Lenses optimized for 40mpx?

[G_Fernando]

One question, how will the 16-80/f4 and 10-24/f4 lenses behave with the new 40mpx sensor? Will they be optimized for such resolution?

[BobJ]

From my experience with both of those lenses I would say no. Remember though that you will get an improvement using them with 40mp, just not as much as with the sharper lenses. How much of an improvement I don't  know. Resolution is determined by the product of all the system components.

[Herco]

Fuji has published an overview of lenses which in their view are optimized for the new 40MP sensor. In my opinion people are reading way too much in that list. Two examples: the relatively new 16-80/f4 is not on that list, while at the same time it is the preferred kit lens with the X-T5. Second example: the 10-24/f4 WR isn't on that list either, while the 23/f2 is. Now the latter has known issues with corner/edge sharpness esp. at f2 and when close focusing. When you look at the data that e.g. Fototest.de publishes about these lenses, you see that the 10-24/f4 WR is way sharper than the relatively 'soft' 23/f2.

My conclusion is that the list was composed for marketing purposes and that you can safely use the lenses you mention on the 40MP sensor and still be able to 'see' the increase in resolution. It will be different for every lens, but the difference between e.g., the 35/f2 and the 23/f2 (both on the list) is just as significant as the difference between the 16-55/f2.8 (on the list) and the 16-80/f4 (not on the list).

Just a reminder re. resolution. When you print your images 20x30cm, you most likely won't see any difference between the 26MP and 40MP sensor. The difference will appear as from approx. 45x70cm prints and larger (at 300dpi). The two main purposes of higher resolution cameras are (a) print bigger and (b) crop heavier. True, many users look at their screens and zoom it at 100 or 200% and 'see' the difference, but that's not how you look at images.

So, unless you print big or crop heavy, 40MP are not a 'must have' and the differences between the different XF-lenses will remain unnoticed. In fact, it's also good to bear in mind that 40MP come at a cost. I did some tests with a X-H2 on loan compared to an X-T3 that we still have, and it showed that at ISO3200 and above the 40MP sensor is substantially noisier than the 26MP sensor. That might be also something to consider before jumping on the 40MP bandwagon. 

Edited November 14, 2022 by Herco

[mecsw500]

10 hours ago, Herco said:

Fuji has published an overview of lenses which in their view are optimized for the new 40MP sensor. In my opinion people are reading way too much in that list. Two examples: the relatively new 16-80/f4 is not on that list, while at the same time it is the preferred kit lens with the X-T5. Second example: the 10-24/f4 WR isn't on that list either, while the 23/f2 is. Now the latter has known issues with corner/edge sharpness esp. at f2 and when close focusing. When you look at the data that e.g. Fototest.de publishes about these lenses, you see that the 10-24/f4 WR is way sharper than the relatively 'soft' 23/f2.

My conclusion is that the list was composed for marketing purposes and that you can safely use the lenses you mention on the 40MP sensor and still be able to 'see' the increase in resolution. It will be different for every lens, but the difference between e.g., the 35/f2 and the 23/f2 (both on the list) is just as significant as the difference between the 16-55/f2.8 (on the list) and the 16-80/f4 (not on the list).

Just a reminder re. resolution. When you print your images 20x30cm, you most likely won't see any difference between the 26MP and 40MP sensor. The difference will appear as from approx. 45x70cm prints and larger (at 300dpi). The two main purposes of higher resolution cameras are (a) print bigger and (b) crop heavier. True, many users look at their screens and zoom it at 100 or 200% and 'see' the difference, but that's not how you look at images.

So, unless you print big or crop heavy, 40MP are not a 'must have' and the differences between the different XF-lenses will remain unnoticed. In fact, it's also good to bear in mind that 40MP come at a cost. I did some tests with a X-H2 on loan compared to an X-T3 that we still have, and it showed that at ISO3200 and above the 40MP sensor is substantially noisier than the 26MP sensor. That might be also something to consider before jumping on the 40MP bandwagon. 

I too think the list is probably neither accurate nor helpful,. A 40MP sensor compared with a 26MP sensor is not a huge difference in pixel density and I doubt if any of the newer Fujifilm glass is really limited in resolution by the glass itself compared with the sensor. Going from a 26MP sensor to a 40MP sensor is only like approximately 1.25 times the number of pixels horizontally and vertically. That is not a huge difference in terms of resolution. If the glass is fine in real world use on the 26MP cameras I think it is going to be just fine on the 40MP cameras. Canon EF glass seems to work fine on denser pixel counts on newer Canon R bodies and Nikon F lenses seem to work fine on denser pixel counts with the newer Nikon Z bodies. My 23mm f/2 gives great results on my none IBIS equipped bodies so I'm sure it will work just fine on X-H2 bodies. Some X-H2 users already say the 23mm f/2 works better on X-H2's than earlier bodies because of the eye focus ability with video makes it a great combination. I think my Fujifilm glass will outlast several future generations of camera sensors before I even think of replacing any of them. Heck, I even get great results from my better 1980's Olympus Zuiko lenses on adapters if used in a "sympathetic way" and they were designed nearly fifty years ago. I too worry more about sensor noise than megapixels to be honest.

[mecsw500]

I took all my Nikon AI-S FF and AF DX lenses and mounted them via adapters on my 26MP Fuji sensors. They seemed fine to me. I did the same with my Olympus Zuiko lenses and they also seemed fine. The ones I was worried about were the Nikon DX lenses as I was using them for D200 10MP cameras. But, with the exception of the Zuiko 70-140 F4 zoom, they all seemed fine to me. Some of the older lenses had inferior coatings so you had to be more cautious about flair but I couldn't see any real inferiority to be honest.

Now for the Nikon 28mm F/2.8 AF-D, to be fair, released around 1994/1995, it was not of very good optical quality on either Nikon FX or DX cameras at the time. It appeared inferior when I tried it, against my 35mm AI-S F/2.8 on a D200, and that 35mm f/2.8 was not that brilliant a lens either, so I didn't buy it. At the time the lens was considered worse than either the earlier 28 AI-S or even the then contemporary 28-70mm zoom. If I recall it was based on a 6 element design derived from the E series lens, of which the 28mm E series was not Nikon's finest. So to me this would have been a case of a not terribly good lens in the first place, not being very good on a 40MP sensor. I'm sure it would have been passable on the 6MP sensor, but it wasn't very good on the 10MP D200 DX one. I'm sure it was getting noticeably bad on the 16MP sensor, even worse on the 26MP one, so by the time it comes to 40MP it's probably truly awful.

However, if you look at the quality of most of the current and recent Fujifilm lenses, they are generally starting at a much higher quality baseline, so I still think jumping from 26MP to 40MP is not going to make them look significantly inferior. OK, some might look better wide open than others if pixel peeping, but I personally wouldn't bother rushing out to replace anything Fujifilm that I think looks good on the 26MP sensors on a 40MP one. Other brands, especially third party ones, might be a bit iffy, but the Fujifilm glass in general is pretty good at 26MP and therefore I think will handle 40MP without too much trouble.

I'll guess I'll see if and when I get a Fujifilm 40MP body whether this holds up, but I'm not going to not buy a Fujifilm lens that's not on "the list" in the meantime ,for fear it is going to look bad on the 40MP sensor in the future.