/p/ - Photography » Thread #3363827

[154 / 14 / ?]

60KiB, 720x442, Fujifilm-GFX-100S-720x442.jpg

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 06:55:33 No.3363827 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3363833 >>3363839 >>3363844 >>3363847 >>3363849 >>3363883 >>3364236 >>3364260 >>3364262 >>3364274 >>3367797 >>3368204

JUST BOW DOWN TO THE GREATEST PHOTOGRAPHY COMPANY IN THE WORLD
>Rule film industry with the greatest film emulsions
>Rule the instant film industry with the Instax
>Rule the entire digital photography with a Medium Format camera that BTFO FONY, CANIKON, PANTECKS and MICRO FOUR TURDS

Why aren't you shooting a Fuji? Why are you still on the Fool frame meme?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:05:45 No.3363833 Report

Quoted By: >>3363835

>>3363827
>Why aren't you shooting a Fuji?
Mostly because Fujis just don't handle like a DSLR.

It's pretty compact, I'll give it that. If I did studio portraits or slow paced stuff I'd be drooling over this.

I feel like aperture-bragging forum types would really want one just for bragging rights.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:15:26 No.3363835 Report

Quoted By: >>3363839

>>3363833
>Mostly because Fujis just don't handle like a DSLR.

So are the Soiny, Nikon Z, Canon Fool frame mirrorless. The GFX is way superior than them and we all know we can't wait until Fuji releases Full frame X-trans sensor next year.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:20:03 No.3363837 Report

Quoted By: >>3363878

Was the Fujifilm GFX a Mistake? Should Fuji Have Gone Full-Frame Instead?
https://petapixel.com/2018/09/18/was-the-fujifilm-gfx-a-mistake-should-fuji-have-gone-full-frame-instead/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:21:28 No.3363839 Report

Quoted By: >>3363843

>>3363827

>”medium format”
>fractionally other than fullframe
>outperformed by d850 and a7rii/iii sensors
>ridiculously priced
>no lenses
>welded sensor

Boring as fuck.

Let me know when we get a 6x4.5 medium format camera.

>>3363835

>fullframe x-trans sensor

Oh god, for their sake I hope not. That would be THREE lens mounts Fuji would have active, and they are slow to produce lenses for their crop mount already.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:28:26 No.3363843 Report

Quoted By: >>3363846 >>3363876 >>3366006

>>3363839
>>fractionally other than fullframe

Stupid Fool frame user
The GFX has the 6x4.5 size sensor which is way bigger than a fool frame. In comparison, the difference between APS-C and Fool frame is a lot smaller compared to the difference between fool frame and medium format.

>outperformed by d850 and a7rii/iii sensors
No source

>ridiculously priced
Pretty well priced as compared to Soiny and Nikon Z

>no lenses
So are the Canon and Nikon fool frame. Also the Pana fool frame.

>welded sensor

who gives a shit. You're just gearfagging.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:31:10 No.3363844 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363827
If they every put out a 6x6 sensor body I'll just put a holga lens on it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:33:42 No.3363846 Report

Quoted By: >>3363848

>>3363843

>he thinks the fix is a 6x4.5

Oh you poor anon. Are you in for a surprise.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:36:51 No.3363847 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363827
>sonyggers, canoniggers, nikoniggers, olympussies, panoseethings, leikards BTFO.

While they battle in the fool frame territory because "muh 35mm film" and some Male-Female Transsexual crops, Fuji continues to uphold both compact, cheap and reliable APS-C and brings up glorious medium format cams. Now with 100 mpx and fucking compact, almost entry level 50R. Fucking what???

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:38:11 No.3363848 Report

Quoted By: >>3363896

>>3363846
That was a typo. My other arguments beat your ass though.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2018-09-26 at 12.22. (...).png, 977KiB, 1356x710

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:38:41 No.3363849 Report

Quoted By: >>3363853 >>3363856 >>3363898

>>3363827
>Why aren't you shooting a Fuji? Why are you still on the Fool frame meme?
Because the Canon 5Ds is half the price (1/3rd the price gray market), and there's practically no difference between them in IQ. The Fuji is a very, very tiny bit sharper ooc which won't matter if you sharpen your images at all.

The 5Ds...
* Handles like a DSLR.
* Can use any EF lens out there.
* Has a real AF system.
* Can shoot at 5fps.
* Won't moire the fuck out. (It's a myth that you don't need AA filters at high resolutions. I see hints of moire in fabric even with the 5Ds AA filter.)

If Fuji released a camera with a true 645 sensor (roughly 55x42) at 100mp or higher at these price points I would be very interested. But they've chosen a "cropped 645" imaging circle which isn't that much bigger than 35mm full frame, and they're only shipping 51mp. By the time they ship 100mp Canikony will probably be doing the same, or close to it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:42:30 No.3363852 Report

Quoted By:

FUJIFILM: M4/3 is rubbish, Full-frame is rubbish too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:43:07 No.3363853 Report

Quoted By: >>3363858

>>3363849
>100 iso comparison
Ishygddt. You know that 5ds has a shitty dynamic range of a 1" sensor right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:44:05 No.3363856 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363849
Forgot sensor sizes. Fuji GFX is 44mm x 33mm.

645 varied a little bit between brands, but but on film was about 55mm x 42mm and in the Phase One "full frame MF" system is 53mm x 40mm.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO capture-one-pro-11-software-phas (...).jpg, 23KiB, 700x700

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:45:53 No.3363857 Report

Quoted By: >>3363896

>capture one is now free for fujifags
Based fuji

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2018-09-26 at 12.22. (...).png, 1MiB, 1362x708

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 07:47:30 No.3363858 Report

Quoted By: >>3363870 >>3363871 >>3363872 >>3363953

>>3363853
Here's ISO 12800 and it's still holding its own. Again, the GFX sensor just isn't that much larger than 35mm, so there's not that much gain in terms of light gathering or bokeh.

>muh duhnamick ranges
Most over discussed / under utilized sensor spec. I can hold bright white clouds while opening up nearly black canyon walls on the 5Ds (+3.5ev shadows; total range just over 13ev) at base ISO. I don't need more than that.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 5ds_vs_gfx_1.jpg, 101KiB, 1501x640

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 08:20:32 No.3363870 Report

Quoted By: >>3363874 >>3363953

>>3363858
yeah no

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 5ds_vs_gfx_2.jpg, 78KiB, 1566x636

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 08:21:34 No.3363871 Report

Quoted By: >>3363874 >>3363953

>>3363858

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rx100.jpg, 96KiB, 1535x616

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 08:23:38 No.3363872 Report

Quoted By: >>3363874 >>3363953

>>3363858
and the fun part

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 08:37:07 No.3363874 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363870
>>3363871
>>3363872
>graphs vs real photo
>chooses graphs
Take your autism over to /g/ and don't come back.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 08:51:02 No.3363876 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363843
FUJIFILM G format is similar to 127 format rather than 645 Medium format.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 08:53:37 No.3363878 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363837
stop shilling your shitty blog.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 09:03:34 No.3363883 Report

Quoted By: >>3363887 >>3364272

>>3363827

>make a sensor fractionally larger than fullframe

BUY OUR MEDIUM FORMAT!

Fuji is cancer. Killing off film, while pushing instax and their terrible, overpriced, crop mirrorless with flawed sensors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 09:11:59 No.3363887 Report

Quoted By: >>3363891

>>3363883
>Killing off film, while pushing instax
Gotta get on the Kodak hype train my dude. Ektachrome just got released!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 09:16:17 No.3363891 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363887

I shoot 120 now though. Gonna be awhile before we see it in 120.

Might pick up a 135 roll anyway.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 09:24:50 No.3363896 Report

Quoted By: >>3363919

>>3363848
No, a typo is an error in typing, not being wrong.

But, let's dig deeper into your claim.

1. Crop to ff is a doubling in sensor size, ff to fuji mf is a fair bit less than double. So no, the jump from crop to ff is larger.

2. Literally everywhere can show that sony is still on top, dxo and ir are good places to start. So again, you were wrong.

3. The gfx is basically a sony a7 with a bigger sensor, considering the sensor is less than twice the size, asking for more than double the price of an a7 would be a fucking ripoff. A sony a7 is £800, a gfx is £6000. It's a huge fucking ripoff. So again, you were wrong.

>no lenses
Well, at least you admitted to this one.

>you're just gearfagging
Says the guy trying to imply the gfx is a good choice for anyone or anything except being an expensive necklace. Wewlad.

I'm not the op you were replying to, but it has become evidently clear, that you're a dumb cuck.

>>3363857
That's thanks to sony, again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 09:29:39 No.3363898 Report

Quoted By: >>3363907

>>3363849
>Handles like a DSLR.

Who wants a big ass DLSR to carry all around during travel and paid shoots? DSLRs are dead.
Everyone knows you are a creep if you shoot a DSLR in 2018

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSCF8207.jpg, 258KiB, 1500x1000

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 09:31:00 No.3363899 Report

Quoted By: >>3363928

GFX sensor is 1.7x larger than full-frame

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:06:40 No.3363907 Report

Quoted By: >>3363925 >>3365464

>>3363898
>Who wants a big ass DLSR to carry all around during travel and paid shoots?
Anyone who has to handle big ass lenses. Sony might be fine with a pancake, it's absolute shit with big glass.

Sony bodies are for onions cuck boys. DSLRs are for Chads.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:21:13 No.3363919 Report

Quoted By: >>3363926 >>3363932 >>3363957

>>3363896
>1. Crop to ff is a doubling in sensor size, ff to fuji mf is a fair bit less than double. So no, the jump from crop to ff is larger.
>being this dumb

Crop to FF is not double. That's MFT to FF that's double.

>2. Literally everywhere can show that sony is still on top, dxo and ir are good places to start. So again, you were wrong.

Stop being a Tony Northrup shill. No one give a shit about BXO mark. It only factors in sharpness.

>3. The gfx is basically a sony a7 with a bigger sensor, considering the sensor is less than twice the size, asking for more than double the price of an a7 would be a fucking ripoff. A sony a7 is £800, a gfx is £6000. It's a huge fucking ripoff. So again, you were wrong.

The a7rIII is $4000. What are you saying? For $2k more you can get a bigger medium format camera with a bigger sensor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:28:41 No.3363925 Report

Quoted By: >>3363929

>>3363907
>Sony bodies are for onions cuck boys. DSLRs are for Chads.
>this overcompensating

All the Chads use mirrorless now. No one cares about your shitty Rebal.

>>3363907
>Anyone who has to handle big ass lenses.

Who tf wants big ass lenses. You look like a total creep with a big ass DSLR + 18-300mm zoom.
Ask any women and they would gladly prefer the XT, X-E Fuji series with cute pancake lenses over a weirdo with Canon Rebal / Nikon DSLR

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:29:26 No.3363926 Report

Quoted By: >>3363930 >>3363932

>>3363919
>Crop to FF is not double. That's MFT to FF that's double.
864 sq mm vs 370 sq mm. It's a bit more than double.

>Stop being a Tony Northrup shill. No one give a shit about BXO mark. It only factors in sharpness.
Actually agree with you on shitmark.

>The a7rIII is $4000. What are you saying? For $2k more you can get a bigger medium format camera with a bigger sensor.
But not "bigger" IQ. The Fuji is more expensive yet it's not delivering anything more at base or high ISO.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO leica-x1-sensor-comparison.jpg, 133KiB, 550x828

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:30:16 No.3363927 Report

Quoted By: >>3363950 >>3363955

The Leica S3 has the same sensor size as the S2 and Fuji GFX which is a quite small 30 x 45 mm sensor.
No current camera with small format sensors with a size of 24 x 36 mm and 32.9 x 43.8 mm like the Hasselblad X1D-50c has better dynamic range than the Nikon D850 and D810.
I'm quite sure the Z cameras will be as good as D850/D810.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:30:47 No.3363928 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363899
That's by area. It's basically the same % difference as between m43 and APS-C.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:31:43 No.3363929 Report

Quoted By: >>3363950 >>3363963

>>3363925
>quoting the same post twice
>claims to not be an onion boy
ishygddt

>Who tf wants big ass lenses.
People who care about image quality.

>18-300mm zoom.
>kek
Try 300 f/2.8 onion boy.

>Ask any women
>choosing the camera women would choose
Exactly cuck.

Protip: you're a creep if you're sneaking pics of them no matter the camera. Chads talk them up and get them to model.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:31:43 No.3363930 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363926

Don’t forget the a7rii has the same sensor and can be had as low as $1,800 now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:33:58 No.3363932 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363926
>>3363919
>Crop to FF is not double. That's MFT to FF that's double.
>864 sq mm vs 370 sq mm. It's a bit more than double.
Both are correct, it's just linear dimensions vs area.

APSC to FF -> 1.5x linear, 2.2x area
m43 to FF -> 2x linear, 4x area
m43 to APSC -> 1.3x linear, 1.7x area
FF to GFX -> 1.3x linear, 1.7x area

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:37:29 No.3363933 Report

Quoted By: >>3363938

Why are you fat fucking autists arguing so much about this piece of electronic?

99% of you won't buy it and of the 1% that do 99% will not be able to take a semi decent picture with it and then sell it for 50% of the price on craigslist

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:40:57 No.3363938 Report

Quoted By: >>3363942

>>3363933
U mad?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:44:41 No.3363942 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363938
no, just confused

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 10:57:12 No.3363950 Report

Quoted By: >>3363956 >>3363957

>>3363929
>People who care about image quality.

Big lenses doesn't equate to image quality. A Fujifilm X-series lens is sharper than most Nikon fool frame lenses.

>>3363927
>I'm quite sure the Z cameras will be as good as D850/D810.

Lol no. Even Theoria Apophasis who is a Nikon fanboy is switching to Fuji now. Nikon will be dead in 5 years.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:12:29 No.3363953 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363872
>>3363871
>>3363870

ok
what do these graphs mean for end quality?

>>3363858
Oh, its a meaningless spec epenee thing

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:16:01 No.3363955 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363927
Fuji uses the same sensors as Hassleblad and Pentax, not Leica's 3:2 aspect sensor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:16:08 No.3363956 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363950
>Big lenses doesn't equate to image quality. A Fujifilm X-series lens is sharper than most Nikon fool frame lenses.
>a newer apsc lens is sharper than an old 35mm lens
Covering a FF or larger imaging circle with glass that can resolve 50mp into the corners = big lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:18:18 No.3363957 Report

Quoted By: >>3363962 >>3363966 >>3363967

>>3363919
Crop to ff is slightly over double, mft to ff is quadruple.

Dxo offers a lot more measurements than just sharpness, thanks for confirming your ignorance though.

The a7riii and gfx aren't comparable, the gfx has about 2/3 stop bonus due to larger sensor, but loses a stop to thr a7riii for being a generation behind, another stop because it has no bsi, and up to 5 stops for no ibis. It also doesn't have the af speed, the tracking ability, the af ai, burst rate, buffer size, literally any metric apart from sensor area the gfx is WAY behind on.

>>3363950
>a fuji is sharper than a nikon.

Lmfao, no, and fuji needs less than half the glass as nikon for its babby sensors.
There's a reason there's no fuji lenses on dxo, and it's got everything to do with fuji throwing a legal shit fit.

Also, pro tip, don't use a guy that claims magnets affect optics and has a shit ton of tinfoil hat conspiracy theory videos as your basis for someone to follow the advice of. Especially don't listen to them if they get thoroughly embarrassed by average photographer, jason lanier.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:22:22 No.3363962 Report

Quoted By: >>3363970

>>3363957
>Dxo offers a lot more measurements than just sharpness, thanks for confirming your ignorance though.
dxo is shit though. "Perceptual megapixels" is literal nonsense and their lens tests are observably wrong. As for their sensor tests: color bit depth is meaningless; their high ISO scores are often observably wrong; DR is the only test they have which actually seems accurate.

I agree with the rest of your post but in my book dxo is no better than believing magnets affect optics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:23:45 No.3363963 Report

Quoted By: >>3363965 >>3364011

>>3363929
>Who tf wants big ass lenses.
>People who care about image quality.

>he still thinks that having a big DSLR and big ass lenses will improve your skill as a photographer

Zack Arias with a Fuji XA-1 kit lens will produce better photos than you even if you have a a Nikon D850 or Sony A7rIII with Zeiss

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:30:20 No.3363965 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363963
> Zack Arias with a Fuji XA-1 kit lens will produce
Show us his work

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:31:04 No.3363966 Report

Quoted By: >>3363970

>>3363957
>The a7riii and gfx aren't comparable, the gfx has about 2/3 stop bonus due to larger sensor, but loses a stop to thr a7riii for being a generation behind, another stop because it has no bsi, and up to 5 stops for no ibis. It also doesn't have the af speed, the tracking ability, the af ai, burst rate, buffer size, literally any metric apart from sensor area the gfx is WAY behind on.

People compared MFT to FF all the time. They are comparable. It just shows how the GFX cameras shits on all Fool frame cameras.

>Lmfao, no, and fuji needs less than half the glass as nikon for its babby sensors.

Fuji has less glass because it is newer. Damn Nikon F mount has been around way before you were born.

>Also, pro tip, don't use a guy that claims magnets affect optics and has a shit ton of tinfoil hat conspiracy theory videos as your basis for someone to follow the advice of. Especially don't listen to them if they get thoroughly embarrassed by average photographer, jason lanier.

Well Jason Lanier is a Soiny shill. At least Theoria is true and doesn't have any external links. He also bought all his Fuji cameras from his own money.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:31:21 No.3363967 Report

Quoted By: >>3363970

>>3363957
>it's got everything to do with fuji throwing a legal
shit fit.
>lmfao
aaaah here you are. Taking unsourced facts out your ass again, as usual.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 11:48:29 No.3363970 Report

Quoted By: >>3363991 >>3363999 >>3364091 >>3364111 >>3364475

>>3363962
Please, tell me how pmp is nonsense, they explain in good detail how they arrive at that figure, i presume you've not read it.

How are their lens tests "observably wrong", i can't help but notice you didn't expand on that at all, and as dxo offers all their method and evidence the burden of proof that it's "wrong" is on you.

Color bit depth is far from meaningless, maybe your knowledge isn't quite up to standard, color bit depth and dr together make up the bandwidth of the sensor.

Again, you claim the high iso tests are observably wrong, but left no observations.

In fact, you didn't really say anything of any merit or substance at all.

>>3363966
>they are comparable
Yes, the original a7 is very comparable, it has an almost identical list of features to the gfx. Read my post again, I'm clearly stating the lack of comparability comes down to the huge list of features the gfx doesn't have compared to a later sony model.

>fuji has less glass because its newer

No, you dumb turd, it has less glass because the image circle is much smaller. It has FEWER LENSES because it's newer. Having said that, sony have announced 12 new lenses coming out in the next year, fuji has 1 lens on its roadmap for x mount, ouch.

>at least fatty isn't a paid shill

You mean no one wants him to shill for them because his whole life is an embarassment. And is duping and marrying a senile, ill elderly women then taking her home and all her money really "bought all his fuji cameras from his OWN money".

I'm cringeing just writing about you.

>>3363967

Why do you think fuji aren't on dxo?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 12:32:00 No.3363991 Report

Quoted By: >>3363995

>>3363970
>Landscape score is dr
>Sports score is iso
Dxo is a joke in the first place

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 12:35:45 No.3363995 Report

Quoted By: >>3364061

>>3363991
Yes, they are the basic bitch score equivalents

Dr is more useful for landscapes, as image quality is paramount.
Better high iso performance is more useful for high shutter speeds, as capturing the moment is paramount.

If you didn't understand why dxo display their basic scoring like this, your more of a chin dribbler than i ever expected. My condolences.

If you

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 12:38:39 No.3363999 Report

Quoted By: >>3364015 >>3364051

>>3363970
>Having said that, sony have announced 12 new lenses coming out in the next year, fuji has 1 lens on its roadmap for x mount, ouch.

Releasing 1 great nice > Releasing 12 shitty lenses

Also you don't need 300+ lenses.

>You mean no one wants him to shill for them because his whole life is an embarassment. And is duping and marrying a senile, ill elderly women then taking her home and all her money really "bought all his fuji cameras from his OWN money".

Well at least he is not a shill.

His wife is long dead stop disrespecting the dead.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 12:49:59 No.3364011 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363963
>Zack Arias
Zack Arias and Karl Taylor are anathema to the gearfaggorty

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 12:57:35 No.3364015 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363999
Theo you fat shit, go on a diet and get a real job. Heavily sighing as you walk 3 feet from your tripod to your chair is not content.

And no one has disrespected your dead wife more than the swindle you pulled on her. You're literally scum.

Also, sony outperforms fuji massively at comparable prices for lenses. In fact, sony outperform everyone. And let's not forget, fuji are crop cucks who will never get image quality on par with sony.

Sony only agreed to start selling fuji sensors after they saw fujis mount was too small for full frame, sony even advised them on the mount and implied that their mount was too small for a ff sensor so fuji shouldn't worry about it. It's one of the greatest cuckenings sony has ever done. Then they managed to blag fuji into buying massively over priced "medium format" sensors that didn't outperform sonys ff sensors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 13:50:11 No.3364051 Report

Quoted By: >>3364120

>>3363999
>Releasing 1 great lens > Releasing 12 shitty lenses

Ehh.

1. The Sony lenses are unlikely to be shitty. It’s not like they’re releasing rebranded c-mount security camera lenses or anything; they have legitimate chops when it comes to optics. 12 decent-to-great lenses is better than releasing just one lense, especially when:
2. Fuji’s lens lineup is currently just about the smallest in the game (if you spot Nikon and Canon their SLR adapters, I think only PanLeicMa L is smaller right now. And with Sigma’s raison d’être being pumping out existing lenses with new mounts, expect that to change quickly), with a lot of niches unfilled. So honestly, as the owner of a Fuji mirrorless, I’d be more interested in them pumping out some cheaper low-end or midrange glass to flesh out the system a bit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 14:07:57 No.3364061 Report

Quoted By: >>3364103 >>3364115

>>3363995
not fucking necessarily at all.
I dont shoot sports but do night street photo. You want to say iso in this case is less relevant to me than to a sports shooter? \what if i shoot sports with a fucking 200 f2 lens in pure daylight? Plain stupid..
Also as for Fuji, DxO doesnt measure them because they do their tests via DxO Optics Pro, which does not support Fuji, cause frenchies are too retarded to figure out the demosaicing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 14:57:40 No.3364091 Report

Quoted By: >>3364103

>>3363970
>fuji has 1 lens on its roadmap for x mount
get your facts right fucker. 33/1, 16/2.8 and 16-80/4 are confirmed in addition to the 8-16/2.8 and 200/2 that will be released in coming months.
>Why do you think fuji aren't on dxo
because those french fags can't be bothered to rewrite their algorithms.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:15:19 No.3364103 Report

Quoted By: >>3364105 >>3364113 >>3364479

>>3364061
Lets go through your reply here

>but i do fine art photography

Great, use a smartphone, image quality isn't important for fine art, intention is.

>what if i shoot a 200mm f2

Then you will be probably stopping down to f8, good sports photography isn't about making bokehlicious portraits. The f2 aperture allows for faster and more accurate focussing.

>dxo cant demosaic fuji

You mean dxo, a company that made and uses its own demosaic algorithm can't do the exact same but in a slightly different, published, pattern? Uh huh, sure sweety.

>>3364091
I dare you to try posting objective lens quality tests from fuji. I have no doubt that you will receive a very similar letter to the one we did.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:21:39 No.3364105 Report

Quoted By: >>3364119

>>3364103
>I dare you to try posting objective lens quality tests from fuji.
Like literally dozens of websites do about every fuji lens available?
>I have no doubt that you will receive a very similar letter to the one we did.
Oh you have proof! Why don't you post it! Oh right, because you're full of shit!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:29:07 No.3364111 Report

Quoted By: >>3364119

>>3363970
DXO doesn't tell you anything at all about the P-Mpix number except that it's an on-camera test, test charts are involved, and the results are weighted according to they think is important, and they're not going to tell you what that is. What makes one lens score higher than another? You don't know. It might resolve more detail, or it might just resolve differently in a way that the test favors. Or maybe it's just a higher resolution camera -- you should't really compare tests done in this way with different cameras.

The right way to test lenses is on an optical bench, but DXO has clearly decided they don't want to pay for that sort of thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:31:05 No.3364113 Report

Quoted By: >>3364119

>>3364103
>You mean dxo, a company that made and uses its own demosaic algorithm can't do the exact same but in a slightly different, published, pattern?

Yes.

This is the answer directly from DxO. Technically more “we haven’t gotten around to it yet and there’s not enough call for us to make it a priority” than “we can’t”, but it’s very much because their measurement software doesn’t support the X-trans demosaicing.

https://petapixel.com/2016/01/26/why-dxomark-doesnt-test-fujifilm-cameras/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:34:34 No.3364115 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364061
>I dont shoot sports but do night street photo. You want to say iso in this case is less relevant to me than to a sports shooter?
I think you’re reading way more into those names than was intended. DxO just calls them that so people who don’t actually know anything about photography can still sort of understand the scores. For anyone who does understand photography, it’s not like they’re cagey about what each of those mean—it’s right there in parentheses after the “friendly” name for the score component.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:45:01 No.3364119 Report

Quoted By: >>3364124 >>3364128 >>3364135 >>3364139

>>3364105
>Like literally dozens of websites do about every fuji lens available?
None of them properly objective testing though.

>Oh you have proof! Why don't you post it!
because I haven't worked for dxo for 3 years.

>>3364111
>and they're not going to tell you what that is.
Bullshit, DXO gives you every test result and how they reach the pmp number is published.

>>3364113
We weren't allowed to put "Fuji threatened to sue us for libel as they imply the average consumer doesn't know the difference between crop and full frame and therefore these scores will look low to their potential customers"

We could have fought it, but we believed showing nothing put across a strong enough message that fuji are anti-consumer, and we couldn't be sued for that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:47:42 No.3364120 Report

Quoted By: >>3364122

>>3364051
Sony certainly hasn't been releasing shit lenses, mostly, but I just have to say that Sony doesn't have any optical chops at all. They don't make lenses. Every single Sony-branded lens is contracted from an outside manufacturer. So it's really just down to who they contracted and how good a design they paid for, for any given lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:52:52 No.3364122 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364120
>Sony outsource

So do voigtlander, zeiss, pentax.

However, they only outsource production, all the design is done in house by sony, voigtlander, zeiss and pentax etc.

Which makes a lot of sense, lens grinding isn't an art or a science any more, it's just popping a block of glass into a machine and pressing go.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 15:57:36 No.3364124 Report

Quoted By: >>3364126

>>3364119
So where do I find the formula that DXO uses to turn test charts into a single number?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:00:45 No.3364126 Report

Quoted By: >>3364134

>>3364124
>This new metric introduced by DxOMark aligns with the standardization work currently being undertaken by the IEEE, the International Imaging Industry Association (I3A), and the ISO - and in which DxO Labs actively participates. Perceptual Mpix is also based on the scientific findings of CNES (the French space agency) pertaining to the optimization of digital acquisition, notably in the field of satellite imagery.

yfw pmp is going to be an international standard soon

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:16:12 No.3364128 Report

Quoted By: >>3364132

>>3364119
>None of them properly objective testing though.
So in that case, neither does dxo
>because I haven't worked for dxo for 3 years.
How convenient! I totally believe every word! Yes you absolutely worked for dxo, I'm so convinced!
>We weren't allowed to put "Fuji threatened to sue us for libel as they imply the average consumer doesn't know the difference between crop and full frame and therefore these scores will look low to their potential customers"
>We could have fought it, but we believed showing nothing put across a strong enough message that fuji are anti-consumer, and we couldn't be sued for that.
AAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAA that's not how business works you dumb fuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:22:47 No.3364132 Report

Quoted By: >>3364156

>>3364128
>So in that case, neither does dxo
Except pmp is well on it's way to being an IEEE recognised standard, oof, ouch, owie.

>Yes you absolutely worked for dxo, I'm so convinced!
OK, someone has to work there, are you surprised that people with an interest in photography have both worked in the field and posted on photography forums? seems awful farfetched huh.

>AAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAA that's not how business works you dumb fuck

No, you're right, businesses never ever purposefully avoid being taken through a libel case.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:24:11 No.3364134 Report

Quoted By: >>3364815

>>3364126
So where do I find the formula?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:28:40 No.3364135 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364119
There’s literally no evidence that Fuji threatened to sue them.

Other sites that don’t use dxo’s software have posted comparisons.

DxO lists results for their non-Xtrans cameras.

DxO has publicly stated that incompatibility with Xtrans is the reason.

There is precedent for it (eg, there’s also no Sigma results because Foveon).

You’re espousing a ridiculous conspiracy theory and it makes you sound like a crazy person.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:30:52 No.3364136 Report

Quoted By:

The human eye can't see more than 50mp anyways

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:40:56 No.3364139 Report

Quoted By: >>3364140

>>3364119
>Fuji threatened to sue us for libel as they imply the average consumer doesn't know the difference between crop and full frame
Holy shit, what kind of mentally ill conspiracy theorist are you

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 16:44:09 No.3364140 Report

Quoted By: >>3364212 >>3364481

>>3364139
I've never seen anons more deranged than anti-Fuji anons on this board. It makes me want to buy a Fuji camera in the hopes it ruins someone's day when they see me use it in the real world.

That's implying the anti-Fuji guy ever goes outside, of course. Already a big ask.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 17:07:43 No.3364156 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364132

>standard
I work in the electronics industry, I've read through more worthless standards than I can count. dxo bullshit pamphlet will fit right in! (lil' hint for you, anyone can make a "standard" with some money changing hands)

>people with an interest in photography have both worked in the field and posted on photography forums
I know, I also work for dxo and can confirm that everything you say is false.

>a libel case
Over fucking what? Something that every review site does? And not a single one of those have been taken to court? And considering how poor job they do of it (according to you), that should be an easy case to win?

You go on about this stupid conspiracy theory and when you can't substantiate it, you suddenly claim (again, with zero evidence) that you have first hand knowledge. Right after you claimed that fuji only has 1 lens on the roadmap instead of 5. See, this is why you're not believable.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO m43 9.jpg, 51KiB, 1895x281

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 18:17:05 No.3364212 Report

Quoted By: >>3364221

>>3364140
>I've never seen anons more deranged than anti-Fuji anons on this board. It makes me want to buy a Fuji camera in the hopes it ruins someone's day when they see me use it in the real world.

LOL WUT?
If there's a system that's been attacked and shit upon for years and years here it's the MFT system.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 18:32:05 No.3364221 Report

Quoted By: >>3364246

>>3364212
Yeah, but at least the anti-MFT people argue that it’s worse based on things like sensor size. Not that it’s worse because Fuji has a shadowy cabal of lawyers ready to pounce on this one specific review site if they make any effort to review their cameras (but not any of the other review sites out there).

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 18:47:13 No.3364236 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363827
film? like what? movies?

What is this prehistoric shit and why would anyone care?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 18:57:51 No.3364246 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364221
You've not been in any mft threads recently. Apsc and pontandshot anonons hate it with blind insanity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 19:27:55 No.3364258 Report

Quoted By: >>3364261

No lie, I have actually contemplated of selling My A7r for a X-Pro2.
The AF and low light shooting just prevents it, I need them to be good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 19:31:30 No.3364260 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363827
I'm gonna buy one of each and shoot exclusively in jpeg.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 19:33:04 No.3364261 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364258
Fuji has better AF

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 19:37:39 No.3364262 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363827
What a coincidence. I too am working on a ground breaking camera. It will have a global sensor, no shutter, no mirror, be large format, 512 megapixels, and support all lens mounts in existence (with sensor cropping set by user when needed).

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 19:57:09 No.3364272 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363883
who gives a fuck about film we digital space monkeys now nigga

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 20:06:12 No.3364274 Report

Quoted By: >>3364484 >>3364641

>>3363827
Honestly why did they go for 100 megapixels? They just ruined it. They should have done 40 max, on a large medium format sensor everyone of those 40 mpx would have been glorious

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Sep 2018 20:08:04 No.3364276 Report

Quoted By:

Moop you must be so close to the fucking edge, eh boy?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2018-09-26 at 5.55.4 (...).png, 3MiB, 1364x1388

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 01:01:40 No.3364475 Report

Quoted By: >>3364638 >>3364654 >>3364694

>>3363970
>Please, tell me how pmp is nonsense,
Megapixels is a measure of SENSOR SAMPLING FREQUENCY and is NOT a measure of RESOLVED TARGET DETAIL. There is no standard definition of how a 10 or 20 or 100mp image should look therefore there's no reference for saying a sensor + lens is perceived as 10 or 20 or 100mp.

It would be like trying to compare cars by "perceived RPM." It's utterly meaningless.

I've compared two sensor/lens combos where they reported one as having half the "perceived megapixels" of the other. The images were in fact very close, much closer than two images using the same lens on a camera with 10mp and 20mp.

>i can't help but notice you didn't expand on that at all, and as dxo offers all their method and evidence the burden of proof that it's "wrong" is on you.
If dxo says A is better than B and RAW files from other sources like dpreview and IR look identical, or show B to be better, they've been proven wrong. The graph or score HAS to match reality, not the other way around.

>Color bit depth is far from meaningless,
It's utterly meaningless. Take the lowest color depth ILC sensor on the chart and the highest color bit depth sensor. Now take the same photograph with both and display on a 4k IPS display or print to a pro ink jet. No human being will be able to see a difference in tonal/color gradation between them. For all we know the color bit depth test is accurate, but it represents differences below the perceptive threshold of human observes so who gives a fuck?

>Again, you claim the high iso tests are observably wrong, but left no observations.
Pic related. dxo ranks the cameras this way: A73 > A7S > A7r3 > 5DsR
My eyes see: A7r3 > 5DsR > A73 > A7S

dxo probably gets high ISO wrong because they completely ignore resolution and treat everything as if it were 8mp.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 01:02:28 No.3364476 Report

Quoted By:

my wife chino is so cute

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 01:04:56 No.3364479 Report

Quoted By: >>3364694

>>3364103
>Then you will be probably stopping down to f8, good sports photography isn't about making bokehlicious portraits. The f2 aperture allows for faster and more accurate focussing.
>WTF am i reading???
If you buy a 200 f/2 for sports it's for indoor and night sports and it's absolutely to shoot at the f/2 aperture.
>t. Shoots Indoor Sports with f/1.8 and f/2 primes

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 01:07:09 No.3364481 Report

Quoted By: >>3364517 >>3365251

>>3364140
I like Fuji cameras. I like Fuji users.

I fucking hate Sony users.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 01:08:44 No.3364484 Report

Quoted By: >>3364623

>>3364274
"muh big pixels!" are a myth for stills. The sweet spot is typically a smaller pixel pitch / higher resolution.

For video big pixels rule.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 01:59:34 No.3364517 Report

Quoted By: >>3364536 >>3364612 >>3365251

>>3364481
And Fujifilm uses Sony sensors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 02:21:55 No.3364536 Report

Quoted By: >>3364630 >>3364694 >>3365251

>>3364517
Yet Fuji fans aren't complete and total faggots online or IRL.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 07:17:35 No.3364612 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364517
Not any more famalam

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 07:55:00 No.3364623 Report

Quoted By: >>3364654

>>3364484
What about noise? 100 megapixels will generate alot of noise

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 08:04:16 No.3364630 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364536
gottem

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 08:19:43 No.3364638 Report

Quoted By: >>3364831

>>3364475
Dxo measures ISO by actually matching sensor output to calibrated lighting. The samples at dpreview use the ISO reported by the camera, which is not consistent not just across manufacturers but sometimes across camera models as well (and given that the difference in dxo scores between all of those is like 0.5EV, even a small inconsistency matters).
Also, the same sensor will produce slightly more noise when hot. When you're trying to split hairs in fractions of EV, temperature is an issue and no site actually reports on that.

>My eyes see: A7r3 > 5DsR > A73 > A7S
My eyes see that all those samples are so close to each other that it shouldn't even be a fucking factor, other differences between those cameras (like one being a SLR) will affect your images in much bigger ways.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 08:26:23 No.3364641 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364274
>Honestly why did they go for 100 megapixels? They just ruined it. They should have done 40 max

- They already have a 50 MP camera, you can just get that
- You can also easily downsample 100 to 40
Modern BSI sensors no longer have read-out circuitry wasting space on the photosensitive side, so a higher MP sensor captures pretty much the same amount of light compared as a lower MP sensor, and downsampled results will be pretty much the same. The only inconvenience of having 100 MP when you need much less is having to deal with massive raws.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 08:55:40 No.3364654 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364623
That's more per-pixel noise, but the pixels are smaller so it evens out. Look at a7s in >>3364475, it has 3 times less pixels than a7r3 but isn't appreciably cleaner.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 10:24:38 No.3364694 Report

Quoted By: >>3364835

>>3364475
Mp is x, not y
I guess that's why this is pmp, not mp then. It makes sense to use a term, mp, that the public is already aware of and already assosciates with sharpness or resolution.
>there is no std for how x should look
I guess that's why there workong towards a new ieee standard then you fucking brainiac.
>I've compared 2
No you haven't, you've compared images that have been resized in post, if they were all blown up to a7rii pixel resolution the difference would be clear as day. You can already clearly see this with the a7s.

>the graph has to match

It always does you tard, you think dxo do their own tests then pluck a number from thin air? That's dumb and extra work. Dxo work with cnes, they know a lot more than you little brainlet.

>colour depth is meaningless
Lmao, no, bandwidth isn't meaningless, if digi cameras had enough of it skins would come out as beautiful and varied as they are on film, as opposed to the orange lump look of digi.

>dxo got this rank
Snr is a measurable number, not a diary of your feefees you dumb cunt.

>>3364479
Show me your 200/300 f2 and d500

>>3364536
Most dads by definition aren't fags

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 14:43:35 No.3364815 Report

Quoted By: >>3364837

>>3364134
Still waiting on this

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:03:37 No.3364831 Report

Quoted By: >>3364834

>>3364638
>Dxo measures ISO by actually matching sensor output to calibrated lighting.
They also normalize to 8mp which is why their scores do not match reality.

>The samples at dpreview use the ISO reported by the camera, which is not consistent not just across manufacturers but sometimes across camera models as well
Do you want me to download the A7S RAW and blow it up to A7r3 size? The ONLY reason it doesn't look worse is because the others are scaled down. It cannot compare with higher rez bodies, yet dxo scores it higher.

>My eyes see that all those samples are so close to each other that it shouldn't even be a fucking factor,
That's in part because they are scaled down to 12mp because dpreview doesn't have a "scale up to largest" mode where the A7S really looks like shit. Yet the A7S has a much higher "sports" score than the 5DsR.

Face it: dxo test results do not match reality. That's why only newbs use them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:09:36 No.3364834 Report

Quoted By: >>3364836

>>3364831
>resizing isn't normal

Yes, that's why i use a7s for small photo, a7 for medium and a7r for big photo, resizing just isn't done in the real world

/s

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:15:01 No.3364835 Report

Quoted By: >>3364842

>>3364694
>Mp is x, not y
>I guess that's why this is pmp, not mp then.
Idiot. No one can define what X mp should be perceived as because mp is NOT a measure of resolved detail.

Put another way: show me the reference 20mp image so I know what dxo means when they say a sensor+lens has a "perceived" 20mp, or STFU. You can't of course because even if you had a perfect lens the question then becomes what sensor. Bayer? Foveon? B&W? X-Trans? There is no such thing as "perceived megapixels." It's a marketing gimmick for retards, which is why you fell for it.

>I guess that's why there workong towards a new ieee standard then you fucking brainiac.
If the ieee makes a standard based on a torturous abuse of language then they deserve to be disbanded.

>>I've compared 2
>No you haven't, you've compared images that have been resized in post,
God you're stupid. My statement about comparing two cameras was NOT related to the attached pic. That should have been quite clear from the rest of the post. Is English your second language?

>if they were all blown up to a7rii pixel resolution the difference would be clear as day. You can already clearly see this with the a7s.
Yes it would be. The A7S would look like complete shit compared to the others, yet it has the higher ISO score from shitxo.

>>the graph has to match
>It always does you tard,
>says this when it visibly does not
You're a blind tard.

>you think dxo do their own tests then pluck a number from thin air?
It often looks that way, yes.

>Lmao, no, bandwidth isn't meaningless, if digi cameras had enough of it skins would come out as beautiful and varied as they are on film,
You've clearly never shot film if you think any film in the same format size can out perform modern digital on skin tones. 35mm tonal gradations were shit compared to FF digital.

>Snr is a measurable number,
Yes, but since we view 2D images it has to include sensor resolution. SNR of a single pixel is absolutely worthless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:16:08 No.3364836 Report

Quoted By: >>3364846

>>3364834
>you can score cameras by resizing everything to postage stamp size
Welp, your D850 just scored lower than an iPhone XS. TRUST THE SCORE.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:17:11 No.3364837 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364815
You're not going to get it because shitxo is snake oil.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:27:06 No.3364842 Report

Quoted By: >>3364846 >>3364860

>>3364835
>Put another way: show me the reference 20mp image so I know what dxo means when they say a sensor+lens has a "perceived" 20mp, or STFU.
The idea is that it’s a reference you can use to compare different cameras. Ie, knowing that camera/lens combo A will give you X pmp won’t tell you anything, for exactly the reasons you specify, but knowing that combo A gives X pmp while combo B gives 2X pmp tells you a lot.

It’s like iso. ISO doesn’t have any units and there not a platinum iridium iso 50 in a vault in Paris somewhere, but you can assume iso 100 on one camera is going to be about the same as iso 100 on another and that iso 200 is gonna be twice as sensitive as 100 and half as sensitive as 400.

DxOMark scores are definitely abused a lot, with people saying that one camera is garbage compared to another because it has a score of 3092 instead of 3098, but that doesn’t mean that the scores are worthless. You just have to understand that you pretty much need log-scale differences to see a difference in real life.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:34:46 No.3364846 Report

Quoted By: >>3364854 >>3364861

>>3364836
let us analyse your statement a little bit.

DXO are resizing to what, 8mp? Which is approximately the same resolution as a 4k screen? aka, the highest resolution screen widely available.

How many photos do you view on screen compared to printed, in a gallery. Maybe 1000 to 1? if you visit A LOT of galleries.

So we can safely say that for 99.9% of situations, 8MP is the max resolution you will ever need.

And as DXO have shown in the past, their reference scores and scoring system change with the popular technology at the time, so it always stays relevant.

>>3364842
To add to this guys point, the "total scores' are pretty dumb and worthless to anyone with more than a cursory understanding of photo, luckily they give you all the much more in depth measurements so those that know what they are talking about can use their resources to great effect.

Saying DXO is shit/worthless is just admitting to your own lack of understanding.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:45:08 No.3364854 Report

Quoted By: >>3364859

>>3364846
I don't take photos to view on a screen, I take photos to print. Whether the vast majority of shots I take get printed is irrelevant, because the goal is to print the good ones and I need to know how things perform in print.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:52:06 No.3364859 Report

Quoted By: >>3364861

>>3364854
Perfect, just take your pmp score and you can easily check your max print sizes at different dpi values.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:54:56 No.3364860 Report

Quoted By: >>3364866 >>3364871

>>3364842
>>Put another way: show me the reference 20mp image so I know what dxo means when they say a sensor+lens has a "perceived" 20mp, or STFU.
>The idea is that it’s a reference you can use to compare different cameras. Ie, knowing that camera/lens combo A will give you X pmp won’t tell you anything, for exactly the reasons you specify, but knowing that combo A gives X pmp while combo B gives 2X pmp tells you a lot.
What does it tell you exactly? That it's twice as sharp? A 20mp camera is not 2x as sharp as a 10mp one. That it has twice the printing size? This is more closely related to actual file dimensions than "muh perceptual mp" and is also bound by subject matter, artistic intent, viewing audience, etc. So that isn't it. Twice the detail? I can put sensor+lens combos up against a resolution chart all day long and prove that a 2x pmp score != 2x the resolved detail.

WTF is it even supposed to mean? What does 20pmp vs. 10pmp tell me exactly?

>It’s like iso. ISO doesn’t have any units and there not a platinum iridium iso 50 in a vault in Paris somewhere, but you can assume iso 100 on one camera is going to be about the same as iso 100 on another and that iso 200 is gonna be twice as sensitive as 100 and half as sensitive as 400.
LMFAO. ISO is clearly defined so that you could know what ISO 100 means without there being an ISO 50 or an ISO 200. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed

>DxOMark scores are definitely abused a lot, with people saying that one camera is garbage compared to another because it has a score of 3092 instead of 3098, but that doesn’t mean that the scores are worthless.
They're worthless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 15:56:28 No.3364861 Report

Quoted By: >>3364871 >>3364875

>>3364846
>DXO are resizing to what, 8mp? Which is approximately the same resolution as a 4k screen? aka, the highest resolution screen widely available.
>How many photos do you view on screen compared to printed, in a gallery.
Doesn't matter. If my goal is to make gallery prints then a score that completely ignores resolution is worthless, is it not? Also, will we not someday have 8k monitors?

>To add to this guys point, the "total scores' are pretty dumb and worthless to anyone with more than a cursory understanding of photo, luckily they give you all the much more in depth measurements so those that know what they are talking about can use their resources to great effect.
>Saying DXO is shit/worthless is just admitting to your own lack of understanding.
Saying they are worth something is just admitting that you go wide eyed whenever a company sounds technical, but you've never actually compared their scores to real world results and asked "does this match?"

>>3364859
>Perfect, just take your pmp score and you can easily check your max print sizes at different dpi values.
ROTFLMAO. Whatever pmp is supposed to mean, it sure as hell doens't mean that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 16:07:10 No.3364865 Report

Quoted By: >>3364871 >>3364875

According to this PetaPixel article: https://petapixel.com/2012/12/17/perceptual-megapixel-mtf-charts-boiled-down-to-a-single-number/

>For example, say you’re shooting with a 24-megapixel camera, but are using a lens rated at 18 P-MPix. This means that the resulting photos are equal in sharpness to an 18-megapixel camera shooting with a optically perfect lens.
An optically perfect lens would have 100% line pair contrast so far beyond the resolution of any sensor we can make today that it would be nearly impossible to detect a sharpness difference between an 18mp or 24mp camera. Surely the engineers at DxO aren't this stupid, are they?

>Using the system, DxOMark also tested more than 2,500 camera and lens combinations. The conclusion they came to is startling: on average, 45% of a camera’s reported resolution is lost to defects in the camera or lens.
Resolution != sharpness. So is pmp a measure of sharpness or of resolution?

Seeing their one example (Samyang 35mm f/1.4 on 5D2, 5D, and 7D) I'm quite confident that if pmp is supposed to encapsulate resolution then it's dead wrong. I can guarantee you that if you put that lens on a 5D and a 7D that the 7D will resolve more lpmm's on a resolution chart.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 16:07:35 No.3364866 Report

Quoted By: >>3364872

>>3364860
"Sharpness" is such a squishy term anyway. The implication, given that they use "megapixels", is clearly that it's resolving power, but that still needs to be defined, whether it's MTF50 or MTF10 or something else entirely. Contrary to what some people believe, lenses don't just stop resolving at some frequency of detail.

If perceived sharpness is important, then you'd care more about low frequency performance and overall contrast and rendering, but given their stated test methods, that's definitely not what they're measuring.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 16:11:35 No.3364871 Report

Quoted By: >>3364875

>>3364860
Pmp is a figure that gives an approximation of the amount of detail that a lens and sensor combo can achieve.

To really dumb it down for you, if you took a 10 pmp combo with a theoretically perfect flat field, then took a photo of a grid with 10 million squares each coloured in, it would be able to differentiate each and every squares' colour.

It's a measure of how much a sensor and lens combo can resolve, it's blending both analog and digital constraints, so there is no hard set figures, that's not how photo works. The sensor is definely set squares, the lens is blurry blobs of color.

>iso is defined
Fucking hell son, you're dumb. Read that article, there's 6 different methods of defining iso on digital sensors alone, and fuji use a different standard to every other camera manufacturer.

>>3364861
It doesn't ignore resolution. But you're question is asking "why doesn't my pasta strainer stop couscous from going through it?" which anyone with eyes and an iq north of 40 can clearly answer.

>it doesn't mean that
Lmao, yes, if you want sharp prints, this is a perfect formula to use.

>>3364865
>Is pmp resolution or sharpness
Both

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 16:13:06 No.3364872 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364866
>"Sharpness" is such a squishy term anyway. The implication, given that they use "megapixels", is clearly that it's resolving power, but that still needs to be defined, whether it's MTF50 or MTF10 or something else entirely. Contrary to what some people believe, lenses don't just stop resolving at some frequency of detail.
I wish more people understood this.

>If perceived sharpness is important, then you'd care more about low frequency performance and overall contrast and rendering, but given their stated test methods, that's definitely not what they're measuring.
Does anyone know what they're measuring? From wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptual_MegaPixel
>Complete scientific or technical documentation of the process used to compute P-MP values has never been published, and P-MP measurements have never been made without the cooperation of DxO Labs. The name of the measurement is a trade mark.
Woa! I thought this was the next IEEE standard? Was that a lie?

Also from the same article:
>It is intended to express the resolution of which a combination of camera and lens is capable.
>The P-MP meant for photographers to consider when comparing the sharpness of a combination of camera and lens.
Holy fuck someone needs to make up their mind.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 16:16:56 No.3364875 Report

Quoted By: >>3365522

>>3364871
>Pmp is a figure that gives an approximation of the amount of detail that a lens and sensor combo can achieve.
Then their scores are provably wrong.

>To really dumb it down for you, if you took a 10 pmp combo with a theoretically perfect flat field, then took a photo of a grid with 10 million squares each coloured in, it would be able to differentiate each and every squares' colour.
So their standard is a 10mp Foveon sensor? Because a Bayer sensor couldn't do that. Not that this would change what I said above, just pointing out the obvious.

>>iso is defined
>Fucking hell son, you're dumb. Read that article, there's 6 different methods of defining iso on digital sensors alone,
And none of them require a relative reference you idiot.

>>>3364861
>It doesn't ignore resolution.
Scaling all images to 8mp then scoring them does, by definition, ignore resolution.

>>it doesn't mean that
>Lmao, yes, if you want sharp prints, this is a perfect formula to use.
It's observably, provably not.

>>>3364865
>>Is pmp resolution or sharpness
>Both
OH NO NO NO NO NO NO NO LMFAO
We've got someone here who doesn't understand the difference.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Sep 2018 23:19:00 No.3365251 Report

Quoted By:

>>3364536
>>3364517
>>3364481

I used to agree, but as of late Fuji users are just a s bad. All they do is shit post every thread and resort to name calling when they lose an argument.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 07:48:14 No.3365464 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363907
>replying to obvious b8

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 09:51:27 No.3365522 Report

Quoted By: >>3365631 >>3365671

>>3364875
>their scores are provably wrong
Then prove it you fucking dingus instead of just claiming that you can.

>it's a foveon sensor because bayer can't do that

Fuck, you're actually an idiot.
If it had 10mp sensor, no you couldn't, if it has 10pmp yes you can.

>none of them require a relative reference
So you agree, there is no one set definition of iso, iso is a meaningless value.

>observably probably
Still not gonna try and prove it though are you, you must be a fuji shooter.

>we've got someone here that doesn't understand

And we've got someone here who does understand. I'm glad we cleared that up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 13:48:32 No.3365631 Report

Quoted By: >>3365635 >>3365671

>>3365522
Sensors with color filter arrays are not color accurate down a single pixel. In order to get a 10 mp color accurate image, you would need a 40 mp camera downsampled, so you have a full filter quad for each pixel. Given that DXO gives out plenty of scores higher than 10 for cameras with less than 40 mp (i.e. basically all of them), then either they're giving out false scores, or you're wrong about that being the standard. Personally I'm leaning towards you being full of shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 13:59:10 No.3365635 Report

Quoted By: >>3365671 >>3365939

>>3365631
Well, you clearly didn't read the paper on pmp.

Read it again and come back.

Spoiler alert, missing pixel information is succesfully interpreted, every time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 15:03:43 No.3365671 Report

Quoted By: >>3365673 >>3365683

>>3365522
>>their scores are provably wrong
>Then prove it you fucking dingus instead of just claiming that you can.
dxo ranks the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS at 38pmp (5DsR) and the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II at 33pmp (A7R II) yet the Canon is clearly sharper at every focal length except 100mm. That one focal length couldn't be throwing the score because the Canon is sharper than the Sony by a wider margin at 200mm than the Sony v. Canon at 100mm.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=1137&CameraComp=1106&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

I'm sure you'll try and hand wave this, make an excuse, or say it's one error. I can produce a dozen comparisons like this where dxo is quite visibly wrong.

>>it's a foveon sensor because bayer can't do that
>Fuck, you're actually an idiot.
Says the fucking idiot.

>If it had 10mp sensor, no you couldn't, if it has 10pmp yes you can.
See: >>3365631

>>none of them require a relative reference
>So you agree, there is no one set definition of iso,
There is a set definition with specific testing for each medium and major sensor category. The goal is to calibrate medium sensitivity so that the same EV will produce the same result (as close as possible given different mediums and technologies).

>>we've got someone here that doesn't understand
>And we've got someone here who does understand.
Thank you for acknowledging your ignorance and my understanding. Now learn so I don't have to deal with your ignorant posts.

>>3365635
>Spoiler alert, missing pixel information is succesfully interpreted, every time.
You can easily demonstrate that this is false by shooting a Bayer sensor with an IR filter on the lens. In this configuration only 1/4th of the pixels are actually recording anything worth while.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 15:04:49 No.3365673 Report

Quoted By:

>>3365671
Fuck. That should read:
>dxo ranks the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS at 38pmp (A7r II) and the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II at 33pmp (5DsR) yet the Canon is clearly sharper at every focal length except 100mm. That one focal length couldn't be throwing the score because the Canon is sharper than the Sony by a wider margin at 200mm than the Sony v. Canon at 100mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 15:20:41 No.3365683 Report

Quoted By: >>3365698 >>3365703

>>3365671
>it's provable because my eyes think one of these is better than the others

The sony is clearly the better performer in every way there you blind cunt.

It should also be noted that dxo take the average score from 10 lenses, not relying on a single sample.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 15:37:53 No.3365698 Report

Quoted By:

>>3365683
>>it's provable because my eyes think one of these is better than the others
>The sony is clearly the better performer in every way there you blind cunt.
Wow. I never thought you would resort to lying. What a piece of shit you are.

This conversation is over Sony shill. Go earn your shekels some where else.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Canon-v-Sony.jpg, 205KiB, 1470x1037

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 15:42:02 No.3365703 Report

Quoted By: >>3365882 >>3367806

>>3365683
Canon on top, Sony on bottom.
>The sony is clearly the better performer in every way
>calling someone else a blind cunt

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 22:08:40 No.3365882 Report

Quoted By: >>3365919 >>3365958

>>3365703
I'm just jumping into the conversation, but isn't Canon supposed to be years behind the competition in sensor tech? It surprises me that it wrecks the Sony like that. Zero ghosting, beautiful.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 23:05:25 No.3365919 Report

Quoted By: >>3365941

>>3365882
Never was. It was all the time just silly ev and iso shilling from sony. What matters is based iso performance.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot from 2018-09-28 20-12 (...).png, 586KiB, 1124x440

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 23:13:10 No.3365925 Report

Quoted By: >>3366005

I thought the R was supposed to be smaller?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 23:23:45 No.3365939 Report

Quoted By:

>>3365635
What paper?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 23:26:38 No.3365941 Report

Quoted By: >>3365945

>>3365919
I meant regarding IQ mostly. At least a few years ago.
I remember Canon being regarded as the brand of choice for things like sports photography because the AF compensated for any shortcomings the sensor could have or something like that, and that despite Sony making the sensors for all the competition they didn't have the top performers on IQ but Nikon did.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 23:36:43 No.3365945 Report

Quoted By: >>3365949

>>3365941
Sensor quality hit diminishing returns half a decade ago, at least. Sony is pushing hard against that, and that's a good thing, but the differences are pretty inconsequential. Lenses matter way more, and Canon makes good lenses for comparatively cheap. That's always been the bedrock of their camera business.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Sep 2018 23:46:05 No.3365949 Report

Quoted By: >>3365958

>>3365945
Interesting. So Canon has been catching up?
Was there much of a difference around 2012?
I have a Nikon D5100 and I've been thinking of moving to Canon, getting a 5D2 for various reasons: FF can pull off landscape photography better with less extreme focal lengths, Canon's flange distance lets me adapt vintage lenses better (notably M42) and I want to do video so having a FF camera would be good specially when capturing in low light.
Am I about to make a mistake?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Sep 2018 00:49:30 No.3365958 Report

Quoted By: >>3366094

>>3365882
>I'm just jumping into the conversation, but isn't Canon supposed to be years behind the competition in sensor tech?
They're behind in one respect: total dynamic range at base ISO. Mind you "behind" means they're nearly as good as Kodak Portra (color print film with the most exposure latitude) where Sony is a little better than Portra.

In terms of resolution they're ahead (50mp vs 45mp and 42mp) but admittedly not by much. IMHO high ISO is a wash between currently shipping FF sensors. Differences are in fractions of 1ev, and I would rank the 5Ds bodies and 5D IV near the top.

>It surprises me that it wrecks the Sony like that. Zero ghosting, beautiful.
In this comparison it's mostly due to the lenses. If you had the same lens on a 5DsR and an A7R II the difference would be very tiny (50mp vs 42mp).

But then glass is Canon's strength.

>>3365949
The 5D II won't give you huge gains over your D5100, but FF is sharper ooc than crop and it will be cleaner at high ISO. Where you might see large gains are in glass if you put newer Canon lenses on the 5D2. (Depends on what Nikon glass you have now.)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Sep 2018 02:44:45 No.3366005 Report

Quoted By:

>>3365925
It's 1 inch thinner, and 50S you'll have the BULGE on which makes it taller.
Height and depth are what matters most for pocketability, and the GFX50R wins there vs a 50S whether the BULGE is there or not due to being 1 inch slimmer in terms of depth.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Sep 2018 02:45:35 No.3366006 Report

Quoted By:

>>3363843
It’s cool. But not even close to 645 real format. It’s approximately 45x38mm. Which is approximately as small compared to 645 as full frame is to this 45x38mm format. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, 645 in digital isn’t gonna be affordable for another decade

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Sep 2018 07:44:34 No.3366094 Report

Quoted By: >>3366333

>>3365958
>The 5D II won't give you huge gains over your D5100, but FF is sharper ooc than crop and it will be cleaner at high ISO. Where you might see large gains are in glass if you put newer Canon lenses on the 5D2. (Depends on what Nikon glass you have now.)
I just have a shitty kit lens (18-55 plastic fantastic) but I was hoping to get some extra FOV mainly.

Sorry for derailing, I thought I was on /gear/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Sep 2018 15:26:09 No.3366333 Report

Quoted By: >>3366920 >>3366921

>>3366094
>I thought I was on /gear/
kek

I don't know what your budget is but there lots of good WA options for a 5D2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Sep 2018 07:39:55 No.3366920 Report

Quoted By:

>>3366333
Might as well give a bump in compensation for having derailed the thread.
My budget is dirt poor but I'm sure I could find some manual only lens or something like that for cheap. I mean, I currently have 18mm as my lowest focal length but it's like having a 27mm because APS-C. I'm sure 18mm on fool frame would be more than enough for my stuff and if I can get even lower then that's even better.
I'll have to get a fast prime maybe in 50mm for filmmaking but I'll look for someone with plenty of blades, I'm not going to risk bad bokeh.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1470181461167.jpg, 20KiB, 252x249

Anonymous Sun 30 Sep 2018 07:40:58 No.3366921 Report

Quoted By: >>3368148

>>3366333
Oh and also checked.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Oct 2018 18:44:55 No.3367797 Report

Quoted By: >>3367808

>>3363827
>PANTECKS
It's great to see more competition in the affordable(ish) MF(ish) segment, but I think the 645D is still a better choice in many circumstances, because of superior ergonomics and lack of battery-draining EVF.
>Why are you still on the Fool frame meme?
Inertia and not enough reasons to switch, I guess.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Oct 2018 18:57:06 No.3367806 Report

Quoted By:

>>3365703
I don't have a stake in argument here, but my only gripe about comparison shots like these is the fact that the sensor vs sensor thing can be affected a great deal by the lens. Like are they using the same lens; as in same physical lens between each shot on different cameras? Or, are there 2 different lenses from the same manufacturer? Or, 2 different lenses with different manufacturers? I ask because I can swap out one lens for another, on the same camera, and get the exact same results for both top and bottom if I wish.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Oct 2018 19:00:30 No.3367808 Report

Quoted By: >>3367812

>>3367797
Do you mean 645Z? 645D is old and busted.

>lack of battery-draining EVF
That's only relevant for the minority of MF shooters that shoot in the field for extended periods of time. For years, the battery life on most MF backs was a joke even without live view so everyone is pretty used to spare battery packs and AC adapters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Oct 2018 19:04:36 No.3367812 Report

Quoted By:

>>3367808
>Do you mean 645Z? 645D is old and busted.
Yeah
>That's only relevant for the minority of MF shooters that shoot in the field for extended periods of time.
Arguably the same shooters that would prefer Fuji's smaller/lighter form factor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Oct 2018 23:32:21 No.3367995 Report

Quoted By:

testing
nintendosoy

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Oct 2018 21:35:46 No.3368077 Report

Quoted By: >>3368143

>hy aren't you shooting a Fuji? Why are you still on the Fool frame meme?
Fool is the one that switches on a whim -- the wise man waits for second generation body.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Oct 2018 22:51:02 No.3368143 Report

Quoted By:

>>3368077
If they make a second gen GFX50R with phase detection at the same price point that's going to be great

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Oct 2018 22:53:25 No.3368148 Report

Quoted By:

>>3366921
What kind of Hasselblad is that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2018 00:09:31 No.3368204 Report

Quoted By: >>3368233

>>3363827
Sony already won.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2018 01:04:01 No.3368233 Report

Quoted By: >>3368239

>>3368204
>Sony outsold by Canon EOS M in Japan
>"Sony already won"

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 03 Oct 2018 01:30:40 No.3368239 Report

Quoted By:

>>3368233
Your right.
Apple and Samsung have BTFO'ed all cameras.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches