➡Be sure and get my FREE Photography Guides: "I Bought A Nice Camera, Now What? 10 Things To Do First" and "Photography Basics: 20 Definitions You Should Know" on my website: "boorayperry.com/education/ ➡Use the code RUclips to save 50% on my guide to photographing with natural light and my guide on photographing outdoors with off-camera flash! 9 ➡Guides and other stuff - boorayperry.com/education/ ➡Gear - linktr.ee/boorayperry ➡Instagram - wwwinstagram.com/boorayperry/ ➡Store - my-store-e02782.creator-spring.com/listing/new-camera-nerd ➡Booray Explains - tinyurl.com/3e7w8zjt
Digital zoom in Raw+jpeg IS available on the X100V starting with FW 2.00 and higher. That way you can use the unaltered raw file to upscale it yourself, or use the in-camera upscaled jpeg. I wish that Fuji had maintained that approach on the X100VI. FWIW they use the same non-upscale approach for digital zoom in the X-T5 so perhaps they just pulled that over on the VI.
The only real benefit I can see between upscale and crop is that many don't trust the upscale, even though they know nothing about it, in camera bad, in software good. So a camera with more megapixels relying on crop will be better in their minds versus the "V" upscaling. I know at dpreview I've recommended upscaling and received lectures that photoshop is better, some claim to say they can see a degraded image, I know this observation is crap, I use the digi zoom with my "F" all the time.
That is how proper digital zooms should work. It makes no sense to interpolate pixels that just make the file bigger and the image blurry in 1:1. On my Camera (Canon G9 X II) I sometimes reduce the resolution when using digital zoom. If you want maximum quality you can shoot raw and then use any software to crop and enlarge in post. Digital zoom is for fast work.
@@okaro6595 as I mentioned in the video, the interpolation that takes place inside the older Fuji cameras is every bit is good as doing it in post in Photoshop. It doesn't make the picture blurry It just saves you from having to do it manually in post
Hey Booray, it's quite a noticeable difference 3882x2592 on the long side. I shoot with Nikon but i really like finding information on other camera brands, and learning new features. As i love photography, all camera brands interest me. Thanks Booray you have great product knowledge 😊
Hi Booray, Thanks for the analysis - it gives me comfort in my decision not to upgrade to the VI. Question: I have always wondered if the camera uses the cropped portion to determine exposure values when in digital zoom, or does it use the full frame? Using the data from the cropped frame only would be a benefit of using the digital zoom.
That's a good question. You would have to be using a metering mode that was "whole frame" to test it. I always use a mode that puts more weight on the focus point.
Remember the old days with crappy computer and pixelized images? Those images are easy to upscale becourse the quality of the pixels are sharp due to they are drawed images. Same with photos, you need a well exposed images so the pixels are sharp. No softwares can recreate and upscale a blurred image to be sharp. The quality of upscaling image depends on how sharp and well exposed the images are. A lesser exposed image with blurred pixels will not get better with upscaling it, it will be oversharpened with full of artifacts. Did lot of test when i got my 40 mp, becourse so many claimed it was no good at that time. Its not about the camera, software or sensor nor the mp, it is about the exposure and sharpness of the original photo. Even saved some bad blurred images by downscaling 4-6 times so the noise, blur and artifacts were gone, then upscaling it again and get a better photo by it. Try it yourself... Very mindblowing, since then: Do you really need a 50-100 mp camera. When you can succesfully upscale pictures and look away from the DR advantage higher format have. Off course the succes rate of downgrade images are still depended on the quality of the picture.
The X100V is the only camera I use digital zoom, bcs it looks so good, possibaly bcs of the way they upscaled it. Didn't get the VI bcs 26mp is fine, both V and VI have leaf sbutter, built-in ND, built-in flash (so cool how well that works with leaf shutter for fill flash...love your video about that), both have tilt screen (even though I prefer fully articulating screens). OK, the VI has IBIS, so that was tempting...but I learned the non-ibis tricks, plus have IBIS on the xt4 and xs10 if really need ibis. BUT...digital zoom on the X100V? So useful and so well done on this camera, whereas that feature was shut off on other cameras.
I have the V and the crop works well. I like the quality of the photos, as you said, the upscaling looks fine. I never had to change settings to get it to work, I have raw+jpg, it works. I get the feeling lots of people look down on these cropped and upscaled images. Maybe Fuji listened to them and made it a straight crop with the 40mpx sensor? Why not give the user the choice?
Did not know about the upscaling. One point is that they have AI upscaling in software now which is supposed to a big improveement over the old PS method.
Another way to look at it is the cropped image on the VI looks at least as good as the upscaled cropped image on the V in a smaller format 😉 To me it's no issue but overall I'm not sure I prefer the VI to the V at least for my kind of photography and instead of selling the V I'd rather sell the VI. Besides I'm still using my X-Pro3 and both go together well. Anyway thanks for your great videos!
@@BoorayPerryabsolutely. I used ND and IBIS to slow down the shutter speed to about 1/4 second to take a beautiful waterfall and get the flow effect. It also brought out an internal rainbow that only looked feint to the naked eye. I then took great images down some spectacular lit caves and again IBIS was brilliant. Finally night shots of Shanghai from a river boat cruise were magnificent. On the digital zoom, the VI is fine for 90% of my uses. If I wanted more, I’d get the tele converter but the only converter I’m getting is the wide angle for architecture especially indoors for cathedrals etc. Again IBIS will be super useful. I’m on a tour of cities in northern Spain in a few weeks. Based on my VI results so far I may only take the Fuji and converter. Out of interest if in camera upscale is so good, why doesn’t the fancy Leica Q3 have it?
I don't understand why you would use digital zoom with the VI (which only permanently crops the picture) when you can crop in post more precisely - especially when you get the same resolution.
I do it just for composition aid and because sometimes I want to upload it online right away. On the V I also had the benefit that the Fuji upscale software was as good as PS.
Hi Booray, thanks for an interesting video. The VI is my first X-100 so this is all new to me. Unless you wanted to print the non-upscaled VI pic, why would you want to upscale it before sending to anyone who’s only going to view it on their screen(s)?
It is useful for those of us who prefer minimal post-processing and do not always carry a computer when traveling. It is also helpful to compose with the final crop in mind.
I'm really curious now that you brought up what seems to be a downgrade on the VI compared to the V. Maybe you could you use your sources to find out from Fuji, and also whether they can bring it back through software upgrades. I really like the digital zoom feature, as I just got my VI, and am not used to the one camera, one lens way of operating. On a 2nd topic, which you may have previously covered, is the newer FUJIFILM XF 16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 a worthy upgrade to the FUJIFILM XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 which is basically my always on lens on all of my other Fuji cameras.
I suspect that the answer is that they don't need to upscale it sop they don't. I don't know anything about the technology but if it costs any money at all to make it work with the new sensor then why spend the money if it's not really necessary. It's just odd to have a camera with a bigger sensor produce and image that is smaller. :)
@@BoorayPerry no I’m asking can’t this be fixed later down the road by firmware update by Fujifilm ? It looks more like they took out a software feature that allowed images to be stored in upscale format by default.
➡Be sure and get my FREE Photography Guides: "I Bought A Nice Camera, Now What? 10 Things To Do First"
and
"Photography Basics: 20 Definitions You Should Know"
on my website: "boorayperry.com/education/
➡Use the code RUclips to save 50% on my guide to photographing with natural light and my guide on photographing outdoors with off-camera flash!
9
➡Guides and other stuff - boorayperry.com/education/
➡Gear - linktr.ee/boorayperry
➡Instagram - wwwinstagram.com/boorayperry/
➡Store - my-store-e02782.creator-spring.com/listing/new-camera-nerd
➡Booray Explains - tinyurl.com/3e7w8zjt
Digital zoom in Raw+jpeg IS available on the X100V starting with FW 2.00 and higher. That way you can use the unaltered raw file to upscale it yourself, or use the in-camera upscaled jpeg. I wish that Fuji had maintained that approach on the X100VI. FWIW they use the same non-upscale approach for digital zoom in the X-T5 so perhaps they just pulled that over on the VI.
I always thought the upscaled images in the V were fine. This is a surprise to me, an unwelcome one.
Guess I’ll crop in post and use Gigapixel.
There ya go. :)
The only real benefit I can see between upscale and crop is that many don't trust the upscale, even though they know nothing about it, in camera bad, in software good. So a camera with more megapixels relying on crop will be better in their minds versus the "V" upscaling. I know at dpreview I've recommended upscaling and received lectures that photoshop is better, some claim to say they can see a degraded image, I know this observation is crap, I use the digi zoom with my "F" all the time.
That is how proper digital zooms should work. It makes no sense to interpolate pixels that just make the file bigger and the image blurry in 1:1. On my Camera (Canon G9 X II) I sometimes reduce the resolution when using digital zoom.
If you want maximum quality you can shoot raw and then use any software to crop and enlarge in post. Digital zoom is for fast work.
@@okaro6595 as I mentioned in the video, the interpolation that takes place inside the older Fuji cameras is every bit is good as doing it in post in Photoshop. It doesn't make the picture blurry It just saves you from having to do it manually in post
Hey Booray, it's quite a noticeable difference 3882x2592 on the long side. I shoot with Nikon but i really like finding information on other camera brands, and learning new features. As i love photography, all camera brands interest me. Thanks Booray you have great product knowledge 😊
Thanks! I have "okay" product knowledge. I don't dig into it like some people unless I'm interested in it. :)
@@BoorayPerry Your welcome Booray, you are an Encyclopaedia Britannica 😂📸
Hi Booray,
Thanks for the analysis - it gives me comfort in my decision not to upgrade to the VI.
Question: I have always wondered if the camera uses the cropped portion to determine exposure values when in digital zoom, or does it use the full frame?
Using the data from the cropped frame only would be a benefit of using the digital zoom.
That's a good question. You would have to be using a metering mode that was "whole frame" to test it. I always use a mode that puts more weight on the focus point.
Remember the old days with crappy computer and pixelized images? Those images are easy to upscale becourse the quality of the pixels are sharp due to they are drawed images. Same with photos, you need a well exposed images so the pixels are sharp. No softwares can recreate and upscale a blurred image to be sharp. The quality of upscaling image depends on how sharp and well exposed the images are. A lesser exposed image with blurred pixels will not get better with upscaling it, it will be oversharpened with full of artifacts. Did lot of test when i got my 40 mp, becourse so many claimed it was no good at that time. Its not about the camera, software or sensor nor the mp, it is about the exposure and sharpness of the original photo.
Even saved some bad blurred images by downscaling 4-6 times so the noise, blur and artifacts were gone, then upscaling it again and get a better photo by it. Try it yourself...
Very mindblowing, since then: Do you really need a 50-100 mp camera. When you can succesfully upscale pictures and look away from the DR advantage higher format have. Off course the succes rate of downgrade images are still depended on the quality of the picture.
The X100V is the only camera I use digital zoom, bcs it looks so good, possibaly bcs of the way they upscaled it.
Didn't get the VI bcs 26mp is fine, both V and VI have leaf sbutter, built-in ND, built-in flash (so cool how well that works with leaf shutter for fill flash...love your video about that), both have tilt screen (even though I prefer fully articulating screens). OK, the VI has IBIS, so that was tempting...but I learned the non-ibis tricks, plus have IBIS on the xt4 and xs10 if really need ibis.
BUT...digital zoom on the X100V? So useful and so well done on this camera, whereas that feature was shut off on other cameras.
I have the V and the crop works well. I like the quality of the photos, as you said, the upscaling looks fine. I never had to change settings to get it to work, I have raw+jpg, it works.
I get the feeling lots of people look down on these cropped and upscaled images. Maybe Fuji listened to them and made it a straight crop with the 40mpx sensor? Why not give the user the choice?
@@MichaelGerrardYes, it will work with raw plus JPEG but it does not crop the raw image. It also won't work if you are just in raw.
@@BoorayPerry thanks!
Did not know about the upscaling. One point is that they have AI upscaling in software now which is supposed to a big improveement over the old PS method.
Another way to look at it is the cropped image on the VI looks at least as good as the upscaled cropped image on the V in a smaller format 😉
To me it's no issue but overall I'm not sure I prefer the VI to the V at least for my kind of photography and instead of selling the V I'd rather sell the VI. Besides I'm still using my X-Pro3 and both go together well.
Anyway thanks for your great videos!
@@boris.dupont for me, the Ibis is the big draw.
@@BoorayPerryabsolutely. I used ND and IBIS to slow down the shutter speed to about 1/4 second to take a beautiful waterfall and get the flow effect. It also brought out an internal rainbow that only looked feint to the naked eye. I then took great images down some spectacular lit caves and again IBIS was brilliant. Finally night shots of Shanghai from a river boat cruise were magnificent.
On the digital zoom, the VI is fine for 90% of my uses. If I wanted more, I’d get the tele converter but the only converter I’m getting is the wide angle for architecture especially indoors for cathedrals etc. Again IBIS will be super useful. I’m on a tour of cities in northern Spain in a few weeks. Based on my VI results so far I may only take the Fuji and converter.
Out of interest if in camera upscale is so good, why doesn’t the fancy Leica Q3 have it?
@@andrewcrossley2448 there's so many things that like a does or doesn't do that I don't understand 🤣
I don't understand why you would use digital zoom with the VI (which only permanently crops the picture) when you can crop in post more precisely - especially when you get the same resolution.
I do it just for composition aid and because sometimes I want to upload it online right away. On the V I also had the benefit that the Fuji upscale software was as good as PS.
Hi Booray, thanks for an interesting video. The VI is my first X-100 so this is all new to me. Unless you wanted to print the non-upscaled VI pic, why would you want to upscale it before sending to anyone who’s only going to view it on their screen(s)?
@@christianpetersen1782 With the old 24MP sensor, you had to upscale it to get a decent sized image.
It is useful for those of us who prefer minimal post-processing and do not always carry a computer when traveling. It is also helpful to compose with the final crop in mind.
If you do not see the difference and the X100VI files are smaller, isn’t that a good thing?
@@freekvanbuul5100 My point is that I can't see the difference after upscaling which is supposed to add artifacts.
I'm really curious now that you brought up what seems to be a downgrade on the VI compared to the V.
Maybe you could you use your sources to find out from Fuji, and also whether they can bring it back through software upgrades. I really like the digital zoom feature, as I just got my VI, and am not used to the one camera, one lens way of operating.
On a 2nd topic, which you may have previously covered, is the newer FUJIFILM XF 16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 a worthy upgrade to the FUJIFILM XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 which is basically my always on lens on all of my other Fuji cameras.
I suspect that the answer is that they don't need to upscale it sop they don't. I don't know anything about the technology but if it costs any money at all to make it work with the new sensor then why spend the money if it's not really necessary. It's just odd to have a camera with a bigger sensor produce and image that is smaller. :)
Can't that be fixed with firmware upgrade
@@sohrubjoshi5189I'm unaware of a firmware update that changes this. Do you know of one?
@@BoorayPerry no I’m asking can’t this be fixed later down the road by firmware update by Fujifilm ? It looks more like they took out a software feature that allowed images to be stored in upscale format by default.
@@sohrubjoshi5189 I suppose they could push it out in a firmware update but I don't think they will. I think they did it on purpose