Not interested, but X-T30 shows the way.

Raist3d wrote:

Thing is, if you use the Fuji f2 lenses close up to the subject that is when their performance really collapses.

Keep in denial, keep making excuses. First the lenses were bad wide open. Now it's only if it's closed up (not true!).

I noticed that picture was at iso 400 and a super high shutter speed - easily done with that nonsense fake film ISO dial

Nope. It's about the DR mode. You know, DR the the Olympus lacks :-).

But hey, what do I know. I sold my X-E3 and keeping GX9/PenF for my main shooting right now.

Sorry - just to be clear. I am stating that the F2 Fuji primes are soft wide open and very soft (to my eye unuseable) wide open and close up.

I don't know what DR mode is, but if it thinks wide open with shutter speed 4000 and ISO 400 is a sensible set of parameters it fits right in with their ergo design principles and stubborn refusal to abandon their X-Trans malarkey.

This is my last post on this matter as you are basically trolling the micro 4/3 forum by massively overselling what Fuji has to offer whilst bashing the system we use.

Might I suggest anyone who wants to see swathes of evidence supporting my point of view googles: fuji soft wide open close up

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

I beg to differ with the xf35 f2.0 example I gave. you don’t see vessels because of the size and eye of subject it’s also true xtrans compromises in color resolution to gain on luminance The part to see here is the hair if you are getting a hairline as a single pixel

Sorry, I am looking at the subjects eyes and skin. The stands of hair were reflecting sunlight - high contrast, no wonder they stand out.

Yes but look at the resolution I am not talking about the contrast If the hair is pretty much one pixel width that tells you how sharp this is

Not sure how you’re measuring hair width as “1 pixel” but however many pixels represent hair should be visible, yes? As the sunlight reflecting off the blonde hair is high contrast, I’m not surprised it stands out. What I am surprised at is the waxy skin, eyes, lashes, brows reveal poor detail, sort of a fused or smeared look.

What I mean is the hair goes with jaggies/pixelation. It's pretty much capturing to the resolution. When a lens is not as sharp, you see it but it is smoother. Which can also be a good thing but that's besides the point.

I don't think the high contrast hair is the issue, nor do I think that lens lacks sharpness. What strikes me immediately in this photo is the way the skin, eyes, lashes, brows reveal poor detail - it's smeared together in your 1:1 view. It's not the lens, it's the demosaicing I suspect. I would LOVE to see this lens on an XA3 or whatever the Bayer array is called.

But perhaps let me know you how big proportionally the eye is in size to the photo and compare to the shot of the girl you shot.

Here's how that eye fits in proportion to the photo, so it should be no wonder you see red line sin the eye in yours. I just saw another shot I took with my X-e3 with the eye being bigger in the shot and effectively you can see a bit of red lines.

You were definitely farther away - 10ft perhaps? Which means the DOF was 2ft deep. So the hair stands AND face was in focus. Only the high-contrast hair strands reveal fine detail. The face (skin, eyes, brows, lashes) is lower contrast and gets mushed together in the demosaicing process. That's unfortunate - I hope other processors can preserve the details there.

In any case, nice shot!

As for the review sites of lenses- they warn you shouldn't compare across systems just like that.

Without accounting for sensor size differences...which I did.

I think lens-tip themselves explains too. But anyhow, all I can say is I do find by experience the XF35 F2.0 sharper than the Panasonic wide open.

The Fuji is sharper wide open. Lenstip shows this. But the Panasonic wide open captures more light and offers more subject separation. At f/2 they offer the same vertical resolution. The PL is simply doing this on a smaller sensor. The mZD 25/1.2 captures even more light than the PL and the detail is even better wide open, especially micro-contrast.

The Panasonic becomes pretty good once you stop down.

Across the frame yes. But no one would consider it's center performance unacceptable even wide open.

And the original PL 25 mm F1.4 m43rds is better than both.

And extinct.

And honestly I am sorry, but I see your eye sample that you pointed out of the girl in the bath pretty soft, with some CA's even on the specular part o the eye to light.

I don't see CA in that shot but yes, CA is an issue with the PL just like coma and CA is on the Fuji.  One of the reasons I moved to the mZD 25/1.2 for video.  The CA and flare control is much improved.

Thank you for posting the shots, I think at this point I am going to agree to differ, but if you ever get a chance to try for yourself if you are curious go for it. Also if you ever get hold of the Panny Leica 4/3rds original, check it out. It's kinda big but it's great.

You must have missed the part where I mentioned I shot with the original PL on the E1 and E30. It was a fine lens.

I don't think we are disagreeing! I said the XF35/2 is plenty sharp. It must be the demosaicing of the x-trans array that is muddying detail in the face.

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

G1Houston wrote:

When it comes to lenses mFT has shown the way and never fell behind. With some recent additions, the Sigma 56 mm F1.4 from a third party and the 10-25 mm f1.7 to come. The Leica zooms......This is one of the main reasons in my view to go mFTs, not to leave it.

The average fujinlens is better than the average mft lens there’s also many copies of the same ranges but mft does have very goodnlenses too but usually they are big

the small primes in m43 are good but I would say the Fuji xr 35 2.0 small prime is a hit betterao kore these Fuji small primes are all weather sealed Olympus needs to make their small primes weather sealed too- would go perfect with an em5 mkiii

From what I have seen in reviews the primes of mFTs are good (wide open) and small. You have ample choice. They can be large but not necessarily so.

It’s not that the mft primes are bad it’s that the smaller Fuji primes are better and at the very top Fuji matches best m43 more or less (primes)

basically there isn’t really an advantage in lenses for m43 when you take into account how many overlaps and copies are in mft and how many are that you can scratch as being “not as good as” Both have good lens selection

Sorry, the overlap is only partly true. You have variety within focal lengths and they range between reasonable to stellar performance. Macro: just one not stabilised lens. Long FL: just one gets you beyond 400 mm equiv I think. Primes are also not covered as well. There is a gap and perfromance wise the Fuji's are not better, they just come in mostly one variety.

I am going to have to agree to disagree than on average the Fuji lenses aren't better. When I said overlap I meant in m43rds there's a lot of overlap between the copies of same range that are not that stellar. As for number of lenses you only need one. If you have only one but that one is good, that's all you need.

But also remember- the little primes (now 4) fuji has are all weather sealed. Where are the small weather sealed m43rds primes? I hope Olympus remakes them.

Thanks for the reply.

Hiding in the same place as Fuji's small weather sealed bodies

If the EM5 MKII you show there was competitive with those Fuji's offerings, I could take the comparison as valid :-). But we know it isn't. However, good try *hats off*

You're right, the Olympus has IBIS a fully articulating screen, 40MP high-res pixel shift, in camera focus stacking, live composite, live bulb and costs less, and weighs less than the Fuji's...

I think the flip-side is, why aren't Fuji's fastest - most expensive primes weather-sealed? I believe the rumored 33/1 is supposed to be WR. How, big, heavy, expensive is that going to be when it arrives?

Some area, but it's a valid question. However, the reason I ask it of m43rds is because size is their unique selling proposition. OR supposed to be

I can't think of any system that is smaller/lighter/cheaper than the mFT options.  Would be nice to have WR compact primes for travel that's for sure.

Sion H wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Thing is, if you use the Fuji f2 lenses close up to the subject that is when their performance really collapses.

Keep in denial, keep making excuses. First the lenses were bad wide open. Now it's only if it's closed up (not true!).

I noticed that picture was at iso 400 and a super high shutter speed - easily done with that nonsense fake film ISO dial

Nope. It's about the DR mode. You know, DR the the Olympus lacks :-).

But hey, what do I know. I sold my X-E3 and keeping GX9/PenF for my main shooting right now.

Sorry - just to be clear. I am stating that the F2 Fuji primes are soft wide open and very soft (to my eye unuseable) wide open and close up.

I don't know what DR mode is, but if it thinks wide open with shutter speed 4000 and ISO 400 is a sensible set of parameters it fits right in with their ergo design principles and stubborn refusal to abandon their X-Trans malarkey.

This is my last post on this matter as you are basically trolling the micro 4/3 forum by massively overselling what Fuji has to offer whilst bashing the system we use.

Might I suggest anyone who wants to see swathes of evidence supporting my point of view googles: fuji soft wide open close up

I like the concept that somehow I am massively trolling when I am responding to a dubious claim and provide evidence for the sharp  on the other hand you only provide words and humor which is why it’s hard to take what you are saying seriously

I am not “bashing” the system we use while I simply express and give credit to what Fuji is doing  in fact look at the very first post of the thread   Why don’t you ask why I sold my Fuji and kept m43rds?  Maybe that would make me write some stuff that you want to hear

Of course I also start threads with photos, so yes, I think I am qualified by experience to make the comments I say and they shouldn’t be taken as trolling or personal affronts  these are just photographic tools

Sorry can’t respond to all as I am on my phone   Thanks for discussing all the points focusing on them - I really appreciate that

the skin smear you talk could very well be silky pix which is what I used for this conversion

Myra the pl 25 f1.4 m43 is ok wide open  it just doesn’t have the old pl 25 of 4/3 quality and imho not the Fuji xf35f2.0 though I would say taking out the sharpness I like some of the overall contrast of it better (but not better than the xf35 f1.4 Fuji)

what I find is the ok 25 m43 becomes quite good stopped down including overall contrast “pop” but the original 4/3 lens did that wide open from the get go

so no, not a bad lens and not what I meant but not what one would think could be

just clarifying that   I still have the old PL and the new one  I was astounded how much “pop” the old one has over the current even if the current is good

ShatteredSky wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Well, I can only speak for my direct experience of the Oly F1.8 25mm and the Fuji XF35 F2.0 in the example I brought up here. Maybe it's a function of not just the lens but the system together producing more detail than the m43rds lens on a m43rds camera.

Maybe the Oly 1.8 is not the best choice for a comparison ...

why not?  They are near the same size and aperture  and focal length   I don’t see much Libby comparing a 25mm f1.2 pro lens to the Fuji 25mm f2.0   Would be like say comparing the Fuji xf90 2.0 to the oly 45 1.8   It’s really not a fair comparison

I just thought that to suggest that Fuji lenses are like smeared is a bit out of touch with the reality of these lenses

That of course was a bit too strong. Anyway, since I do not own any Oly nor Fuji primus I probably should not talk. If the E-M5 III gets released, this may change ...

def waiting to see what happens with that camera  of the penf 2 is not coming out or it’s not weather sealed, I would love the em5 iii But please get the same film Jozef options of the penf

Cheers

-- hide signature --

"Blue for the shattered sky"