BernardC Posted March 17, 2018 Share #221 Posted March 17, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think the Fujinon GF23mm has better resolution and sharpness than the S24 in my own comparison and experience. Can you post some examples? The reason I ask is that neither lens should be particularly strained in terms of sharpness, given the pixel density. I'm surprised you could find a consistent "sharpness" difference at all. In my experience, the S lenses really stand-out in terms of how they handle back-lighting, flare, and micro-contrast. They are also unusual for medium format because they deliver full performance wide open (a stop or two faster than the competition, at the wide end). Sharpness doesn't come into play; they are sharp edge-to-edge, at every aperture, until diffraction shows up past f:11. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 17, 2018 Posted March 17, 2018 Hi BernardC, Take a look here New S 008. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
xiaubauu2009 Posted March 17, 2018 Share #222 Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) Can you post some examples? The reason I ask is that neither lens should be particularly strained in terms of sharpness, given the pixel density. I'm surprised you could find a consistent "sharpness" difference at all. In my experience, the S lenses really stand-out in terms of how they handle back-lighting, flare, and micro-contrast. They are also unusual for medium format because they deliver full performance wide open (a stop or two faster than the competition, at the wide end). Sharpness doesn't come into play; they are sharp edge-to-edge, at every aperture, until diffraction shows up past f:11. Like I said before. It might be the synergy with the sensor. The lens produce a crisper look than the Leica S24 on the S007. S24 definitely is among the best there is for wide angle MF. GF23 S24 Sorry, subject matter is too different. And the best bit of the GFX that I have forgot to state, is that for the 1 year I have using it... I have never need to clean the sensor at all and I have never need to do any dust removal in PP.... it's almost god like in repelling dust..... a miracle really considering it's a mirrorless. I don't know what Fuji did to their sensor but it's quite amazing. Edited March 17, 2018 by xiaubauu2009 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted March 17, 2018 Share #223 Posted March 17, 2018 Doesn't the Fuji have an optical flat in the images path, keeping dust away from the sensor? Mind you, I haven't had any dust issues with the S, but others may have. People blame the flat for the fact that lenses that adapted should cover the sensor aren't quite as sharp as they should be (in theory). That's not an issue with native lenses. It's very had to see any significant difference in sharpness between your two down-sampled files. I will have to take your word that there is a difference, and that it is noticeable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted March 17, 2018 Share #224 Posted March 17, 2018 Doesn't the Fuji have an optical flat in the images path, keeping dust away from the sensor? Correct, there is a glass plate 9 mm in front of the sensor - to keep the sensor free from dust and to reduce the visibility of any dust on the mentioned glass. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan.y Posted March 17, 2018 Share #225 Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) And here're some informed speculations about the customizations Fuji made on the sensor to maximize "sharpness" at the expense of some light-gathering capability. Edited March 17, 2018 by alan.y 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZHNL Posted March 17, 2018 Share #226 Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) Like I said before. It might be the synergy with the sensor. The lens produce a crisper look than the Leica S24 on the S007. S24 definitely is among the best there is for wide angle MF. GF23 S24 Sorry, subject matter is too different. And the best bit of the GFX that I have forgot to state, is that for the 1 year I have using it... I have never need to clean the sensor at all and I have never need to do any dust removal in PP.... it's almost god like in repelling dust..... a miracle really considering it's a mirrorless. I don't know what Fuji did to their sensor but it's quite amazing. I had a complain about 24S WO corner performance(until f8). However, at f11, it clear out, which I used most for my landscape work. At f11, Diffraction is better than 35mm system for the pix density given its bigger sensor. So I will not hesitate using f16 if I need extra DOF or longer shutter. Center performance is top class right from WO. I don’t expect anything better. There is no CA at corner which many SWA lens struggle. I have no experience for FUJI23, and didn’t follow it either so I can’t comment how they two compare. Edited March 17, 2018 by ZHNL Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted March 17, 2018 Share #227 Posted March 17, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Doesn't the Fuji have an optical flat in the images path, keeping dust away from the sensor? Mind you, I haven't had any dust issues with the S, but others may have. People blame the flat for the fact that lenses that adapted should cover the sensor aren't quite as sharp as they should be (in theory). That's not an issue with native lenses. It's very had to see any significant difference in sharpness between your two down-sampled files. I will have to take your word that there is a difference, and that it is noticeable. I always have to clean the S for oil spots and dust spot. Every time before a trip and also mid trip. You can see in the sample from the Leica. It has spots on them. The 9mm glass gap on the Fuji does do wonder. There seems to have not much issue with adapted lens as far as I have tried. Nut adapting M lens on it is not that good. But that is yo be expected. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted March 17, 2018 Share #228 Posted March 17, 2018 I had a complain about 24S WO corner performance(until f8). However, at f11, it clear out, which I used most for my landscape work. At f11, Diffraction is better than 35mm system for the pix density given its bigger sensor. So I will not hesitate using f16 if I need extra DOF or longer shutter. Center performance is top class right from WO. I don’t expect anything better. There is no CA at corner which many SWA lens struggle. I have no experience for FUJI23, and didn’t follow it either so I can’t comment how they two compare. One thing about gfx is that f16 should avoided. Diffraction is very obvious. I think it has to do with with 5 something micron sensor pitch. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2018 Share #229 Posted March 18, 2018 One thing about gfx is that f16 should avoided. Diffraction is very obvious. I think it has to do with with 5 something micron sensor pitch.Whats Deffraction please?Neil Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #230 Posted March 18, 2018 (edited) When light goes through a small aperture, it spreads out like water waves passing through a narrow break in a barrier. This makes lenses slightly blurrier at high f-numbers. For MF, f/8 or f/11 is fine. After that it gets noticeable. But if you need depth of field, a little blur is preferableMatt Edited March 18, 2018 by mgrayson3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frame-it Posted March 18, 2018 Share #231 Posted March 18, 2018 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction Whats Deffraction please?Neil Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #232 Posted March 18, 2018 Also, the smaller the pixels, the easier it is to see diffraction. If the effect is smaller than the pixel, it’s hard to see. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2018 Share #233 Posted March 18, 2018 Thanks Matt and ? For the explanation. I’ve been shooting my S and Hassy at around f16 and can’t really say I’m seeing anything funny. I will look out for it though Neil Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #234 Posted March 18, 2018 Neil, People go crazy over the least important things. I wouldn't hesitate to use f/16. Diffraction blur cleans up very well with a little sharpening. Something blurry because it's too far from the plane of focus is much harder to fix. The current S and SL have 6 micron pixels. Your 100MP has 4.9 micron pixels, so diffraction will be more visible. The next S will have, I believe, 4.5 micron pixels, and so the issue will be slightly more pronounced. But it really is way down the list of things to be worried about as far as IQ is concerned, let alone photography. Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #235 Posted March 18, 2018 Neil, People go crazy over the least important things. I wouldn't hesitate to use f/16. Diffraction blur cleans up very well with a little sharpening. Something blurry because it's too far from the plane of focus is much harder to fix. The current S and SL have 6 micron pixels. Your 100MP has 4.9 micron pixels, so diffraction will be more visible. The next S will have, I believe, 4.5 micron pixels, and so the issue will be slightly more pronounced. But it really is way down the list of things to be worried about as far as IQ is concerned, let alone photography. Matt I have used Zeiss 120mm f/4 macro with f11 and f16... the IQ dropped quite significantly on the GFX smaller sensor pitch. It is un-fixable by a little sharpening or de-hazing... f8-f11 is so pin sharp but once you go to f16, the IQ drops off the cliff. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #236 Posted March 18, 2018 Thanks Matt and ? For the explanation. I’ve been shooting my S and Hassy at around f16 and can’t really say I’m seeing anything funny. I will look out for it though Neil I think the bigger sensor pitch and also the way the micro-lens is designed will have less impact.... I consistently shoot the IQ3-100mp at f16 and notice no significantly lost of IQ, but not so on the GFX. Leica S is fine too at f16, the degradation is not as bad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZHNL Posted March 18, 2018 Share #237 Posted March 18, 2018 (edited) Neil, People go crazy over the least important things. I wouldn't hesitate to use f/16. Diffraction blur cleans up very well with a little sharpening. Something blurry because it's too far from the plane of focus is much harder to fix. The current S and SL have 6 micron pixels. Your 100MP has 4.9 micron pixels, so diffraction will be more visible. The next S will have, I believe, 4.5 micron pixels, and so the issue will be slightly more pronounced. But it really is way down the list of things to be worried about as far as IQ is concerned, let alone photography. Matt To be Fair, for this particular diffraction matter: The microcontrast of image will be lost when diffraction happen. Sharpening can helps definitely but the multi-thousands dollar prime lens will be similar as zoom lens at f16 in term of IQ. My best lens always perform best at f2~f5.6 cross frame, most Leica S glass can reach peak at f5.6 cross frame, some even earlier. S24 is not, but the thing is for my SWA use, either WO for other stuff on center or f8~f16 for landscape, I seems always mainly fighting with DOF for foreground stuff, so this(unsharp corner before f8) is again not an issue. Edited March 18, 2018 by ZHNL Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.