High Resolution Or Low Light Performance?

[Batdude]

Guys, there is no way the 40MP sensor is going to do miracles when it comes to high ISO performance. Is just physics. Is the XH2S doing miracles at 26MP? No, so why are some already guessing that the 40MP is going to have "improved" high ISO performance?

So in reality, who needs what? Do you need a lot of resolution to make prints of the size of the empire state building or for cropping birds heavily, or high ISO performance? You can't get both.

It looks like the trend is resolution, and this seems to keep going and going. I'm looking at the images from the 26MP sensor and darn it man, I don't need more than that. I actually need a sensor with top notch low light performance. I don't need more than 20MP that's the truth.

I wonder what Fuji is going to do with the XT5 and so forth but it looks like the camera industry has brain washed many making them think they "must have" that high resolution sensor. So the question to me is will Fuji ever make a low light top of the line low light performer? What's up with that?

And don't tell me there is software for that. I have no desire to add more extra steps and time wasted to my existing workflow which is in fact already time consuming. Some things are just starting not to make any sense sorry.

 

[GMacF]

As much as I find Fuji’s low light performance more than acceptable, if “top notch low light performance” is your main criterion then just go to Full Frame and have done with it.

 

[XenonDeathFlash]

Both X-H2 and OM-1 is BSI-CMOS. Are X-H2 similar or less DR than MFT camera?

• OM System OM-1 20MP Stacked BSI-CMOS MFT sensor, pixel size=3.36µm
• Fujifilm X-H2 40MP BSI-CMOS APS-C sensor, pixel size=3.03µm

Pixel size has no relation to dynamic range. The only thing that matters is sensor size and sensor tech (well depth, BSI, and so on). That myth has been debunked so many times already... For instance compare the Sony A7S III (12MP) to A7R IV (62MP) and A7 III (24MP): the A7S III with huge pixels actually has worse dynamic range... https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony ILCE-7M3,Sony ILCE-7RM4,Sony ILCE-7SM3

Pixel size also does not/barely impact low-light performance, especially with BSI sensors. (

, https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5559775087/choosing-a-camera-should-i-worry-about-pixel-size))

The only drawbacks of higher resolution are the increased file size and the increased readout time, leading to rolling shutter when using electronic shutter (no effect when using mechanical shutter).

I would love to have a 100 MP sensor. Lots of cropping potential if the lenses are sharp enough (in the center at least).

Guys, there is no way the 40MP sensor is going to do miracles when it comes to high ISO performance. Is just physics. Is the XH2S doing miracles at 26MP? No, so why are some already guessing that the 40MP is going to have "improved" high ISO performance?

No sensor is going to improve low light performance in the future. It's just the lack of photons that is the limit now. That's the physics reason (not the pixel size...).

So in reality, who needs what? Do you need a lot of resolution to make prints of the size of the empire state building or for cropping birds heavily, or high ISO performance? You can't get both.

You can have both. Because pixel size does not impact high ISO performance...

The A7Siii uses a 48mp sensor and bins to 12mp so thats a bad example if you're trying to prove a point.

 

[forest dream]

It looks like the trend is resolution, and this seems to keep going and going. I'm looking at the images from the 26MP sensor and darn it man, I don't need more than that. I actually need a sensor with top notch low light performance. I don't need more than 20MP that's the truth.

As much as I find Fuji’s low light performance more than acceptable, if “top notch low light performance” is your main criterion then just go to Full Frame and have done with it.

OP mentioned his satisfied current Fuji 20++MP sensor. All current Fuji camera model featuring 26MP BSI-CMOS X-Trans sensor.

Latest Fuji flagship also featuring 26MP sensor.

 

[XenonDeathFlash]

It looks like the trend is resolution, and this seems to keep going and going. I'm looking at the images from the 26MP sensor and darn it man, I don't need more than that. I actually need a sensor with top notch low light performance. I don't need more than 20MP that's the truth.

As much as I find Fuji’s low light performance more than acceptable, if “top notch low light performance” is your main criterion then just go to Full Frame and have done with it.

OP mentioned his satisfied current Fuji 20++MP sensor. All current Fuji camera model featuring 26MP BSI-CMOS X-Trans sensor.

Latest Fuji flagship also featuring 26MP sensor.

No he didn't, he mentions that he's satisfied with the resolution but needs better lowlight capabilities (which sticking with Fuji XF won't give him).

 

[forest dream]

Both X-H2 and OM-1 is BSI-CMOS. Are X-H2 similar or less DR than MFT camera?

• OM System OM-1 20MP Stacked BSI-CMOS MFT sensor, pixel size=3.36µm
• Fujifilm X-H2 40MP BSI-CMOS APS-C sensor, pixel size=3.03µm

Pixel size has no relation to dynamic range. The only thing that matters is sensor size and sensor tech (well depth, BSI, and so on). That myth has been debunked so many times already... For instance compare the Sony A7S III (12MP) to A7R IV (62MP) and A7 III (24MP): the A7S III with huge pixels actually has worse dynamic range... https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony ILCE-7M3,Sony ILCE-7RM4,Sony ILCE-7SM3

Pixel size also does not/barely impact low-light performance, especially with BSI sensors. (

, https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5559775087/choosing-a-camera-should-i-worry-about-pixel-size))

The only drawbacks of higher resolution are the increased file size and the increased readout time, leading to rolling shutter when using electronic shutter (no effect when using mechanical shutter).

I would love to have a 100 MP sensor. Lots of cropping potential if the lenses are sharp enough (in the center at least).

Guys, there is no way the 40MP sensor is going to do miracles when it comes to high ISO performance. Is just physics. Is the XH2S doing miracles at 26MP? No, so why are some already guessing that the 40MP is going to have "improved" high ISO performance?

No sensor is going to improve low light performance in the future. It's just the lack of photons that is the limit now. That's the physics reason (not the pixel size...).

So in reality, who needs what? Do you need a lot of resolution to make prints of the size of the empire state building or for cropping birds heavily, or high ISO performance? You can't get both.

You can have both. Because pixel size does not impact high ISO performance...

The A7Siii uses a 48mp sensor and bins to 12mp so thats a bad example if you're trying to prove a point.

Found the article:

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sur...ctually-has-a-48-megapixel-quad-bayer-sensor/

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4608197

 

[forest dream]

It looks like the trend is resolution, and this seems to keep going and going. I'm looking at the images from the 26MP sensor and darn it man, I don't need more than that. I actually need a sensor with top notch low light performance. I don't need more than 20MP that's the truth.

As much as I find Fuji’s low light performance more than acceptable, if “top notch low light performance” is your main criterion then just go to Full Frame and have done with it.

OP mentioned his satisfied current Fuji 20++MP sensor. All current Fuji camera model featuring 26MP BSI-CMOS X-Trans sensor.

Latest Fuji flagship also featuring 26MP sensor.

No he didn't, he mentions that he's satisfied with the resolution but needs better lowlight capabilities (which sticking with Fuji XF won't give him).

Fujifilm GFX 50S II provide better than most full-frame cameras

 

[XenonDeathFlash]

It looks like the trend is resolution, and this seems to keep going and going. I'm looking at the images from the 26MP sensor and darn it man, I don't need more than that. I actually need a sensor with top notch low light performance. I don't need more than 20MP that's the truth.

As much as I find Fuji’s low light performance more than acceptable, if “top notch low light performance” is your main criterion then just go to Full Frame and have done with it.

OP mentioned his satisfied current Fuji 20++MP sensor. All current Fuji camera model featuring 26MP BSI-CMOS X-Trans sensor.

Latest Fuji flagship also featuring 26MP sensor.

No he didn't, he mentions that he's satisfied with the resolution but needs better lowlight capabilities (which sticking with Fuji XF won't give him).

Fujifilm GFX 50S II provide better than most full-frame cameras

Which is why I wrote Fuji FX and not GFX.

You'd also have to buy a 100s to see any difference from FF as the other GFX cameras use an older sensor.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=nikon_z7ii&attr144_1=fujifilm_gfx50sii&attr144_2=fujifilm_gfx100s&attr144_3=fujifilm_xt4&attr146_0=64_7&attr146_1=100_6&attr146_2=100_6&attr146_3=160_7&normalization=compare&widget=205&x=0.006935635548682349&y=0.2463823175581354

A used 100s in 3-4 years is my end game pretty much. I won't need another camera until it breaks down completely after that...

 

[forest dream]

Below article mentioned 2-Layer Transistor Pixel which "separates the photodiodes and pixel transistors into two different substrate layers. By splitting the layers, the photodiode can be larger, resulting in a higher signal saturation level (also referred to as full well capacity), while the larger transistors result in less noise."

"By separating the photodiode and the transistor pixel for each photosite, Sony's engineers were able to optimize the components separately, resulting in improved noise performance and dynamic range."

https://dpreview.com/news/2200844774/sony-semiconductor-solutions-details-its-new-2-layer-transistor-pixel-design-tech

 

[GMacF]

It looks like the trend is resolution, and this seems to keep going and going. I'm looking at the images from the 26MP sensor and darn it man, I don't need more than that. I actually need a sensor with top notch low light performance. I don't need more than 20MP that's the truth.

As much as I find Fuji’s low light performance more than acceptable, if “top notch low light performance” is your main criterion then just go to Full Frame and have done with it.

OP mentioned his satisfied current Fuji 20++MP sensor. All current Fuji camera model featuring 26MP BSI-CMOS X-Trans sensor.

Latest Fuji flagship also featuring 26MP sensor.

No he didn't, he mentions that he's satisfied with the resolution but needs better lowlight capabilities (which sticking with Fuji XF won't give him).

Exactly. OP could pick up a 20mp FF Canon if that’s all the resolution they require.

 

[biza43]

This discussion is worthless without defining what, for you, is high ISO.

3200?

6400?

51200?

The lager the sensor, the better high ISO will be.

For me, I never go above 3200, so I am ok with APSC.

 

[thisbeeristaken]

Hi

I would definitely go with low light performance. When i understood that MP count is "only" for prints dims, i don't think that 100MP brings you better images than a 12MP sensor, unless proven

Just to notice i've owned a D700 few years ago and with its 12MP i printed a 40X60cm, with enough details and sharpness.

So if you want to wallpaper your house, car, dog, cat, wife with prints, yep go for high res for sure.

 

[robert1955]

You've moved on from things you are disappointed with to things you anticipate you will be disappointed with!

Soon there will be an attempt to complete the Rumsfeld Circle discussing the Unknown Disappointments

 

[Eulan13]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

 

[michaeladawson]

Exactly. OP could pick up a 20mp FF Canon if that’s all the resolution they require.

It's not that simple. You must not follow Batdude's never ending complaints against the cameras produced by just about all the camera companies out there.

I can assure you, there's going to be multiple reasons put forth as to why a 20 MP FF Canon camera isn't an option. Near the top of the list will probably be the colors simply don't match the X-T1.

 

[GMacF]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

Genuine question but is there another APS-C camera manufacturer out there who has better performing low light sensors?

FWIW, compared to any of the Canons I used to own (DSLR & Mirrorless) they were absolute garbage for both high ISO and dynamic range compared to what Fuji can do.

I said it above already, if low light/high ISO performance is your line in the sand as far as photography then just get a FF or even MF.

 

[robert1955]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

Actually, that Sony is made like that for read-out speed in video. It is only 12MP and the dpr review of the iii version is not glowing for stills. Some would like to go 'darker' than now [and there is no real limit to that], but the technical limits are there. Going FX will gain you one stop, DMF almost another, but that's about it and there is a price

 

[Jerry-astro]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

Genuine question but is there another APS-C camera manufacturer out there who has better performing low light sensors?

FWIW, compared to any of the Canons I used to own (DSLR & Mirrorless) they were absolute garbage for both high ISO and dynamic range compared to what Fuji can do.

I said it above already, if low light/high ISO performance is your line in the sand as far as photography then just get a FF or even MF.

Precisely! There seems to be this assumption that Fujifilm is leaving a significant improvement in IQ on the table by not simply retooling and/or updating their sensors. So, let's stick with "apples to apples" comparisons here and please find another vendor who offers a crop sensor that delivers significantly better IQ. If such a thing is out there, then I think these demands for significant IQ improvements in next gen crop sensors are justified. If not, then my request to the OP is to please do us all a huge favor by getting off the pulpit, acquiring your choice of FF or MF camera, and just moving on.

--
Jerry-Astro
Fuji Forum co-Mod

 

[robert1955]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

Genuine question but is there another APS-C camera manufacturer out there who has better performing low light sensors?

FWIW, compared to any of the Canons I used to own (DSLR & Mirrorless) they were absolute garbage for both high ISO and dynamic range compared to what Fuji can do.

I said it above already, if low light/high ISO performance is your line in the sand as far as photography then just get a FF or even MF.

Precisely! There seems to be this assumption that Fujifilm is leaving a significant improvement in IQ on the table by not simply retooling and/or updating their sensors. So, let's stick with "apples to apples" comparisons here and please find another vendor who offers a crop sensor that delivers significantly better IQ. If such a thing is out there, then I think these demands for significant IQ improvements in next gen crop sensors are justified. If not, then my request to the OP is to please do us all a huge favor by getting off the pulpit, acquiring your choice of FF or MF camera, and just moving on.

Adding to that: doing like in the last sentence 'buys' you 1, resp. 2 stops. The difference is more or less permanent

 

[biza43]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

Genuine question but is there another APS-C camera manufacturer out there who has better performing low light sensors?

FWIW, compared to any of the Canons I used to own (DSLR & Mirrorless) they were absolute garbage for both high ISO and dynamic range compared to what Fuji can do.

I said it above already, if low light/high ISO performance is your line in the sand as far as photography then just get a FF or even MF.

Precisely! There seems to be this assumption that Fujifilm is leaving a significant improvement in IQ on the table by not simply retooling and/or updating their sensors. So, let's stick with "apples to apples" comparisons here and please find another vendor who offers a crop sensor that delivers significantly better IQ. If such a thing is out there, then I think these demands for significant IQ improvements in next gen crop sensors are justified. If not, then my request to the OP is to please do us all a huge favor by getting off the pulpit, acquiring your choice of FF or MF camera, and just moving on.

Wise words as always, but common sense is not abundant around here... one would think people would choose the appropriate tool for their requirements.

--
www.paulobizarro.com

PauloBizarroPHOTOBLOG – Some of my photography

 

[Jerry-astro]

I fully agree with you and Batdude: IMOO the story is that camera makers have chosen to sell higher and higher resolution and the fastest possible autofocus. Personally, I have choses Fujifilm cameras for their lenses and the bodies size. This is because I usually take photos of people around me, and I need to go unnoticed. But - above all - I need to be able to shoot in dark environments (churches, houses, bars, nightplaces).

I frankly do not understand why Fujifilm had chosen to ignore the high iso problem. They could have made an X-T3S or X-T4S with a 20 mpixels sensor, allowing us to reach high sensitivities in darkness (over 6400 Iso): the same choice Sony made with their A7 S line.

Genuine question but is there another APS-C camera manufacturer out there who has better performing low light sensors?

FWIW, compared to any of the Canons I used to own (DSLR & Mirrorless) they were absolute garbage for both high ISO and dynamic range compared to what Fuji can do.

I said it above already, if low light/high ISO performance is your line in the sand as far as photography then just get a FF or even MF.

Precisely! There seems to be this assumption that Fujifilm is leaving a significant improvement in IQ on the table by not simply retooling and/or updating their sensors. So, let's stick with "apples to apples" comparisons here and please find another vendor who offers a crop sensor that delivers significantly better IQ. If such a thing is out there, then I think these demands for significant IQ improvements in next gen crop sensors are justified. If not, then my request to the OP is to please do us all a huge favor by getting off the pulpit, acquiring your choice of FF or MF camera, and just moving on.

Wise words as always, but common sense is not abundant around here... one would think people would choose the appropriate tool for their requirements.

I couldn’t agree more. I suppose it’s grumpy Mod time again.

“Choosing the appropriate tool” takes effort and costs money. Sharing one’s frustration with the fact that crop IQ simply can’t measure up to FF time and time again in the forum costs nothing. Yet, the solutions are, and always has been, right there for the taking.

1) Move to FF. Pick your vendor… there are numerous choices.

2) Go for the gold… move to MF. Even better IQ, but it comes at a price in terms of cost and portability.

3) If there’s a crop sensor body out there with better IQ out there, buy it.

If the OP truly believes that Fujifilm is leaving potential IQ on the table, then provide some proof in the form of a direct (and fair) comparison with another crop format camera. If that’s not possible (and I have my doubts), then either suck it up, pay the price (in cost, size, and weight), and move to FF or MF. If you can’t tell, the constant whining in post after post is just getting old.

--
Jerry-Astro
Fuji Forum co-Mod