FUJI 26mp V's 40mp - Detail Comparison in Capture One
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 дек 2022
- 📷 Level up your landscape photography game with my composition ebook - www.iworthphotos.com/store/co...
Join me on a photography adventure - Check out my workshops and tours - www.iworthphotos.com/workshops
Check out my Zine & Print packs👉 www.iworthphotos.com/store
I have been running some tests between Fuji's 26mp cameras and the new 40mp Fuji x-h2. This week I test them in Capture One. The results are very surprising. let me know your thoughts in the comments. Be Nice. 🙏
Watch last week's video here - • Consider THIS before U...
The BEST plugin for Fuji raw photos - Try it for free - DxO PureRaw2: tidd.ly/3wFxKIP
The best music, sfx & templates - get 2 months free: bit.ly/Artlist-Ian_Worth
Best stock footage around - get 2 free months: bit.ly/Artgrid-Ian_Worth
Awesome VFX/Motion graphics assets: bit.ly/Motion-Array-Ian_Worth
Free video editing software: bit.ly/FX-Home-Ian_Worth
JOIN MY ONLINE PHOTOGRAPHY CLUB -
www.iworthphotos.com/clubhous...
MY WEBSITE - www.iworthphotos.com/
MY FREE NEWSLETTER - Don't miss a video! - bit.ly/2Y7uDZN
----------------------------------------------------------------
VIDEOS YOU MIGHT LIKE -
5 photography Techniques - • 5 Intermediate Photogr...
Customize your camera - • How to Customize your ...
Pro Landscape Photography Tips - • Pro Landscape Photogra...
Binge-Watch my vlogs - Playlist - bit.ly/3kJoK2u
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CAMERA GEAR
Awesome multi-tool - geni.us/UQEk
Vlogging camera - geni.us/xkFOB
Main camera - geni.us/FmDh
Tripod head - geni.us/8F1UKB
Microphone - geni.us/0fdep
Drone - geni.us/Uz0Idwk
Sd cards - geni.us/7Nn60
Awesome filters - kasefilters.com/ref/IanWorth/
As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
Check out all of my camera gear www.iworthphotos.com/my-gear
---------------------------------------------------------------
CONNECT -
Web site: www.iworthphotos.com/
Email: ianworthphotography@yahoo.co.uk
Vero @ian_worth
Instagram: @ian_worth / ian_worth
---------------------------------------------------------------
#fuji #fujixh2 #fujixt3
For the controlled test shots I was using the red badge 50-140 f2.8. I thought it would be interesting to compare the non-recommended 18-55 kit lens against the recommended 50-140 to see the difference 👍👍 I also used the viltrox 13mm f1.4 which I've found to be exceptional, I know it's not on fuji's recommended list but I can't see fuji ever putting a third party lens on that list, it just wouldn't make sense for their marketing strategy going forward. 👍👍👍👍
definetly give a try to sigma primes. 30 1.4 is amazing. 56 too :)
Well done for taking the time to redo this using Capture One after requests. Dedication to duty!
Great video Ian. I appreciate you doing this again with Capture One.
No worries 😁👍
Thank you so much! Sticking with the x-t4 I got.
Thank you for this test. I'll hold onto my lovely XT30 and not worry about being left too far behind.
Thanks a lot, Ian, for another great video and this comparison! Makes me feel good to continue rocking my X-T3 with the 50-140 and the 10-24mm as wideangle option.. the Viltrox is tempting though for Astro work.. but I got the manual Samyang 12mm f2.. 🙂
Nice, thanks. I've been tempted to replace my xs10 with xt5, but now I'm resolved to collect more money and get into gfx system while keeping xs10. Also, thanks to DPreview studio comparisons.
Thank you Ian. Another useful and informative video. I have toyed with the xt5 since it’s release and now I am convinced to stick with my xt3 and xe3 (for now anyway), as the gains are not significant enough for me to make a change. I will probably wait until prices drop and then have another look. Thanks again. Merry Christmas 🎄.
Thanks Steve and merry Christmas to you too. 😁👍👍
Great video!
Appreciate the thorough comparison Ian! Makes feel like I am missing not as much by keeping my X-T4. My printer can take 13x19 sized papers at most either way, so all good for my hobby photography and printing.
The capture at the end of the video... perfect as always sir.
Cheers!
Many thanks my friend 🎄👍😁
I believe people is expecting double the resolution when upgrading to the xt5 or xh2 when in fact it’s only a 26% increase in resolution approx. In terms of detail, both are the same with the newer sensor giving you a bit more room to crop, the reason to get the new bodies is better af, processing power, better evf, better screen, battery, etc.
i have gfx 50r and 100s i can crop about 40% more on the 100s 102mpx vs 51mpx on 50r like you wrot not dubbling the reselution but more like 50% better but reselution is not counted measured in prosent but megapixels
Thanks Ian, for time bring I'll keep my X-H1 & X-E3 combo, probably I should invest into 1.4 lenses instead of X-T5/ X-H2...
Thanks for the great information in your video Ian. I can't see any reason I would swap my XT30 for anything with more mega pixels after watching it. I may get an XT4 at some point, as the used prices for them seem to be coming down now that the XH2 and XT5 is out. I guess people with more needs than me might feel different though and enjoy the newer megapixel cameras, so that's fine.
Just watched this after watching your first comparison video. Great detailed work - thanks for putting in the effort on our behalf. I guess the question is this: are you happy or disappointed with your purchase of the XH2? Was that a day trip down to Wales or are you from there/regularly down there? Many great memories of Tenby. Subscribed!!
Thanks for this Ian, in this one video you’ve saved me more money than Martin Lewis has all year😝. It’s a really valid point about only zooming to 67% as any more is just pointless and a bad habit I’ve had in the past. Focusing on flaws not visible in print and getting caught up in thinking I need better more expensive equipment than my actual use case.
Thanks Paul 👍👍
I still bet you get the new camera within 6 months 😉
@@chloescanlon1107 🤣 🤣You are probably correct
Ian, thank you so much! . Perfect review for me and I think many others in the same boat. I will keep enjoying using my XT3 now until it dies and and invest my money in a new red badge lens.
Great decision Andrew 👍👍
Thanks Ian, great video. You've reaffirmed my decision not to upgrade my X-T3. The benefits are not substantial enough to outlay for a new camera when the old one works perfectly well.
Put your money into better glass my friend 👍👍
Thanks Ian! Very interesting video! I've got the XT3 and XT4. Mainly used the 3 for photos and 4 for video on trips. I've been thinking about the X-H2S or X-H2. After this I'm more tempted to get the X-H2S for video main, and keep the XT4 for photo.
What are your thoughts on photo comparison between the 3 and 4?
Great video & informative
I don’t think this would convince me I need a 40mp xt5/xh2 in my life. Coming from an A7r which only resolved slightly more, but chewed through hard drives like crazy. I actually “downgraded” back to 24mp. Much easier to process and store, and a quick and easy upscale if I need larger. Personally don’t think apsc is large enough to capture extra high res in detail. Truth is, you need medium format.
I agree, Karl 👍
40MP is roughly 30% more linear resolution than 26MP. The real benefit here is twofold: 1) Additional latitude to crop; 2) The ability to make a larger print while maintaining the same observable level of detail at the same viewing distance; 40MP won't be sharper, it will just give you more detail when enlarging bigger. At a certain point, the law of diminishing returns kicks in, and adding megapixels to any given sensor size becomes less apparent to the overall image quality than just moving to a larger sensor.
When you crop the image 30% or more you are just a bad photographer.
Well dang, I like to shoot in the 65:24 crop mode on my gfx so I guess I’m rubbish : \
@@caskraker Oh Christ, here we go again… #Marstro
It is more complex.
The pixel resolution advantage is less than 24% and with a small disadvantage in low light. But the resolution is limited by diffraction in all apertures over f5.6 in APS. It is also limited by lens aberrations in the corners and distortion correction in most Fujifilm lenses. Even in the best aperture, f5.6, only the best lenses get close to 20mp in the corners and some popular ones are at lower than 10mp. If you are shooting architecture and landscape, on XT4, the problem is the lenses. I use 8-16, 16-55 and 50-140. At certain focal lengths, these are actually better than the primes atn 5.6. Invest in lenses and do tests, and forget about higher resolution sensors in APS.
In full frame, 50Mpixel is OK because the diffraction limit is moved to f8 and the best lenses are very good at f5.6 and f8 necause they simply use more glass. Medium format is even better, 100MP will look OK and f11 is very sharp..
The crop advantage is very small in the real world, because image quality is lower at a given ISO on the full frame, and MTF of the lens is equal on the full frame. By magnifying (for the same final viewing size) you are getting same pixels on a smaller part of the lens and with more visible noise (a littler higher due to the smaller pixel, and similar frequency composition due to the same resolution).
@@aristotle_4532 Except that we weren't discussing diffraction or sensor size differentials, which are applicable when you measure any APS-C sensor against its larger competitors. So, sure, all of that other stuff is [mostly] accurate, but tangential to this comparison. And, btw, the older XF lenses will still enable more visible detail with the newer sensor, just not as effectively as the newest XF lenses.
btw: The X-T5/X-H2 have just over 30% more linear resolution than the X-H2S. Not 24%.
very interesting Ian and thanks for the hard work :-)
I think your tests prove just how good the X-Trans 4 sensor is! I'm happy with the results from my X-T2, 4 and 5. The X-T2 in particular is excellent to my eye and produces the nicest "looking" images.
The 5 though in my opinion does render greater detail in the tests I've done. What I've found when shooting higher resolution cameras (I've been lucky enough to own the GFX50R and GFX100) is that the extra resolution amplifies any errors I might have made, and really made me concentrate 100% on every image I was taking. That (as well as the size and weight of the system) meant I wasn't enjoying my photography as much as I should have been and I went back to an X-T2.
Comparing the GFX50R and 100 I owned, there wasn't a huge difference in resolution there either, and to my eye the images from the 50R were again "nicer" to look at, and if I do ever go back to medium format it'll be a 50MP sensor I'll go for. I only really noticed differences in printed images, and even then when viewing under a loupe or magnifying glass!
I think there comes a point where too much detail affects an image adversely, and also tests the limits of our eyes ability to see details. But one area I found the higher resolution did help though was in tonal and colour transition. It provided a more pleasing effect to my eye anyway.
After all that, I think it boils down to whether you're happy with a camera or not. For me IBIS and the better battery make the T5 a better overall camera than my T2 (or a T3 for that matter - I've owned one too).
Anyway, thanks again and here's wishing you a Merry Christmas :-)
how's the HDR between the 26 and 40 MP sensor? Can you recover more details in under exposed areas with the 40 than you can with the 26? I think the smaller pixel is a liability on the 40 mp sensor... they're too small and liable to noise at even moderately higher ISO, is my suspicion. Any insight on this question?
As an xt3 owner, this made my day. As far as I know, the dynamic range for stills is about the same.
What a rabbit hole... 🙂 40mp's was always going to be just slightly better than 26mp's but everything has to be optimized to see the difference. My 30x40 inch prints from the XT3 were fine. I expect my XH2 and XT5 prints to be just a little bit easier to get them the way I like them. I shoot a lot of square, and with the 40mp sensor the 1:1 aspect ratio comes in at 27mp's which is a huge advantage over the 1:1 crop on the XT3 at 17mp's. By the way it's 1 degree F (-17C) here this morning. I'm staying in. ⛄
Very true Edward. A rabbit hole indeed... no more pixel peeping on this channel for a while 👍👍
Edward, there's no end to this🤣🤣🤣
This is the best comparison I’ve seen yet between the X-H2/X-T5 40mpx sensor and previous generation Fuji bodies. Thanks for that! Maybe it’s a case of needing to mature a bit through software updates, but the 40mpx sensor really seems like more of a side-grade to the X-Trans sensors before it, and even a downgrade in certain situations.
In the few photo (not video) comparisons I’ve seen, the new 26mpx stacked sensor actually seems to offer better image quality than the 40mpx, and it also seems to carry more of the “Fuji Magic” film-like look from the previous generations as well.
I’d love to hear your opinion of how the X-H2S compares to your X-H2 and X-T3 for outdoor photography. Hopefully you get a chance to test or rent one in the future.
Thanks buddy 👍👍
I'm shooting with a nearly 7 year old X-Pro2 and submit that it still is not worth upgrading to the 40MP sensor. The images my X-Pro2 produces are incredibly good. How much better could it possibly be? Try using DXO Pure RAW2 to convert your RAW files as a plug-in in LR. You will be impressed even for low ISO images. Unless your printing very large consistently, I don't think it is worth the money to upgrade. My 11x14" or even my 20"30" prints look great.
Honestly I’m more interested in seeing the stacked 26mp sensor show up in another body-xt6 with a battery grip. But only if it comes with fixed/superior AF-C.
If you had used one of the later lenses optimised to take advantage of the 40 mp sensor you would have seen a marked difference. I do a lot of bird photography and even with the 150-600 at 600 mm regularly have to crop 100% There is a marked difference between my XT4 and my Xh2 with the same lens at the same settings with the detail on the XH2 being considerably more detailed. The same went for my 16-55 mm f2.8 lens on landscape photos. I haven't tried the primes yet I also have the XHs2 and the only advantage of the s is in low light and faster moving birds but if a relatively slow moving shot the 40mp sensor has more and sharper detail. Incidentally LR does not support the XH2 yet. Other you tube comparisons support my own findings.
I noted something similiar. Now the lens needs to be exceptionally good in order to reveal the 40mp sensor.
right, so all the money i spent on the original, sharpness fujinon beasts is basically for nothing? i should just stick with T3s until they bring out a low-MP X-T out again?
@@acidtears you are looking at an old video. There have been several firmware updates since then and all the new cameras are performing better and I certainly would not contemplate going back to my XT4
@@chrisbartlett8146 Oh shit.. Why not back to T4 (regardless of the updates)? I'm contemplating the X-T4 over my broken T3 because a T5 would break the bank. I like the movie/stills switch and the battery life is insane. I don't really care about the screen. How's the lowlight performance of the T5? Any worse or noticeably better than T4?
@@chrisbartlett8146 Okay, a quick read of the last DPReview (rip) on the T5, I think I will stick with getting the T4 since I shoot hybrid and I need good video capabilities. Next switch I will do from there will most likely be FullFrame - Canon, Nikon or Sony, only god knows...
Hi, not long ago you compared XT2 and XT3 where you found out XT2 was the better one. Today you do the same with XT3 and X.... It would have been very interesting what the difference between all those 3 cameras would have been.
I appreciate your efforts on this and I love your videos so much, keep on doing it!
Maybe firmware will address some of these problems over time 👍👍
In portrait photography there is day and night difference between XT-4 and X-H2 .X-H2 renders with so much details compared to XT-4
I appreciated the comparison.You did well to isolate a few variables to make certain things clear. I would like to offer, though, a comment. At about 3 minutes you show a rock and suggest little difference in detail on the last phases. And later, "correcting" for enlargement with Tramp, make the same suggestion. Yet in both my sense was that the 40 mp showed slightly more contrast, a thing very different from detail. This sort of goes along with the idea that FF, for example, can produce a richer and less noisy file.
Also, in the stone wall the 40 saturation seems superior.
how's the HDR between the 26 and 40 MP sensor? Can you recover more details in under exposed areas with the 40 than you can with the 26? I think the smaller pixel is a liability on the 40 mp sensor... they're too small and liable to noise at even moderately higher ISO, is my suspicion. Any insight on this question?
I also did quite a few tests with XT5 and my old XT30 and noticed only negligible improvement in image quality and detail. None of my lenses are in the list of 40mp compatible, so most likely I'm hitting their resolution capability. Decided against upgrading for the time being.
I‘m waiting till Fuji will bring an xt5 with 26mp stacket sensor
Hello veery intresting i own both xt3 and xh2 i shoot primary product and macro shots and the xh2 outperforms the xt3 alot in sharpness.. i use the xf 80mm f2.8 macro thats a insanly sharp lens! There the XH2 realy shines
But Your videos make me even happier about still having and loving my XT3
Good common (or not so common) sense approach to evaluating the cameras. I am not a Fuji shooter and I don't mean to start a controversy... However, I got a free download of the Capture one software to see what I was missing. Yes, the images looked better in Capture One than Lightroom using the default sharpening in both programs. But, a closer look showed a lot of artifacts in Capture One. To solve that problem I started using the DXO Pure Raw plug in for Lightroom... badabing - badaboom ...and that does a better job.
Couldn't agree more. I did a video on pure raw2 you can watch it here - ruclips.net/video/I7BeGncr7w8/видео.html
Just curious, are you using proofing mode in C1 when making comparisons? My experience is that even the highest preview resolution (without proofing switched on) will render images less sharp than the final output.
Following up, my own results are seeing a noticeable improvement in sharpness in my X-T5 compared to my X-T3 -- there's really no mistaking it on a good lens. With Recipe Proofing enabled at the highest resolution in Capture One, when I compare images at 300% my X-T5's detail wins easily, but even when reducing the preview size to match the XT3's 26 megapixel image, the XT5 image still reveals more detail and subtlety in the textures, while my XT3 is more smeared as it approaches the granular level, even when the edges are still in decent shape (possibly resulting from image processing) Granted, most of us don't need this extra resolution but I'm thrilled with how the X-T5 reveals more detail in my better lenses.. especially my old Nikkor 55mm Micro.
Thank you for the extra effort! I would just add that the only way to evaluate an image on-screen is at 100%. If less than 100%, the software is removing some pixels, and at more than 100%, pixels are being added by the software. Reducing magnification tends to reduce grain, and look sharper, but it's not what's in the image. At higher magnifications, all images look a bit fuzzier. (Depends on the algorithm used.) But some pixels you see on-screen are not in the actual image, and only there for a 'smooth' display.
Interesting
Like you Ian, I live in the UK and the weather in the middle of winter is not at its best.
Would it be worthwhile repeating these tests in the summer when the air is drier and clearer? This could help to demonstrate the advantages of having a 40MP sensor, if there are any advantages of course.
It would be interesting to see how the two cameras compare when the processing is done through Iridient transformer, which is a dedicated processing engine for the x-series cameras.
I couldn't agree more! I use that transformer too! It is the best for Fuji indeed... or Silkypix, both of them get the best till now for my xt4 files :)
Iridient lets me get better files in Lightroom than opening the RAF directly in C1
Mate thanks for this interesting video, it’s making my pre made choice of getting the xh2 stumble… just wondering if the raw files respond better to editing, if they look more natural when sharpening or if the have overall more latitude 👀… because if that’s not the case maybe I’ll be more interés on the xh2s 👀 thanks in advance 🙌🏽
I bought an XT-5 to round out my two XH-1s. I had expected a distinct difference. I ran the cameras through their paces. Locked down on a tripod with shutter delay, I tried hand-held and despite everything I could think of there just was not enough difference to care about. I ran them through five of my nine lenses at the optimal F/numbers. I could scarcely see more information at 100%, Worse than that, the images looked noticeably sharper on the 24Mp sensor. I reluctantly returned the 40Mp sensor and got a refund. I am a retired commercial photographer.
Similar results to me Joseph. 👍👍
@ianworth Thanks for your review. Can you tell me what is the light protector you use on your computer? Thanks
it came with the Benq monitor 👍
Very glad I wasn't rich enough to replace my xt3 with the xt5, because based on the advertising I would have. I take wildlife shots that require cropping often, but the difference is so small
For bird phots, how much further away can you be with the XH2 and get the same image quality? You could try this with a bunch of feathers. Is it ~30% extra? It would need to be done at a distance which is near/at the limit of acceptable, to show a difference.
I’m using both the xt3 and the xh2 with the 16-55 and 50-140 and to be honest even with both red badge lenses there’s not a lot of difference except when you come to crop with the xh2 the image fares a bit better For stock submissions I have to zoom to 100% to check quality etc to get passed their QC but all in all the xh2 is now my workhorse going forward and is standing up to the Scottish weather
yeah Jim, the xh2 is a wonderful camera, definitely feels more rugged than any other fuji camera I've owned. The grip is amazing, it feels so good in the hand 👍👍
@@ian_worth 👍👍
Side question... Any idea on what the pattern is on the hat you're wearing?
I commented on your previous video that the problem might be the lenses you used. Christopher Frost recently posted a review of the X-H2 and made the same observation. He tested with Fuji's new 56mm F/1.2 R WR lens because, in his experience, lesser lenses just couldn't sufficiently resolve images on a high MP APS-C sensor. If he's correct, the kit lenses you used just aren't sharp enough to get the best results from the X-H2's sensor. If anything, the sensor reveals your lenses' flaws
he's using the XF50-140mm which is on Fuji's list of recommended lenses for the 40mp sensor
What aperture did you use in the comparison? The effect of diffraction will appear at a lower f-stop for the 40 mpx sensor.
f7.1 which is probably the sweet spot for these lenses for edge to edge sharpness
Ha I am happy to stick to my XT4 and the 26mp sensor! Thank you!
thanks for making this comparison! out of curiosity did you notice any difference in colour?
I think the issue could be diffraction, and the images used for testing were shot at f/7.1, which is quite high. It would be interesting to see testing done with photos taken at lower f-stops, since it seems that the 40MP sensor is diffraction limited from about f/5.6. Maybe the new sensor gives better resolution, but only at low f-stops?
Quite possible and you are not the first person to mention diffraction👍. The trouble is, for landscapes it would mean focus stacking most photos which would be a right pain in the arse. 😁
@@ian_worth Indeed, but wouldn't it still be interesting to check to see if this is what's causing the apparent drop in resolution? :)
@@ian_worth ever heard of hyperfocal focussing? Landscape from front to end tac sharp at the sweet spot of your lens!
@@DUCzillaMonster what is hyperfocal focusing?
@@memcrew1 it's a special focal point, where you would not think off, in landscape surroundings, take some distance from the closest element you want in focus, put something like f7, if you are say 2 meters from your closest element, and put your focus point at around 4 meter, just double the distance
Did I see things correctly and there was a mixed time lapse shot at the end? Around 9:21 of the video. If so nicely done.
Good evening Ian. A really enjoyable and thought provoking video.
Fuji have stated that the 18-55 will not get the best out of the 40 mp sensor. I don't know about the Viltrox lens.
I'm interested in the results from the 50-140. In your last video you said it had recently been serviced by Fuji. It would be interesting to test the camera with another copy of that lens and with some newer glass like the recent 56 f1.2 and the 70-300.
I'm not challenging the results in your test. Rather I think that there are insufficient samples to establish what the variable might be. It is also possible that you have a slightly sub par X-H2.
Samples from elsewhere with the 56mm f1.2 WR are significantly sharper in the plane of focus even in jpeg than your examples.
So for me the jury is out.
I have an A7R IV for work where I need to crop heavily. So there is no pressure on me to upgrade my Fuji kit. The jury is out as it stands.
40 megapixels on an apsc, let alone full frame, really push the MTF capability of lenses. I think it's even optimistic the sharper lenses like 50-140 can truly resolve them. They will go through diffraction at lower apertures than on 20 megapixels. Meaning, for landscape work where you need a wide depth of field they could even be worse than lower megapixel cameras. To make lenses sharper they'd have to make lens bigger with more glass elements and that defeats the purpose of using APSC.
Thanks Kane, yeah I was really keen to see the difference between the non recommended 18-55 and the recommended 50-140, the results were as I thought, but I still think the 18-55 is useable. My 50-140 had an autofocus problem which fuji fixed. They sent me a letter to say that the lens is now working as specification, so I can only hope that it is now as new. I cant see fuji putting a third party lens on their recommended list, but I regard the Viltrox 13mm very highly, it definitely beats the 10-24 f4 lens for sharpness at 13mm 👍👍
@@ian_worth I hope they release the Tamron 11-20 f/2.8for landscape work on Fuji.
I have tested a few third party lenses/recommended/not recommended, the 18 f1.4 and the 70-300 are both exceptional, xc15-45 a bit odd on the edges but useable. the 16-80 sadly to me doesn't work as well on the xt5, and some of the other lenses like the rokinon 12mm just terrible when used on the xt5. Honestly don't think any of the wider zoom lens works as well on the XT5 than the XT3/4/30 to me.
@@ian_worth Hi Ian. Hope you had a good Christmas. A quick update, Viltrox have just announced the 75mm f1.2. Christopher Frost tested it on the X-H2 and the results are exceptional. The lens has no problems resolving the detail provided by the 40mp.
I think you have opened a can of worms here. We know from Canon's foray with the crop 32mp sensor on the M most that good glass is crucial. If we assume that your 50-140 is a decent copy then it raises questions about which lenses will deliver the goods. Recent primes are a decent bet. As Mixdrinks notes on this thread the 70-300 is a cracker.
I've just bought a Tamron 17-70 which with the new firmware is a really good performer. I'm hoping it will have the chops to wring the best out of the 40mp was I am scheming the purchase of an X-T5 in the New Year.
GAS, me. How dare you sir !-)
Perhaps use a lens that is officially listed as able to resolve the X-H2/XT5's 40.2 MP sensor?
yeah, I was, the red badge 50-140 f2.8 . I thought it would be interesting to compare the non recommended 18-55 against the recommended 50-140 to see the difference 👍👍
@@ian_worth The XF 50-140mm F2.8 R LM OIS WR you mean. Gotcha. It is a long name. 👍
As much as I wanted the XT5 I finally bought new lenses and if I eventually change for an upgrade I will probably go for the XH2s to stay in the 26mp range which is plenty for me, im not really interested to change lenses I really like because they can't resolve the 40mp for a tiny bit difference at the end. Thank you and as always superb work in every aspect of your video. Happy holidays !
XF 50-240 f2.8 is a great lens! Probably the best consumer grade lens, which then of course means that the beastly XF 200 f2, is not considered n this stated comparison
I have both the X-H2 and X-H2S on loan at the moment and to my surprise I'm actually preferring the 26MP sensor of the S for my landscapes. It just seems shaper. The sensor in the S also seems to give more dynamic range than my X-T3 when taking sunsets. Just my opinion and all very unscientific
I watched Gordon Laing's review of stills from both cameras side by side and he clearly shows a higher resolution in landscape stills for the XH2.
Gordon also suggested that the newer primes take advantage of the XH2 40mp sensor.
This is the reason I decided to quit Fujifilm system. I don't need that many pixels, and also the new 26 mpix stacked sensor seems to be worse that previous one in noise and dynamic range. With pixel density increase we will need newly developed expensive glass to even be able to use that increased resolution to the fullest. I really hoped they will come with lower resolution sensor, optimized for noise and dynamic range, something in the range of 18-20 mpix. One of the reason I chose Fuji in the past was small size of camera and lenses. Nowadays we can have full frame camera that is cheaper, use smaller lenses than APS-C counterparts (yes!), that weigh nearly the same... One thing I will miss thought will be Fuji's ergonomics and colors, I have to admit that :)
Want DR, just buy used GFX50s/50r and kick any FF camera. Yes more money, bigger lenses etc but if DR & picture quality is important, right now nothing beats GFX (well PhaseOne IQ but that's like 50k system)
@@bobby350z Thats way more money and way more weight. Also, there are not so many lenses that can offer you small depth of field in compact package. There is no Holy Grail in photography :)
@@mattbite Yup, But picture quality and DR wise, it is the best I have seen. Weight/size I care less.
You really have to go full frame or medium format to see more detail.
I shoot M43 and there is a mode to get a 50 megapixel image and it's a little better but it's not really worth it.
For my buffer, memory card and computer's sake, if I bought the xt5 instead of the xt4, I'd probably lower the internal camera resolution, especially if you want to keep your lens collection financially acceptable.
Most of these comparisons aren’t quite valid as zooming in to 100 per cent on the 40mp sensor is a greater enlargement than on a 26mp sensor. The correct way to compare is by enlarging to the same size, eg both viewed at A3 or A2 size. But I’d agree you are unlikely to see a dramatic difference between 40 and 26mp. Thanks for sharing Ian!
I did that size comparison in last weeks video in photoshop which you can view here ruclips.net/video/VYqTjlYMQfA/видео.html.
Unfortunately that option isn't available in capture one, you are kind of stuck to the default zoom ratios 👍
@@ian_worth You should be using C1´s recipe proofing for that.
These are the exact same results I am seen comparing my XT2 to the XH2 . The biggest advantage I am seeing is the lower base Iso and overall cleaner image. But on the negative side I am noticing softer corners comparing the two sensors with the same lenses. Not sure why this is.
Softer corners could be that the lens is not resolving enough detail which will become more apparent with more pixels. And, corners are usually more of a challenge for most lens.
I do think that the auto focus is the reason to upgrade for a photographer. For wildlife, sports, perhaps portraits, the X-T5 is much better. For landscapes the X-T3 is very competitive.
It's each camera as a whole & the use-case isn't it.
The AF (while still not == to Sony & Canon), IBIS, fast & large EVF, grip, 15 FPS shooting, quality OOC options.. all ticks for me - even if the sensor quality was the same, more or less.
I'm looking toward X-H2 over X-T5 currently for the comfy & stable grip (esp. w/larger lenses), EVF and buffer, but I'd really have loved a hybrid in silver with X-T/5 top dials, heck throw in the A7R V's all tilting, flipping & rotating screen while you're at it (if it's actually sturdy & didn't add bulk 😁).
This video has made me think about the X-H2S more, with silent full sensor E-Shutter @ 20+ FPS being something I'd use (but don't need + 40 FPS would be fun but rarely used unless the AI tracking suddenly became excellent w/firmware).
Then there're the prospects of the 30mm f2.8 macro, 33 1.4, 56 1.2 WR/mkII (and presumably more updates, keeping similar price points) × this 40mp sensor. Other recent lenses like the 150-600mm are said to be designed with 40mp sensor in mind - which apparently resolves similar detail to the 100-400 (hopefully a good thing, as I haven't really looked into that lense).
Do you take long time exposure (above 120s) as well? I own X-T3 and comparing to my older Nikon D200 doesn't work good enough. Images from Fuji suffer from quality detail definition. Much older Nikon performers much better results. I wonder if new 40mp sensor improves in this area. I'm still thinking about seriously long time exposures. Despite love this gear.
So thats my mind made up, I was going to but the new XT5 to replace my XT3, I’m going to stick and buy the 16-55mm 2.8 lens instead to replace the 18-55mm lens. Cheers Ian
Yeah I think that's a wise decision. The 16-55 will improve IQ more than upgrading the body. There's a cash back on at the moment, I think you can get £150 off until jan 22nd
The issue I had with Capture One is my JPG exports never matched the color of the RAW images I created
I checked another person reviwing the sensor (XH2 vs XS10) for dynamic range and ISO noise. New sensor gets one extra stop of shadow recovery, no change on the highlight (-4 - +2). For the ISO noise noticeable from 6400. That was in a controlled indoor environment... You get 2 extra stop of hight recovery with DR400 and iso 500 (if you have to be at 500 iso anyway)... I've got an XT3, and it is only the autofocus that is tempting me to be honnest. I'm not a pro. As a pro, if I can't braket my shots or need beter keep rate, I'll upgrade to the XH2S... (reviewer was D Abbot)
Forgot to mention the sensor shift for very hi res on XH2/XT5... Might be cool to have a video on that... :)
I've seen tests that shows the exact opposite of this, namely the h2/T5 sensor being sharper.
Myself I've had similar experiences you have but between the t2 and t3 where the t2 was noticeably crispier and rendered overall better.
Sadly fujifilm is somewhat known for being very uneven in their production tolerances and it might be the case of what you are showing here.
The xt2 was the last xt camera to be made in Japan
@@thomasemory4352 What does that have to do with anything?
Quick question from a new viewer. Do you use super resolution in Lightroom? If not, why?
Thanks for the intelligent and detailed reviews.
Hi Michael, Yes I do, I did a video all about it here ruclips.net/video/UBCkQfHSpxk/видео.html Thanks for watching 😊👍
@@ian_worth Thanks a lot. I have been using SuperRes for about a year, and have been happy, although every now and then I get a bizarre aberration . The DXO pure Raw2 you turned me on to seems to correct that problem. Cool. The new age of AI is really improving the quality of digital images without going for expensive and bulky larger formats and sensors. I think we've arrived at a place when we no longer need larger cameras! I like that. You've convinced me to not obsess over the new 40mp Fujis, although the used prices on Xt3s and Xt4s aren't coming down. Oh well.
if with both, the viltrox and the 18-55, the x-t3 looks sharper, is because those lenses do not resolve the 40 mpx sensor from the x-h2, and the softer corners on the newer sensor with the 18-55 is a clear demonstration. i don't think the 50-140 can resolve either the whole resolution of the new sensor despite Fuji says it does. you say there is not much a difference in detail and resolution between the two sensors, but the difference in resolution is as simple and as objective as 14 mpx. if the image detail with those lenses is very close, with the new camera, you have also a 14 mpx gain for whatever you need them. to need or not to need is a different question for each and everyone of us. as a result, some will apreciate in those extra 14 mpx a clear difference in resolution and some will not.
Bought my xt5 for better auto focus features for wildlife etc not for more megapixels.
Great stuff. Bug is the 18-55 certified for 40mp? I know my 16mm 1,4 is not and not my 16-80 f4.
No the 18-55 is not recommended but the 50-140 is, I thought it would be good to see the difference between what fuji recommends and what they don't. 👍👍
@@ian_worth I just find it crazy that there is no difference. Makes me doubt my Fuji gfx 50. Maybe it’s all in my head that it looks better.
@@roberthennings Oh, I wouldn't worry at all about the GFX 50. No comparison with either APS-C or FF! I have an X-T4, X-T5, and a GFX 50R. The larger photo sites on the 50R make all the difference. 🙂
All cameras made in the last decade say, are all fabulous cameras and can take photos that should satisfy anyone. The manufacturers need to keep us dis-satisfied by hyping the supposed improvement in their newer cameras. But it is a bit like the old washing powder adverts - everything is always ‘new and improved’. But you have to seriously ask yourself if your clothes are any cleaner than they were 10 years ago? The same with cameras! If you have plenty of money, go ahead and buy whatever you want, but for the average enthusiast photographer, the money would be better spent on travel or something like printing equipment, if you are into that. But there again, don’t go mad. Composition and story telling are what makes a great photo, not whether it was taken on this or that camera. Save your money folks!
I couldn't have put it better myself, Peter 👏👍😁
Very true. I have to agree, however, it really depends on what camera you have and what camera you’re looking at getting. I shoot with a xpro2, I absolutely adore this camera, and for what I do it’s perfect. However, I was doing some client work a few months ago and unfortunately the xpro2 did not perform to the abilities I needed it to. I really need a faster performing camera in that moment. I would also like to venture to shoot more video and so the reason I’m looking at the xh2s for an upgrade. Which would be an upgrade that would satisfy any needs for the foreseeable future. With a camera like that, I can’t see a reason to need any better.
I wish you did a XH2s too coz I think that stacked sensor is a bit noisy
I have observed an unstable behavior of 18-55 with the same camera and shooting conditions, especially at the border of the images. Apart from that, going to the 50-140, it is a wonderful red badge lens, but it is a zoom in any case. Perhaps the check with one of the newest prime lenses would show something different (perhaps ...). Said that, I am not a professional photographer, and even if I bought recently the new 56 1.2 WR, I will stay for the moment with my beloved X-T3.
The more pixels in the same crop sensor mean that they can receive a less amount of light, thus in fact lower image quality than X-T3.
Thanks for a large dose of common sense based on your research & a cure, or at least a warning, for GAS 🙂.
I genuinely believe we've hit the limit with APS-C. Fuji's 26MP sensor, I believe, is the sweet spot for this sensor size. We saw a similar situation when Canon released their 32.5MP sensor, very similar sharpness and low light ISO performance to their 24MP sensor, just a higher resolution.
Having worked with an A7riii, i don’t think i’ll ever go back to 40+ sensors. The pixel peeping was awesome but my computer was dying
good point 👍
I maintain that the 50-140 2.8 cannot resolve the 40mp sensor. I have done testing myself. The X-H2s 26mp sensor is sharper using that lens in the same conditions. We just need better lenses for this 40mp sensor.
Maybe fuji should take it of their recommended list 👍
@@ian_worth agreed!
This video prevented 100s of people buying a XT5....well at least me.
Demonstration that the obsessive search for many mpx does not bring real benefits. rather it brings disadvantages from the point of view of data saving and management at high ISOs. the differences aren't that noticeable on screen, even less so on print, where you don't see any difference even with magnifiers. H2 is useful for those who want to crop, but be careful about cropping at high ISOs.
I just must to say when I start editing pictures with Capture one is just the same like I have new camera (Works much better than LR I use X-T3)... So much natural look (Film look) and with this software Fuji images really shine and true colours...Lightroom is not so perfect for Fuji files (never achieve the same result in details and colours are different (not for Fuji style)... But now I have different option because 30 days left for capture one free and use CO express wich is free... But if I want more edit (brushing,gradient...) just convert to TIFF and transport to LR and still keep this capture one look images...
❤
Capture one 22 does not recognize my xt5 raw when importing from the sd card! Am I the only one having this problem?
Thank you for this video
You need to have version 15.4.2 to recognize the X-T5 RAF files…
@@jacobh5817 thank you!
But i don't find it..?
So, does that mean that, besides the 40 mpx sensor allowing for better cropping and a few technical advancements, upgrading isn't the best thing to do?!?! I am keeping my X-T4. 😉😉
Depends what you need the camera for, over all, the x-h2 is the best APSC camera I've ever owned. I'm just comparing detail between the 2 sensors and letting folks know that there's not a whole lot of difference in IQ 👍👍
I have seen a few of this comparison between T5 and any other like t3 etc, no real advantage IMO Only thing I like is T5 HAS IBIS. Also some owners are not happy with T5 AF compared with latest new cameras.For the money Fuji wants for it I might just stay with my T30
For me, the megapixels isn’t the most important thing, I can live with 26 megapixels fine. But when you’re cropping a scene in street photography, every little bit helps.
The bigger question is the reports I hear about the auto focus on the XT5 being unpredictable, and not much better than the XT4.
I definitely see no reason to upgrade until they fix the auto focus!
Thanks for the tests! 🖖
I've just gone from x-t2 to x-h2 (same sensor and processor as the x-t5). I agree on the extra MP being valuable for cropping (I've just been doing exactly that ... getting some compositions out of some street photos that I would have otherwise discarded).
I was disappointed with AF, but am now satisfied. The cameras ship set to release rather than focus priority. It makes them look pretty bad when shooting at medium to high burst rates.
They'll hit the 15fps regardless of getting focus first. I changed this from release to focus priority and most shots even in challenging situations are in focus now.
It does means that at times when shooting high still framerate it sounds a bit stuttery and won't maintain the advertised rate, but I'd rather that than a heap of wasted space on shots I was always going to discard anyway.
Apparently turning off AF+MF helps too according to other users. I've done that. I'm wondering if those missed shots are just from bumping the focus ring accidentally while trying to AF.
@@NeilMcAliece I've been getting annoyed with some of the review where people spent maybe a day with the camera a clearly didn't change to focus priority. Really wish fuji shipped with it in focus priority so i can stop getting these videos of xt5 having worst af then xt4 videos from people who never changed the setting.
@@J.T.mus1c absolutely. I'm sure the factory defaults are causing some poor reviews and bad user experiences.
I guess if focus priority was default, the complaint might be that they don't hit 15fps out of the box.
I think missing focus is going to be the bigger annoyance though.
@@NeilMcAliece i alwas use lower burst rate my camera can . I dont see a point in shooting 15 frames a aecond anyway. For what i do 5 would be more than enough and my camera can do 10
@@castielvargastv7931 Of course it depends on the subject you're shooting, for wildlife (inc. kids on a sugar rush, jumping into a pool) or a cyclist riding past graffiti, it's nice to have 15+ FPS available.
Saying that 40 mPex is the same as 26 mPex would be like saying that 4x6 inches is the same as 5x7 inches large format negatives or printed pictures. The difference is not gigantic, but it is there. Wouldn't you say that a 5x7 inches negative looks better than a 4x5??
There is no way a 40mp sensor should be rendering less detail. With each hop of MP I have noticed more detail and better sharpness. Have you raised this with Fuji? Would be great if you could do a comparison with another 40+mp camera.
I cant do any more comparisons, I think my head will explode LOL 🤣🤣
@@ian_worth No I agree you've done an amazing job. I returned my XT5 for an XH2 because of softness. The XH2 so far has been as sharp as my XT3 and probably about 20% more detail. Hence why I think you might have a defective camera. Just did a simple test 5 mins ago and my findings are different to yours
@@17cream x-t5 and xh2 is exactly the same sensor
@@denis5850 yes I know, but I was hoping there might have been different tolerances in the build. I don’t think this is a sensor issue
I think the problem is in the lenes. They can't resolve such a high resolution. It was the similar story with Canon M7.
I have an X H2s and can’t tell difference in image quality unless I zoom in over 200% vs my z7ii
I'm surprised by how (comparatively) bad the 40mp files look. It's very confusing. When fit to screen they look fine, but once you start cropping in, which is one of the main benefits of the new sensor. It looks worse than the 26mp files. I wonder if it's actually worse or just firmware/software support somehow not caught up to the new sensors.
This is a great test. Thank you for the effort. It once again proves that more megapixels isn’t always the answer. I did a low light test myself in our studio with an X-T3 we still have lying around and an X-H2 our Fuji rep brought along. It showed that at ISO3200 and above the X-T3 has significantly cleaner images and is able to maintain details and tonality much better than the 40MP sensor. Don’t get me wrong. The H2 and the T5 are great cameras and you can have several good reasons to upgrade (IBIS, EVF, AF…) but son’t get overexited about the MP increase as it has its drawbacks too. If you really want a better IQ, you need a bigger sensor. Basic physics…
Superb. You save me 2.000 euros
Glad I could help 👍👍
i keep my X-T4, not enough difference to change the body... just go for new lenses 🙂
Glass is the way to go Alain 👍👍
Well, as a professional photographer there is something I learned in the past 50 years. Actual sharpness is different from visual sharpness impression. In lighting we talk about a transfer edge between dark and light. The edge between a dark and light area is not a sudden sharply defined edge. The finer the grain the more you can see that the edge is quite a gradual grayscale. Thus it records much more detail but looks softened . More grain records less detail but it breaks up that edge abruptly so looks sharper to the eye. Film as well as digital pixels are similar.
It a transfer edge has 4 pixels versus 2, the edge looks sharper with only 2. On a test pattern real sharpness up to the resolution of the lens can be more objectively compared.
66% On your screen is a function of the software and monitor so only comparing at 100% should be done. After that, acutance (edge sharpness) of a file is a function of camera software.
Now the last point, the lens renders detail, more pixels show the quality of the lens. 24 Mp may be the limit of the lens.
Just points to consider.
I think your lenses don't utilize high resolution sensor that's why you don't see a big difference between the cameras.
Some thoughts and an idea: Comparing any two images with each other may not give you a quite clear impression which of them is better. This makes a comparison of two good cameras very difficult and you may not remember exactly enough how the scene looked in reality in your eyes. Even more difficult it is to present this comparison to other people, who can only guess how the scene really was. A possible solution: Taking an image of a print would allow you to use the print as a reference for comparing the two cameras. Then, that camera, whose photo looks more similar to the print, is giving a more natural image (also in detail when zooming in to the pixel level). The reference print could be your favourite landscape printout, for example, or any other print of specific interest. For a more technical comparison, you could in addition use a test print similar to that downloadable below the video "How to TEST your NEW or USED CAMERA LENS for Problems". Please, see also "How to Use a Cinematography Focus Chart".
I think people should get on taking photographs and not worry about megapixels or pixels for that matter. Cameras are getting too stupid with all the ‘features’ and claims of improvement. Obviously manufacturers need to keep people buying and ‘upgrading’ to survive, but for the real average enthusiast photographer it should not be the defining factor. Composition, story telling etc, are the things that will make a great photo. All cameras built in the last decade say, are superb cameras and with average skill anyone can take fabulous photos.
@@petercollins7848 Recording reality faithfully and being able to zoom in at times will require even better systems.
That’s a Good idea! Hopefully somebody will try your method.
@@tiitulitii
All cameras made in the last decade and beyond are quite capable of doing everything a real photographer needs. The camera industry and media have made us believe that we need better and better cameras to take the ‘perfect photo’.. No camera can do this, it is the photographer alone who can make the picture ‘great’. We admire photographers and photos from the past, yet their gear was rubbish compared to modern day equipment!
Just buy the 100s