji GFX 5.33 micron space for light gathering compared to 4.88 micron for D810 or 4.35 micron for D850. So GFX can actually give me higher resolution without not only sacrificing pixel size but even giving each pixel a larger space to capture light, DR or whatelse.

In addition, it seems that the GFX has very good lenses. Well, may be not very good but extraordinary. So, the GFX may need much less sharpening which also helps with noise.

Yes true. I will be getting the 110mm, which I heard is amazing. Yes I might be able to do without sharpening, not that I was applying a lot

Jim Kasson, who has all of the Nikon D850, Sony A7rIII and GFX confirms that the GFX lenses are as good they can get, with the exception of the standard 64 mm lens that is just excellent.

You mean the 63mm prime? I was actually thinking if I should take that lens or the 45mm. Haven't tried any of this focal lengths for portraits before, it'll be challenging.

So, I would guess the GFX is excellent, but it relates more to having a physically larger sensor combined with truly excellent lenses than large pixels.

I would recommend that you try the following test:

• Decide on your largest print size.
• Take test shots with all systems you would consider. Or, use the DPReviews raw shots, they are made under carefully controlled lab conditions, better than what I or (probably) you can achieve.
• Process all the image in your favorite raw processor at zero sharpening and zero noise reduction.
• Open all the images in Photoshop and resize to your chosen print size at 180 PPI.
• Sharpen the images with FocusMagic default settings
• Compare the images at actual pixels.

The final step would be to share your findings, that would be much appreciated!

Best regards

Erik Kaffehr

 

[Erik Kaffehr]

I only compared them while editing when I saw noise creeping up in D850 files quicker than it does on D810 files. When I edit, I mostly have the images at 100% or even 200% when editing tiny skin blemishes.

: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

 

[jacketpotato]

Finally couple weeks ago I tried out GFX 50S and I saw a significant improvement over my D810 raws, and also the way it was exposing the shots and the tones etc.

--
http://www.mf-photography.com

Manzur I would be interested to read your views of Foveon Sigma SD1 should you acquire it with regard to Gfx pixel level quality, gradation, tonality.

 

[Manzur Fahim]

I only compared them while editing when I saw noise creeping up in D850 files quicker than it does on D810 files. When I edit, I mostly have the images at 100% or even 200% when editing tiny skin blemishes.

: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

 

[Manzur Fahim]

Finally couple weeks ago I tried out GFX 50S and I saw a significant improvement over my D810 raws, and also the way it was exposing the shots and the tones etc.