Why I don't want a FF X

[stimpy]

You still don't understand the difference between a 36mp sensor and a 16mp sensor. How can you be taken seriously? The comparison above has nothing to do with APS-C vs FF sensors with that amount of MP discrepancy.

Sal

How can you rationalise that an honest comparison between the Sony A7r and Fuji X-E2 "has nothing to do with Full frame vs APSC"

Simple: one is 36mp and the the other is 16mp. The 36mp should look a lot better in a 100% crop. In the comparison above the 36mp only looks a little better which I find astonishing. Sony would need to get out of the camera business if they couldn't make a 36mp sensor that showed more resolution than a 16mp sensor at 100%

Sal

Well you may need to brush up on megapixels and why they are a little overrated. There are mobile phones with way more MP than any Fuji X cam, so by your logic you'd expect them to out shoot the Fuji right?

No. Sorry. No.

There is more to IQ than megapixels - this is a notion that died 10 years ago.

 

[hexxthalion]

You still don't understand the difference between a 36mp sensor and a 16mp sensor. How can you be taken seriously? The comparison above has nothing to do with APS-C vs FF sensors with that amount of MP discrepancy.

Sal

How can you rationalise that an honest comparison between the Sony A7r and Fuji X-E2 "has nothing to do with Full frame vs APSC"

Simple: one is 36mp and the the other is 16mp. The 36mp should look a lot better in a 100% crop. In the comparison above the 36mp only looks a little better which I find astonishing. Sony would need to get out of the camera business if they couldn't make a 36mp sensor that showed more resolution than a 16mp sensor at 100%

Sal

Well you may need to brush up on megapixels and why they are a little overrated. There are mobile phones with way more MP than any Fuji X cam, so by your logic you'd expect them to out shoot the Fuji right?

No. Sorry. No.

There is more to IQ than megapixels - this is a notion that died 10 years ago.

Stimpy - just out of curiosity - are you just trying to keep alive this for the sake of it?

 

[LWS2013]

That should read 5 lenses covering 21 to 300.

Oh and another thing, the FF crowd are going to want lenses that match the sensor as a bare minimum, so top quality 1.4 at least for the 35, 50 and 85. 2.8 for the 14 and the 70-200, and whatever (!) for the 21-300.

there is no Fuji 56mm available its still just on paper and no you don't need f1.4 FF lenses to match the APS-C Fuji ones.

someone gave you the answer to your question, moving the goal posts now serves what point?

I'm not moving any goalposts, which I why I said "fair enough" to what I thought was a very good response. My goalposts are the same as set out in the heading of my post - to explain why I (not you or the 3m others who "need" FF) don't want a FF X camera. My point, which everyone seems to be ignoring for their own reasons, is that a FF X system would not suit MY needs or my pocket, and would divert Fuji from developing a very good system I've already bought into. It's not me who's moving the goalposts - a system that suits my needs and pocket - it's everyone else telling me why they need a FF and how I can have one too for less than £5,000 by buying a Nikon DSLR. I didn't start this to find out which FF systems I can buy for less than £5,000. I've already sold my 5D Mk II and L lenses, so why would I bother?

The Nikon system isn't equivalent to what I have now. I don't care if the DF or 610 or whatever isn't all that big, or that I can stick tons of third party lenses on the front. People want a FF for the better DOF control - fair enough - and OK you only need f/2 to match f/1.4, but why buy a FF camera to get better DOF and put an f/2 on it? With your brand spanking new weather proofed FF Fuji X and it's amazing organic sensor you're going to want f/1.4, or f/1.2, aren't you, and that's what Fuji are going to give you. You think that's going to be cheap? If Fuji do develop a FF X camera, and only produce 35, 50 and 85 f/2 lenses, how much more whining is there going to be on here? BTW I don't use MF lenses except for macro - I'm talking about a system that uses AF.

I know the 56 isn't available yet, but I have faith it will be soon. Most people would have settled for a 56 f/1.4 if they could have had it already, but Fuji moved those goalposts, not me.

well why buy an APS-C if you want the DoF that only FF and an f1.2 or 1.4 lens will give you?

APS-C will never give you the separation that FF can, APS-C can do a very good job but FF is better at it

 

[fujidaix]

Nikon D600 have no resolution advantages over Fuji X-E1. Nikon D600 with 85 f1.8G on 5.6 & Fuji X-E1 with XF60 f2.4 on 5.6. RAW file from Nikon developed in LR 5, RAW file from Fuji - in PhotoNinja 1.2.1

Fuji - top

 

[masterofdeception]

That should read 5 lenses covering 21 to 300.

Oh and another thing, the FF crowd are going to want lenses that match the sensor as a bare minimum, so top quality 1.4 at least for the 35, 50 and 85. 2.8 for the 14 and the 70-200, and whatever (!) for the 21-300.

there is no Fuji 56mm available its still just on paper and no you don't need f1.4 FF lenses to match the APS-C Fuji ones.

someone gave you the answer to your question, moving the goal posts now serves what point?

I'm not moving any goalposts, which I why I said "fair enough" to what I thought was a very good response. My goalposts are the same as set out in the heading of my post - to explain why I (not you or the 3m others who "need" FF) don't want a FF X camera. My point, which everyone seems to be ignoring for their own reasons, is that a FF X system would not suit MY needs or my pocket, and would divert Fuji from developing a very good system I've already bought into. It's not me who's moving the goalposts - a system that suits my needs and pocket - it's everyone else telling me why they need a FF and how I can have one too for less than £5,000 by buying a Nikon DSLR. I didn't start this to find out which FF systems I can buy for less than £5,000. I've already sold my 5D Mk II and L lenses, so why would I bother?

The Nikon system isn't equivalent to what I have now. I don't care if the DF or 610 or whatever isn't all that big, or that I can stick tons of third party lenses on the front. People want a FF for the better DOF control - fair enough - and OK you only need f/2 to match f/1.4, but why buy a FF camera to get better DOF and put an f/2 on it? With your brand spanking new weather proofed FF Fuji X and it's amazing organic sensor you're going to want f/1.4, or f/1.2, aren't you, and that's what Fuji are going to give you. You think that's going to be cheap? If Fuji do develop a FF X camera, and only produce 35, 50 and 85 f/2 lenses, how much more whining is there going to be on here? BTW I don't use MF lenses except for macro - I'm talking about a system that uses AF.

I know the 56 isn't available yet, but I have faith it will be soon. Most people would have settled for a 56 f/1.4 if they could have had it already, but Fuji moved those goalposts, not me.

well why buy an APS-C if you want the DoF that only FF and an f1.2 or 1.4 lens will give you?

APS-C will never give you the separation that FF can, APS-C can do a very good job but FF is better at it

I never said I did want it. See point 7 of my OP. Yes it would be nice, but other factors, also given in my OP, weigh against it. For me, that is, not for you. My point is that people who do want a Fuji FF for better DOF control, or easier low-light work, aren't going to throw that away on f/2 lenses. They'll want the best they can get for the job they are doing, and in practice that means f1.2 or f/1.4. If you are now telling me that Fuji will be producing f1.2 lenses that will be cheaper than the already expensive X system lenses then I'm all ears. But you're not. Admit it, a FF X system is going to be relatively expensive, and out of the reach of a lot of people, and that's just common sense.

Not denying that FF will hold an advantage in that respect - that's physics for you. For me (that's M-E) though, I don't need it, and I don't want it for the price it will cost me. For those that do need it, but can't afford it, subject separation can be got in other ways, using the right background, framing, colour, contrast, depth of scene, focus, lighting, good PP, - there are plenty of great photos on the web taken with APS-C cameras, including Fuji X cameras. But yes, when it comes to DOF and light gathering, FF holds an advantage over APS-C I'm not even going to argue with that because that's also common sense.

What you really want me to say is that FF beats APC-S. Well, there we are, I said it. It does. But I still don't want a FF Fuji X!

 

[marike6]

Nikon D600 have no resolution advantages over Fuji X-E1. Nikon D600 with 85 f1.8G on 5.6 & Fuji X-E1 with XF60 f2.4 on 5.6. RAW file from Nikon developed in LR 5, RAW file from Fuji - in PhotoNinja 1.2.1

Fuji - top

Sure they do.

First of all, the D600 is 24 mp FF sensor absolutely out-resolves the 16 mp APS-C sensor in the X-E1. I'm not sure what those crops are supposed to prove.

It is a fact that a top FF sensor camera/lens will resolve more lines than a top APS-C camera/lens combo. If you need verification just look at DxOMark lens scores - the highest scores to lowest resolution scores are roughly the D800E > D800 > D610/D600 > D4 >= D7100 > D5200 > D7000, and so on.

DxOMark Camera / Lens test for the Nikon D600 / 85 f/1.4 G. See link below. Note: Change the body to the Nikon D7000 (an APS-C camera, and watch the resolution numbers drop).

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/Nikkor-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-f14G-mounted-on-Nikon-D600__834

Lastly, the Bayer sensor in the D600/D610 has zero issues with any of the popular RAW processors like the Fujifilm X-Trans cameras do. A 24 mp Nikon 14-bit NEF file from the D610 processed in Lightroom is not going to require nearly the same amount of capture sharpening / tweaking as the 16 mp RAF files from an X-Pro1 / X-E1. And the D600 doesn't seem to rely on such heavy NR out of the box as Fujifilm X-Trans files so you get clean files with excellent detail straight out of camera. If ACR, Capture One, and the various RAW processors continue to improve we might not have to worry about X-Trans RAW processing quality, but clearly the tried and true Bayer files from the Nikons are significantly less fussy to process.

Go ahead and download a D600/D610 file and see for yourself.

 

[Sal Baker]

Nikon D600 have no resolution advantages over Fuji X-E1. Nikon D600 with 85 f1.8G on 5.6 & Fuji X-E1 with XF60 f2.4 on 5.6. RAW file from Nikon developed in LR 5, RAW file from Fuji - in PhotoNinja 1.2.1

Fuji - top

Thanks for posting. This was the major draw to me for X-E2. I also converted quite a few raw samples from both cameras and like this comparison, IQ was indistinguishable. (The Fuji images held the highlights better it appears but that could just be a better exposure system.). The 16mp fuji files actually look better than my 21mp 5DII/L-glass raw files. It must be the X-Trans sensor, but the Fuji ergonomics and IQ are a joy.

Hopefully someone who has more time than I do will post a similar comparison of crops from the X-E1/2 and the Nikon D4. I was amazed how well Fuji does there up to ISO 3200. (Obviously I'm talking IQ only, the D4 is a much faster and more solid camera).

I'm guessing that the next x-Trans sensor will be 21 or 24, still on APS-C since their lenses are already built to resolve higher res images. If Fuji can pull that off without screwing up other image factors it will be an incredible upgrade.

Sal

 

[djsphynx]

I can't resist...

Well, actually I would like to see a FF X. For others, but not for me. I don't need or want one, because:

1 It will cost a small fortune - I mean £1500 or more, and the lenses? We're talking an investment of £5000 plus for a decent system - much cheaper than Leica, but way beyond my means or needs and in no way value for money for an enthusiast like me - for pros maybe, but still marginal for most I'd think

So what. Whoever has disposable income and/or a business need will buy it. That doesn't affect your current gear what-so-ever.

That was my point, except that focussing on a completely new FF is bound to affect Fuji's commitment to the X system. The X systtem isn't keeping them afloat as it is.

Why do you assume the X system is only crop? We're only talking about the sensor, so many other parts can be shared. Nikon, for example, shares a ton of components between models, DX or FX. My sense is that the X system is all encompassing, and that's a good strategy.

2 It won't be in my hands for at least a year and a half, and going on past form, I'll need to wait until 2017 or later until all the decent AF lenses I need are available

I thought you didn't want one.

I don't.

Yet you wrote "it won't be in my hands" and "I'll need to wait". So which is it? Do you want one or not?

3 It still won't be perfect, and for all sorts of reasons we'll all be needing a new version as soon as it's available - by 2017 who knows what we'll be lusting after - probably the Iphone9 will be outperforming what we have today!

This makes no sense. Substitute XPro FF with XE-3, or XE-4 etc. Nothing is ever perfect, and you don't *need* a new version. You *want* a new version. What does the iPhone have to do with any of this?

See my end comment about resources. I was being ironic about the iPhone, but hey.

You assume that the resources diverted away from crop bodies would create technologies not applicable to crop bodies. As in, half the engineer team goes off to create cement trucks for a year. No, they are still working on cameras. Components can be shared, lessons learned can be shared.

4 It will be a marginal improvement over the existing X cameras - only 400% pixel peepers will will be concerned - IQ is only one component of great photography (and arguably isn't important at all)

That's what people in Nikonland said for years until... the D3 came out. Who knows, maybe Fuji has some disruptive technologies up their sleeves!

Right, you can wait for that then.

I'm not waiting for anything. I don't collect gear, I use it. When something new comes out, I evaluate if it fits my needs and make rational decisions thereafter. That said, all the "sky is falling" Nikonians who held on to the notion that their D2xs was the be all end all of professional cameras changed their tune with the D3/D3x. So will many people here if the FF X ever comes to fruition (whether they need it, it's another story).

5 I have a good camera, great glass, and I can take pictures and improve my photography skills with the camera I have - the Gas syndrome is a never ending one, that never ends in better pictures

Great, so why do you care if Fuji comes out with a new FF camera or a crop sensor camera for that matter? Enjoy your gear and do as you say - improve your photog skills, maybe get a printer (love my epson 3880). No real value in discussing vaporware IMHO.

See my comment about resources. I have an epson 3000 that fulfils my current needs.

Love Epson printers. One of my best purchases.

6 I dropped my excellent 5d Mk II for the Fuji X, for weight, size, cost and functionality - I'm not about to go backwards - a FF is likely to compromise all of these

Applicable to you. What about the other million people who own Fuji and who want a FF with x-trans? Not everyone picked up a x camera for the same reasons as you.

I'm talking about me.

I get that. But you're making the case for Fuji to not go FF. I'm merely reminding you that you're not the only customer.

7 FF's advantage in shallow DOF isn't for everyone, which is why Ansel Adams and f/64 were once fashionable, and will be again - all this talk about shooting wide open makes me laugh - it's just a fad, like instagram is a fad

Some people like FF for more than just DoF BTW. Low light, ability to cram more MP, legacy lens support etc.

Great, Sony can help them.

Sure, and so Leica. But maybe people would rather continue using the Fuji workflow.

Sure, there are lots (?) of people who "need" FF, but even then why would they wait when they can pick up a Sony now?

Because Sony doesn't have any lenses at the moment, so they don't really have a system (A7/A7r specifically). And no, strapping on adapters in front defeats the purpose of a mirrorless system zFuji don!t have

Sony are at least a year ahead. If you want to wait 3 or 4 years for Fuji's system, then good luck.

Sony isn't that far ahead. How long did it take Fuji to come out with lenses after the xpro1 was introduced? Isn't it possible that they have already been working on lenses and are ready to go to market with 3 or 4 primes?

Not saying that a FF X won't be interesting, but for me it's bound to be out of my league and way beyond my means. Still bring it on for those who "need" it. My main issue with it is that it will divert Fuji from their declared aim of providing an APC format that is "as good as" FF. I don't want their resources to be diluted by chasing the Sony/Canikon FF market, though I expect that they will. That's a pity, because I think they were genuinely onto something new and good with the current X system.

I don't think it will divert Fuji in the least since crop sensor, like with Canikon, will continue to be their cash cows. They would simply be catering to a new audience which in the end, is good for all Fuji users. Like me, who has just joined the family.

Well tell that to those of us who are still waiting for the 56 1.2 and the X-Pro 2.

Is the 56 delayed? I thought it was always slated for early 2014 (I could be wrong). Flagship cameras for Canikon have longer dev cycles as you know, why wouldn't the X-Pro 2 also have a longer cycle? From where I stand, it just means that it will take everything that's good with the xe1/2, x100/s, xp1 etc. and add more to make a really strong XP2. Can't wait to see what it looks like.

Have a good one.

You too.

Cheers.

 

[masterofdeception]

I can't resist...

Well, actually I would like to see a FF X. For others, but not for me. I don't need or want one, because:

1 It will cost a small fortune - I mean £1500 or more, and the lenses? We're talking an investment of £5000 plus for a decent system - much cheaper than Leica, but way beyond my means or needs and in no way value for money for an enthusiast like me - for pros maybe, but still marginal for most I'd think

So what. Whoever has disposable income and/or a business need will buy it. That doesn't affect your current gear what-so-ever.

That was my point, except that focussing on a completely new FF is bound to affect Fuji's commitment to the X system. The X systtem isn't keeping them afloat as it is.

Why do you assume the X system is only crop? We're only talking about the sensor, so many other parts can be shared. Nikon, for example, shares a ton of components between models, DX or FX. My sense is that the X system is all encompassing, and that's a good strategy.

I don't assume it, I don't know though. Maybe you're right. All I'm saying here is that a FF system is going to take more resources that could otherwise be used on perfecting the existing X system.

2 It won't be in my hands for at least a year and a half, and going on past form, I'll need to wait until 2017 or later until all the decent AF lenses I need are available

I thought you didn't want one.

I don't.

Yet you wrote "it won't be in my hands" and "I'll need to wait". So which is it? Do you want one or not?

I don't want one. Because (unless I win the lottery) I won't be able to afford one and I don't want to wait 3 years for a system I don't even need.

3 It still won't be perfect, and for all sorts of reasons we'll all be needing a new version as soon as it's available - by 2017 who knows what we'll be lusting after - probably the Iphone9 will be outperforming what we have today!

This makes no sense. Substitute XPro FF with XE-3, or XE-4 etc. Nothing is ever perfect, and you don't *need* a new version. You *want* a new version. What does the iPhone have to do with any of this?

See my end comment about resources. I was being ironic about the iPhone, but hey.

You assume that the resources diverted away from crop bodies would create technologies not applicable to crop bodies. As in, half the engineer team goes off to create cement trucks for a year. No, they are still working on cameras. Components can be shared, lessons learned can be shared.

I don't imagine Fuji has 1000s, or even 100s, of people working on this. To compete on FF with the likes of Sony and Canikon, the people they do have are going to have to work a few late nights.

4 It will be a marginal improvement over the existing X cameras - only 400% pixel peepers will will be concerned - IQ is only one component of great photography (and arguably isn't important at all)

That's what people in Nikonland said for years until... the D3 came out. Who knows, maybe Fuji has some disruptive technologies up their sleeves!

Right, you can wait for that then.

I'm not waiting for anything. I don't collect gear, I use it. When something new comes out, I evaluate if it fits my needs and make rational decisions thereafter. That said, all the "sky is falling" Nikonians who held on to the notion that their D2xs was the be all end all of professional cameras changed their tune with the D3/D3x. So will many people here if the FF X ever comes to fruition (whether they need it, it's another story).

Fine, I agree. I'm not a pro, and I don't need a pro camera to take good (or in my case, bad) pictures.

5 I have a good camera, great glass, and I can take pictures and improve my photography skills with the camera I have - the Gas syndrome is a never ending one, that never ends in better pictures

Great, so why do you care if Fuji comes out with a new FF camera or a crop sensor camera for that matter? Enjoy your gear and do as you say - improve your photog skills, maybe get a printer (love my epson 3880). No real value in discussing vaporware IMHO.

See my comment about resources. I have an epson 3000 that fulfils my current needs.

Love Epson printers. One of my best purchases.

Yes love mine, for B&W especially. Now, a Fuji X Monochrom...

6 I dropped my excellent 5d Mk II for the Fuji X, for weight, size, cost and functionality - I'm not about to go backwards - a FF is likely to compromise all of these

Applicable to you. What about the other million people who own Fuji and who want a FF with x-trans? Not everyone picked up a x camera for the same reasons as you.

I'm talking about me.

I get that. But you're making the case for Fuji to not go FF. I'm merely reminding you that you're not the only customer.

Sure but what about the million customers who don't want a FF with x-trans and want Fuji to deliver on what they said they would? There are already too many X cameras for my liking. Other people are making the case for Fuji to go FF, I'm just giving you the other side (or at least my side) of the coin. All I care about is that Fuji continue to develop a system I've already put £4,000 into - this isn't a small amount of money I want to throw away.

7 FF's advantage in shallow DOF isn't for everyone, which is why Ansel Adams and f/64 were once fashionable, and will be again - all this talk about shooting wide open makes me laugh - it's just a fad, like instagram is a fad

Some people like FF for more than just DoF BTW. Low light, ability to cram more MP, legacy lens support etc.

Great, Sony can help them.

Sure, and so Leica. But maybe people would rather continue using the Fuji workflow.

Maybe. I'm not speaking for other people, but this isn't a democracy. It depends on what works for me, not others. In the end it comes down to whether it will make money for Fuji - if you re-read my opening post I actually say that I think Fuji will go down the FF route, whether I like it or not.

Sure, there are lots (?) of people who "need" FF, but even then why would they wait when they can pick up a Sony now?

Because Sony doesn't have any lenses at the moment, so they don't really have a system (A7/A7r specifically). And no, strapping on adapters in front defeats the purpose of a mirrorless system zFuji don!t have

Sony are at least a year ahead. If you want to wait 3 or 4 years for Fuji's system, then good luck.

Sony isn't that far ahead. How long did it take Fuji to come out with lenses after the xpro1 was introduced? Isn't it possible that they have already been working on lenses and are ready to go to market with 3 or 4 primes?

It's possible, but it will still take 3 years to get a system in place, assuming it happens at all. Some people won't care about that, and I'm one because I doubt I could afford it even if I wanted it. It's not for lack of money, I just have other things I prefer to spend my money on. I'm not a pro. But how many pros are going to switch to an unproven Fuji FF system from their Canikons? Not so many, I think. Or maybe on day 1 they'll all be buying Fujis in droves.

Not saying that a FF X won't be interesting, but for me it's bound to be out of my league and way beyond my means. Still bring it on for those who "need" it. My main issue with it is that it will divert Fuji from their declared aim of providing an APC format that is "as good as" FF. I don't want their resources to be diluted by chasing the Sony/Canikon FF market, though I expect that they will. That's a pity, because I think they were genuinely onto something new and good with the current X system.

I don't think it will divert Fuji in the least since crop sensor, like with Canikon, will continue to be their cash cows. They would simply be catering to a new audience which in the end, is good for all Fuji users. Like me, who has just joined the family.

Well tell that to those of us who are still waiting for the 56 1.2 and the X-Pro 2.

Is the 56 delayed? I thought it was always slated for early 2014 (I could be wrong). Flagship cameras for Canikon have longer dev cycles as you know, why wouldn't the X-Pro 2 also have a longer cycle? From where I stand, it just means that it will take everything that's good with the xe1/2, x100/s, xp1 etc. and add more to make a really strong XP2. Can't wait to see what it looks like.

The 56 1.4 was due out in Spring 2013. I was waiting for that, but Fuji put a 1.2 label on it and left us hanging for at least another year. Not so worried about the X-Pro 2, as Fuji have ironed out a lot of faults though firmware support. But the X-Pro 1 still isn't the flagship camera that Fuji claim it is. That title now has to go to the XE-2. I agree, I'm hoping for an APC-S X-Pro2 that incorporates all the goodies and more. On top of that give me the 56 1.2 and then I suppose I don't care what Fuji do FF wise.

Have a good one.

You too.

Cheers.

--
http://www.roberthawara.com

--
http://www.roberthawara.com