Food for thought, on camera sensors and prints

[milandro]

This of course is one of these critical articles which should make you question the buying of new and improved boxes over the intelligent use of the box that you have already.

 

 

As I have seen time and time agin, this is a highly unpopular point of view anywhere focussed on promoting the acquisition of new equipment.

 

http://friedmanarchives.blogspot.nl/2017/03/full-frame-vs-small-sensor-dont-laugh.html

 

Gary Friedman makes a very good point and proves it , not with theoretical support but with a down to earth “ proof-of-the-pudding” approach.

 

Takes two identical pictures with different cameras and prints them the same size ( which I have been advocating for some time) and then thinks of whether the bigger box results were so much better than the older and smaller box.

 

 

 

 

[Florian]

Hardly surprising, especially the first shot where, probably, even a midrange smartphone camera could have done the job.

 

The question is, of course, how often one gets to use the camera in those ideal circumstances.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Florian

[Tikcus]

There is nothing new here.

 

In perfect conditions most cameras will take good enough pictures

 

I've been soooting a lot recently with large format (5"x4") film, and medium format (6cm X 6cm and 6cm x 7cm) film, and the small 35mm (full frame), the quality increase obtained when using the larger formats is undeniable, unfortunately with film any imperfections on the film are also more significant the larger the format.

The Fact with large format film you can crop away the imperfections and still produce a brilliant large print, which could not be done with 35mm without the quality decreasing.

 

In the digital world sensor size is one of several things that effect the quality and usability of the final print.

 

If your shooting in the studio, happy days, pretty much any camera that can trigger your flashes will produce good prints

 

Outside the studio, you have a lot more issues to deal with

 

If the lights not great, you need a camera with good high iso performance, or fast glass

you want to shoot super shallow dof - larger sensor, faster glass

you can't get close enough to what you want to take a photograph of - More mega pixels allow for more cropping, or buy a longer zoom lens.

 

If you take the same type of photos day in day out and never want to push yourself, I suspect that you can find a camera that does that task well and you'll never need to upgrade it. It's only when you find the camera or your own limitations that an upgrade maybe needed; however, since most of us live in the (almost) free world and are allowed to make our own decisions on how we spend our money, we're allowed to satisfy our wants for new/better gear whether or not the equipment is actually needed

[milandro]

QED, I said this was going to be unpopular.

[David Thompson]

Dear Sir Milandro etc

 

I have 100% agreement with you views

Too much attention is paid to some number on a spec

 

Lately  I have been preparing Discussion Topics & researching topics & proving them on camera

It is quite clear that unless you are preparing for a museum piece there is too much bunk is is the air

 

I strongly advocate that prints are used as proof - I am sure that on most occasions little difference will be perceived

between the cameras - especially when viewed at normal viewing distances

people are zooming on a computer to compare forgetting that it is the display that is important 

 

The difference is in the glass & application - not minor differences due etc. etc.

 

Canon,  Nikon, Sony etc. all produce great cameras - I use Fuji & Panasonic cos for

 

My only remark is when you are pushing the technology - getting a little closer 

the 100 - 400 lens was a clear step forward over the 50 - 230

The X Pro 2 over the X Pro 1

 

For most purposes the Xpro1 was a great camera - because later cameras were released

it did not detract from the Xpro1 qualities as a great camera

 

et.etc.etc.

 

David

[Florian]

QED, I said this was going to be unpopular.

 

Meh, not so much the rather obvious truth that one does not need the latest, greatest and most expensive tool to get the job done well. The test you linked to, however, proves next to nothing. It is like performing a test run of screwing in two screws in pre-drilled holes to demonstrate that manual screwdrivers are just as good as powered ones.

[milandro]

indeed they are and in case the power of the machine doesn’t need to exceed the one of the hand they serve the exact same purpose.

 

Tightening a screw.

 

If one can’t tell the difference between the two prints one can assume that the cheaper camera and sensor does the exact same job.

 

Which is precisely what I wanted to point out.

[Florian]

Which is a fine test if all you are going to do with the screwdriver is tightening one or two screws once in a while  . This rather obvious truth, however, is all that the test demonstrates.

Edited March 13, 2017 by Florian

[milandro]

Precisely, it is exactly like people buying the most expensive power drill , capable to build a house, to tighten screws with it, and some even do this just now and again, for all they do with it might have used anything, really.

[Tikcus]

I think you missed the point somewhat, show me a test that shows the equivalent of a power screwdriver and a manual screwdriver screwing into wood without pre-drilled holes, then claim they are as good as each other.

 

For most a mobile phone camera is all the camera they will ever need, on a good day produce very large prints (I've printed an A1 print from an iPhone photo), but in poor light they are terrible.

 

You still can not claim camera x with a small sensor is as good as camera Y with a large sensor if you only compare them in ideal settings.
​Let me see prints from photographs taken in a night club at ISO 6400 with both cameras and see how they perform

[milandro]

 the majority of people who keep buying new equipment have never even got close to the limits of what they have been upgrading.

[David Thompson]

Good morning,

 

I think we have digressed into flat pack furniture

 

milandro is comparing an older X Series camera with an updated model and the requirement to update

 

There is no bad X Series cameras

Indeed with the firmware updates they remain capable of excellent work

 

bibi 

[milandro]

I am sure that soon we are going to see some expensive medium format pictures which could have been taken with any camera.

[Yulenium]

I think one should use the camera that makes him or her happy. If one has enough money to buy the next version - X-Pro 3, 4, 5 or whatever - then so be it. I believe a happy photographer makes better photos. Maybe not noticeable on a technical pixel level but on many other aspects. Like taking the camera with you more often, or using the new features of the next version to expand your photographic ways of thinking. For example being inspired by Acros to do more B&W, or making much more use of the internal RAF converter to create final JPEGs in-camera.

 

And not to forget, people buying the next box make Fuji happy and keep Fuji alive. 

 

With the X-Pro2 I found my ‚Leica‘. Currently I can’t imagine that I would need more or a X-Pro3. I had the X-E2 before, but the X-Pro2 makes me ‚happier‘. I enjoy it whenever I use it. And I believe therefore I make better photos. I had Nikon equipment before I went to Fuji and my first digital camera was a D70s. The 6MP pictures I got from it can still easily be used to create a photo book or medium-sized prints. But at some point I wanted some more MP, some more features. At then I wanted less weight and size and got the X-E2. Nowadays the X-Pro2 is my(!) compromise in weight vs. happiness. I bought it not because of the maybe better image quality. The overall package just suits me better.

 

Now one could say that all the big cameras and big lenses are not Fuji-like. That’s up to Fuji to define what is Fuji-like. But I think Fuji can please everyone nowadays. Small package: X-E2s with small F2 lenses maybe. Big package: X-T2 with booster and the big red (I also call them giant) zooms. Just examples.

 

Another example. I recently got the 90/F2. Big lens no question. But for me it opened up a new level of photography, looking for details I can extract from scenes and much more, a joy to use. Technically it’s near perfect, and probably therefore the size. I want lenses that are optically correct and not having their distortion corrected by software. Thus I tolerate the size. And dislike lenses like the 35/F2, but that’s just me.

 

Look at Apple. I use a Mac myself and I have an iPhone. But I always fail to understand why people are buying the next new iPhone each year? Even camping outside the store to be the first… even though you can install the next iOS on older phones to have almost the same features. But I guess it’s for the same reason: It makes them happy. I personally think it’s a waste of resources if I would buy a new smartphone each year.  

 

Buying the next new camera box every few years to be a happier and maybe better photographer is okay in my opinion. I also consider the X-Pro2 and the X-T2 (without booster) to still be small compared to others. I don’t understand the hype around the GFX though as I consider it a niche-niche-niche product. But I’m an amateur photographer, it’s my hobby, and I’d never put so much money into a camera for so little gain. Maybe professionals think different.

 

I stress the words „for me“ cause all this is just my opinion and I’m sure there are many other valid ones out there. Just be a happy photographer :-)

 

ps. I could be tempted by a X-E3 but I don’t want to think about that ...

[David Thompson]

Good evening,

 

A lot of my gear would be for sale if a magic XS2 showed up

 

Range of a HS50 - Quality of XS1 and the low light ability of the XPRO2

 

Safari Heaven

 

oh - nothing more than 16 oz

 

Have a great night

[milandro]

unfortunately that won’t, most probably happen, but FR has just told us that some of us may want to start saving for the next NEW & Improved camera which FR called the ultimate X camera ( until they come up with another ultimate model)

Edited March 15, 2017 by milandro

[David Thompson]

Good morning,

 

We can remember going on school trips to see a computer that was addressed by Ladies' with punch cards

 

One lives in hope

 

Have a wonderful day

[milandro]

I have an old joke for you.

 

Two friends meet and one says that he has just bought a Ferrari, “ wow” says the other, :” what are you gonna do with it?” , “ I don’t know “ the one  with the car says " I only ever go to work in the city everyday and the speed limit all the way to work is 50Km/h but maybe after work I can go to Brighton and see how the car performs"

 

After a month the two friends meet again and the one without a supercar asks the other: “ How is it going with your new super car?” , “ Well” the friend answered with a bit of a disappointed look on his face “ I’ve sold it... I didn’t know what to do in Brighton and I was going there every day” .

[jlmphotos]

Good morning,

 

We can remember going on school trips to see a computer that was addressed by Ladies' with punch cards

 

One lives in hope

 

Have a wonderful day

 

Ha!  I learned computers and computing using 80 column punch cards!!  And I also learned to never drop a box loaded with over 1,000 of them as they tend to scatter.  And the machine won't read them and will error out if not loaded in order.  This brings back some seriously great memories!  When I was courting my spouse, I would type her letters using the keypunch machine!!  I still have those saved somewhere.   Corny I know...

[David Thompson]

Ah - the ladies did the punch carding cos they were better at it and had a fewer error rate - FORTRAM is a thing consigned to history - so you had to carry the cards to the ladies!!  Bet you got a think ear when you dropped the box cos I bet it only happened once!

Where I was you did not have general purpose computers - every computer had its own job and was programmed that way not like today!

 

ie one did stability - another did navigation - yet another calculated cargo - whilst the radar computer was the only one that had its own sensor

 

Great memories

[George_P]

I remember repairing the keypunch machines, also adjusting the heads on hard disks with an Allen key and an oscilloscope. The hard disks were the size of a washing machine. I remember slugging those bags full of cards to the computer centre in the middle of the night because that was when I could grab a free time slot. Could be used to write and run your Fortran program but nowadays I would prefer something nicer to run a program, even if the output would be a series of digits printed out of a line printer and therefore effectively the same. The thirst for new and more interesting stuff is legitimate I suppose, isn't it.

Edited March 16, 2017 by George_P

[milandro]

yes, I suppose that you have all heard about this “ Ultimate X” camera?

 

 

 

It is rumored that it will be the most expensive X camera ever , although it isn’t clear to me how this wouldn’t put this new camera in direct competition with  theGiant Fuji X camera that has gathered so many buyers already ...

Edited March 16, 2017 by milandro

[George_P]

But OTOH I agree with the OP somewhat, e.g. I can afford to buy an X-T2 or T20 or whatever but I am not in a hurry because I reckon I don't deserve it as I am not enough of a photographer to warrant that. First the man and then the machine.

[David Thompson]

Good afternoon,

 

I tend to agree, I liken it how we chose a car forty years ago, it was a major decision and everything

concerned you, maintenance - tyres - potential to rust etc.

 

today you walk into a show room and have a wonderful machine that will be old fashioned before being worn out

the power of the cars also staggers me for the size of engine and the actual requirement to move the car 

 

Cameras have reached that hurdle and the manufacturers have excelled in their competition and must somehow

keep us on the treadmill

 

David 

[milandro]

Yes, a very good afternoon to you too.

 

Without any doubt there is always a need to innovate in any field but innovation has to serve a purpose.

 

The original sparkle to open this thread made me look around the internet and I found this most interesting page.

 

http://www.johncairns.net/Papers/consumerism.pdf

 

there are many quotes at the beginning of the paper but this  struck me as very significant, to me ( other will no doubt disagree).

 

Only he who knows what is enough will always have enough.

Tao Te Ching, Lao Tsu 

Edited March 16, 2017 by milandro