Does Sensor Size Matter? Camera Sensor Size Comparison
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 лип 2024
- We compare 4 sensor sizes to see how they compare in print image quality: Hasselblad X1D II 50C, Sony a7R IV, Sony a6600 and Panasonic GH5. See how much difference there is in the Medium, Full-frame, APS-C and Micro 4/3 Sensors. Special thanks to our friends at LensProToGo and Datacolor for helping us make this comparison possible. #sensorsizecomparison #sensorsize #formatcomparison
15% Discount on rental gear at LensProToGo: SLANTEDLENS15
LensProToGo: www.lensprotogo.com/
Datacolor: bit.ly/2lZk8Bi
Enter the GIVEAWAY: theslantedlens.com/giveaway/
Check out our gear for sale: theslantedlens.com/gear/
Hasselblad X1D II 50C
B&H: bhpho.to/2yKVkJs
Amazon: amzn.to/2zfnJIc
Hasselblad XCD 45mm
B&H: bhpho.to/2zUrDq1
Amazon: amzn.to/2zWhpFk
Sony a7R IV
B&H: bhpho.to/3cO9MQb
Amazon: amzn.to/3g6acTZ
Sony a6600
B&H: bhpho.to/3bP4rH1
Amazon: amzn.to/3ghs5zk
Sony 35mm f1.8
B&H: bhpho.to/3e4Kw8e
Amazon: amzn.to/2z7T67E
Sony 50mm 1.4
B&H: bhpho.to/2XdkQ2G
Amazon: amzn.to/2TpiSeh
Panasonic GH5
B&H: bhpho.to/2Tr2Vo5
Amazon: amzn.to/3g3NXOq
Sigma Prime 32mm
B&H: bhpho.to/2zXhzfD
Amazon: amzn.to/3e4JMzY
Panasonic Pancake Prime 40mm
B&H: bhpho.to/36kSyHt
Amazon: amzn.to/3g3KG1L
Follow The Slanted Lens-
Facebook: / theslantedlens
Twitter: / theslantedlens
Instagram: / theslantedlens
---
GEAR USED:
Canon C200
B&H: bhpho.to/2FJaH8d
Amazon: amzn.to/34aYAbJ
Canon 24-70 2.8
B&H: bhpho.to/2OCKjgl
Amazon: amzn.to/2O871PH
Sony A7 RIII
B&H: bhpho.to/2DZYHut
Amazon: amzn.to/2QFH0Zu
Canon EOS R
B&H: bhpho.to/2roExVE
Amazon: amzn.to/2QEnk8s
Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 G2
B&H: bhpho.to/2J2wp4j
Amazon: amzn.to/2KCVw0v
Tamron 28-75 2.8
B&H: bhpho.to/2FsWNno
Amazon: amzn.to/2KJ3rcD
Tamron 17-28 2.8
B&H: bhpho.to/2ItePur
Amazon: amzn.to/37qnWVh
KLM audio module
B&H: bhpho.to/2qqbyUG
Vanguard VEO 2 Pro 263CPV
B&H: bhpho.to/3495qhT
Amazon: amzn.to/2KGGiYr
Platypod
B&H: bhpho.to/2W7xqQx
Amazon:
Spyder X Studio
B&H: bhpho.to/3ga6DMi
Amazon:
__
Support The Slanted Lens by shopping our affiliate links:
Weekly Photography Deals & More: bhpho.to/2AxlpH2
Amazon- amzn.to/1T7Z20D
---
Subscribe to The Slanted Lens and get new videos every Thursday
bit.ly/1RgdYoM
Visit the webpage: theslantedlens.com
Visit our SPONSORS
Tamron Lenses: bit.ly/2mZgkoz
SKB: www.skbcases.com/
Platypod: www.platypod.com/
Westcott: www.fjwestcott.com/?acc=d09bf...
Luminar by Skylum: macphun.evyy.net/c/2073517/64...
Datacolor: bit.ly/2lZk8Bi
FotoproUSA: www.fotoprousa.com/
LITRA: litra.com/
Triple Scoop Music: www.triplescoopmusic.com
Morgan Photo Retouch: www.morganphotoretouch.com
TSL Store: theslantedlens.com/tsl-store/
Jay P. Morgan has been working as a Commercial Photographer and Film Director in the Los Angeles area for more than 20 years developing an impressive list of clients from Paramount to McDonald's. Jay P.'s experience with elaborate set design and extensive lighting are key to the success of his illustrative work.
Support The Slanted Lens by shopping our affiliate links:
Weekly Photography Deals & More: bhpho.to/2AxlpH2
Amazon- amzn.to/1T7Z20D
this video shows nothing. you don't make proper adjustments to achieve similar "looks" based upon aperture and focal length (or if you did: you didn't tell us). You don't hold yourselves to any sort of standard or metrics (you could use a "price limit" or "best that money could buy" setup for each format, or anything really but you don't). You use a 3rd-party multi-format lens on the Lumix (the Sigma 16 is designed to accomodate both APS-C and M43 and is not M43 specialized). You also use 3rd-party budget lenses on both Sony cameras (with a lens intended for full frame format being used on the APS-C camera). Also, if you are testing the formats, then you should either print them with no adjustments, or with light/shadow adjustments ONLY, so calibrating your monitor is pointless.
Not to mention you use cameras with different specialties within their formats. The Sony A7Riv is pixel-dense and sacrifices low-light capability in exchange for ample-light editing headroom and resolution. The Lumix GH5 and Sony A6600 are both primarily video cameras and for stills, especially lowlight long exposures, you would fare better with a Fujifilm APS-C and an Olympus M43 in their stead.
This wasn't scientific, this wasn't even a test, this was a waste of time and load of bullshit.
You sound like a camera sales person. Thanks for your insights.
@@TheSlantedLens What was the price difference between the lenses you compared?
@@TheSlantedLens Not in the least bit, just someone who likes science and respects the scientific method.
@@pandahero1 They used a $2700 lens on the Hasselblad, a $400 lens on the PanasonicLumix, and $300 Lenses on the Sony's.
@@TheSlantedLens YOU sound like a Manual Format camera sales person with your inaccurate and biased video.
OP would've had a stronger position if he didn't sound so bitter in the comments and accepted the reasonable criticism of his methodology.
I think calling it methodology is an insult to anyone that has actual methodology. This was just complete laziness.
Thanks for watching and thanks for your comments!
Optimal aperture should have been used for all cameras. On m4/3 it would be around f4 or less.
Good point. Thanks for watching!
Check out the new version we just posted! We shot everything at an f4 as recommended. ua-cam.com/video/aQH-LVZwahk/v-deo.html
@A Google User Translation: "I don't like people trying to make money for the time and effort they put into creating content for my benefit."
Cool dude. Have a great life.
The fuzzy is coming from the lens.
Very possible. Thanks for watching!
the fuzzy may be from the lens, but the noise or the lack of colour isn't.
@@deim With proper setting of the aperture and camera you can make the all images at base ISO. They shot on tripod!
Color reproduction is not that much depend on the sensor but rather on lens and processing, except using higher ISO values.
1. Try the G9 in High Resolution mode. Sure it won't beat Medium Format but the difference will be significant.
2. The photograph is only as good as the photographer.
3. Professional use is relative, your needs are not everyone else's needs.
4. Versatility and price matter, a sacrifice on sensor size can be made intentionally.
5. It's worth acknowledging that technology will improve and offset the current test.
6. Constraints can provide a form of creative liberation, expensive & large gear can become a limiting obsession.
As far as this test which is fairly clinical in nature, I agree the results are what you expect.
I enjoyed the accuracy of the test but not so much the bias towards larger sensors.
Great comments. Thanks for your support.
Why didn't you use the best lens Sony FF lens...Tamron 35mm 2.8 not exactly best quality
Sometimes we're limited by what's available. And the Tamron isn't bad at all, especially at f5.6. That said, lenses do matter.
That lens is pretty dang sharp.
It was the colours of the Tamron that may have been less accurate
@@davidlord9217 no.
I agree!! Most people don’t seem to notice. By the way.. this video is sponsored by Tamron (see the beginning), so that is why they partnered it with the Tamron. They should have chosen the Sony FE 35mm F1.4 or the Sigma Art F1.4 or hell.. take the Sony FE 35mm F1.8 or the Rokinon/Samyang AF 35mm F1.4. All these lenses are better than the Tamron (which is no shame as the Tamron is way cheaper). This just seems silly to me.
Yeah put them all at F8 and disregard diffraction, nice job...
Thanks for watching and keep on clickin!
@@TheSlantedLens WTF even is this reply? This video is misleading garbage.
@@robertivaniszyn840 crank those numbers mate, it seems like it's the only reason such comparison could be created.
@@robertivaniszyn840 somebody is upset.... Brand Slave, perhaps?
It’s pretty interesting to see how close the Sony a7RIV & A6600 are.
Lol subjective I guess. I saw a big difference
They were very close in parts of the testing.
I agree, in some parts they are very close.
I could definitely see the difference between the medium format & the A7R4. The difference between medium format and full frame was so much bigger then the difference between the full frame and crop sensor.
It's not because this test is nonsense. They didn't even try to make it an even playing field. This test is the equivalent of putting a new 2020 car against a used 2010.
The GH5 really shouldn't have been shot at f8 in that dusk situation. I shoot 5.6 in daylight settings. 3.5 or 4 would have been more appropriate. Throw in Topaz DeNoise AI and you have a great print sharp all the way through. Modern software makes old 6mp sensor prints look amazing at very large sizes like 40 x 60.
Great insights. Thanks for sharing!
@@TheSlantedLens
I'm a print designer and we use AI all the time to enlarge low-res photos. It works like magic.
Printing four-thirds shouldn't be a big problem.
I think this comparison is making too much out of the highlight differences. Properly exposed to the right this is a non-issue - but puts more strain on shadow recovery. In this case, putting the 4433 camera at F10, the 35mm camera at F8, the APS-C camera at F5.6 and the MFT camera at F4 would give the same DOF and exposing to the right would allow for a true comparison of what can be achieved on a tripod. Could you make a follow up video where you set the cameras to equivalent F stops and adjust either exposure time or ISO correspondingly? For a light trail image you might want to fix shutter speed and adjust ISO but for many landscapes, shutter speed on a tripod can help to improve the smaller sensors a *lot*.
Good ideas. Thanks for your thoughts and thanks for watching!
I would love to see a video comparing a $5000 Medium Format to a $50,000 Medium Format Camera.
That is an interesting idea. It would be great to compare the Phase vs Hasselblad.
Interesting comparison. The amount of difference one would see (IMO) really does depend on the use case scenario. Outside of landscape and fashion photography viewing a print is not quite so common. Under most less strenuous situations I doubt the differences would be as noticeable. If I were trying to make a living with my work I would choose the appropriate tool for the type of work I was doing. Right now I shoot apsc and it works well for my needs. However I am not trying to make a living with my work.
Totally agree. Every line of work requires a different approach.
I am no expert. But if it comes to low light shooting with Micro Four Thirds, please let Robin Wong do the tech.
PS. The lenses you use for the GH5 is (are) a joke.
Thanks for watching. Keep on clickin!
Great video , I have Lumix GH5 and Hasselblad X1dii , I use them for different purpose. I love both of them , they are the best
Nice cameras. Thanks for your support!
Outstanding comparison, Thanks! Would have enjoyed seeing the Fuji XT-3 or 4 for the ASPC comparison... different company, Bayer sensor. Very informative!
We shoot the Fuji XT-4 Olympus-D, Sony A7R4, and GFX100 today. Look for that comparison soon. Thanks for your support.
Would have been interesting how the 80mp Highresmodus on Lumix G9 looks vs. the others.
That would be another interesting comparison. Thanks for your comment!
Wow, huge difference. Would love to see the Xt3/Xt4 in the mix.
That would be interesting. Thanks for watching!
You kind of did.
An interesting test.
I would have thought that the Sony would be closer to the Hasselblad than it was.
Perhaps another comparison with perhaps the Fuji Medium Format as well as a Sony A7R4 rival would be interesting.
Thanks for the suggestion. I have added it to out list.
Sensorsize matters, plus 16bit color resolution vs 14bit on the Sony.
Thanks for the efforts. There are definitely many ways to do this type of testing and I’m guessing you wanted to show some fundamental differences. The color gradation and dynamic range were interesting. Given that, I’d be curious how lens quality impacts a given sensors results and if this can be seen in a print. It would be nice to see how a pro grade lens influences results in a print. As well as using the optimum aperture for a given lens. Having Fuji, Canon, Nikon and Olympus would be cool as well although I realize it goes beyond the scope of your test. But it would be interesting. I’d also be curious how the high res mode on Olympus would influence the results in a print compared to not using it. I’ve seen digital comparisons but not in print. Maybe a cool series would be how to optimize based
Sorry hit publish by mistake. But a cool series may be how to optimize output for a given sensor size and what does actually make a difference. Thanks again for your efforts.
Thanks for your suggestions and thanks for watching David! Appreciate the input!
Properly exposed those crop and m43 sensor cameras hold up pretty well, especially considering the cost difference between them and the full frame / medium format camera and lenses!
Overall they all took nice images!
I would have liked to see the Fuji shown ! I think Sony a7r4 definitely hit above it’s price point. Super cool video though :)
Fair enough! Good thoughts. Thanks for your comment!
The Sony doesnt hit above its price point. I see a lot of differences between mf and ff (tonality, grain,..).
As someone who shoots Phase One, this comparison is exactly why we shoot medium format. I should point out, however, medium format also has both full frame and cropped sensors and the Hasselblad is a crop sensor and even better results come from a full frame medium format sensor.
A lot of people make the mistake of thinking medium format is about resolution. It was, back in the film days, but in the digital world it is about color depth and tonal range. The cheap medium format cameras like this Hasselblad get most of the way there, but a full frame medium format sensor gives the ultimate in good results and allowing the photographer to work the image.
Having said that, I use cameras with all sizes of sensors right down to the GoPro, and everyone of those sensors is capable of being the best sensor size for the job it is suited for. There is never a universally “best” sensor, just sensors that are best for the job in hand.
Thanks for the insight man! I totally agree with you on the last point, and I would love to get my hands on a larger sensor MF body to experience the best that digital photography has to offer.
Very good points. Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment!
Do you know how does it compares when you use the super high resolution modes where the sensor shifts in the sony vs regular pictures of the hasselblad? Thanks
We did not test that. That would be an interesting thing to do.
I was wondering to see also the bokeh and depth of field...nice video!!
Great ideas! Next time. Thanks for watching!
Considering the price differences I think you should have gone at least for Olympus em1 mk3 for micro 4/3, for the color science is quite different. And it also has this 50mpxl res mode. I think the result would be different.
Probably would be. We will consider that on the next one. Thanks for your comment!
Cool Video, made me want a medium format camera, but out of my budget....
We know what you mean. You can still get great images with the other cameras. Keep on clickin!
Thanks for a great comparison. As you say yourselves, what you think the result should be, is what it is. However, if you shoot understanding the limits of each camera, the differences only really show themselves as significant at the extremes of lighting conditions. Also, the lens makes a huge difference and this needs to be taken into consideration.
If you haven't already done one, could you do the same comparing a Leica Q2, the Fuji X-T4 and the new GFX 50 S II.
We will add that to our list. Thanks for your comment!
The only way to really compare these sensors is with a blind test. I noticed that the reviewers giggled before they discussed m. four-thirds for example, and praised the Blad like it was made in heaven and I think I saw one of the reviewers drool a little bit when he mentioned the name Hasselblad. While we would obviously expect the Blad prints to be better, the reviewers preconceptions are easily seen here. Blind tests, where the prints are laid out with no indication of what camera was used, would yield a more meaningful comparison. For a comparison more relevant to the average photographer, the prints should have all been printed at the same resolution, even if this means smaller prints, and then judged by somebody who had no idea which were which. That would be an interesting and more relevant comparison.
Some interesting thoughts. Thanks for the suggestions!
I would love to see a video about that color matching procedure you introduced, maybe you already have it published?
You can learn more about color management on Datacolor’s website: www.datacolor.com/photography-design/academy/blog/
Hi I have a very specific request which you might be able to answer..if we compare the pixel size on a6600 sensor vs a7r4 ,a6600 is better... So does 6600 perform at least equivalent to a7r4 in same condition (looking for noise comparison)....
We found that the a7R IV was better when it came to noise.
Just the comparison I was looking for! Too bad you never mentioned how you captured the images in terms of f-stop and image crop, because that way you didn't really compare the four cameras, but really just stated that it is possible to take a cleaner image with a medium format camera than with a full frame/aps-c/mft. I'd love to see a test exactly like this, but with the cropfactor calculated into the focal lengths AND the f-stops, so that the sensors really all get the same amount of light! :)
Great suggestions. Thanks for your insight!
We just posted a new sensor size comparison where we did some tests using equivalent apertures across the different formats. Would love to hear what you think! ua-cam.com/video/aQH-LVZwahk/v-deo.html
Do you have a video about what you said for calibrating colours please?
Not yet. You can go to the datacolor site for some tutorials: www.datacolor.com/photography-design/support/
Nice to see your camera straps blowing in the wind causing camera shake @ around 1:30s
Good eye. Hang in there and keep on clickin!
This is actually something I wish I had learned earlier on. It's hard to get the perfect amount of camera shake, and it's taken me a while to find the right straps with the proper width and weight to get the effect I like. Of course wind conditions affect things too, but I'm pretty happy with the results here.
Understanding that this is a sensor test but the glass in front of the sensors has A LOT to do with perceived resolution and color rendering to the sensor . But overall results are what I would have expected. Especially the Hasselblad
Mark Williams rather have a lower end camera with good glass.
Yeah, lenses do make a big difference.
It will be interesting if you resize the apsc and micro 4/3 files and then compare the new print resolution to the other two cameras. Please!
That is a good suggestion. Next time! Thanks for watching!
Interesting that the Hasselblad seems to have struggled getting detail in the portrait shot. All 3 of the others seemed to have more texture to the skin, but the Hasselblad seems to have struggle. Was this down to the lens/camera, or did the narrower depth of field from medium format make it harder to get in focus with the same aperture?
Not sure. Something to check into. Thanks!
It would be interesting to see how this test turns out now that the GFX100S is out and Fuji has a 40megapixel X-H2 and X-T5 APS-C camera too. As sensor technology moves on, the dynamic range, color, and detail is going to keep improving. I remember going to a gallery who boasted about their 12 megapixel medium format images, that an APS-C camera would crush today. I think they paid about $25K for that camera too.
Yeah, it is amazing how technology is improving so much and so quickly!
"It's not the size, it's how you use it."
Guy with a small sensor size.
Jeff Duke only people with small sensors say that ;) lol 😂
Nevermind I didn’t see the bottom line!
LOL. Stating the obvious.
In this case, don't use the same F stop across different sensor sizes? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Tell it too mine wife
Didn't take into account the fact that you have to also times the aperture by 2 on micro four third sensor. Epic face-palm.lol
We are doing an equivalency test this week to explore how equivalency effects different formats.
Altough f8 will not be optimal with smaller sensor and that diffraction will not be the same, in term of light it makes perfect sense not to change the aperture regarding the format. There is no "face-palm" here. Any lens designed for micro4/3 will gather one quarter of the light collected by the equivalent lens designed for full-frame, at the same aperture. But in the meantime, a micro4/3 sensor is one quarter in surface of a full-frame one. So, at f2.8, f4, f8 or any other given aperture, both micro4/3, full-frame, APSC lens collect exactly the same amount of light PER SENSOR SURFACE. It would have made no sense to change the aperture of this test regarding to the sensor size (but OK, for diffraction and optimal sharpness, the test is flawed)
New comparison is up where we shoot with equivalent apertures like you said. Check it out! ua-cam.com/video/aQH-LVZwahk/v-deo.html
Nice video, however I would have liked the Fuji MF 100MP in that row of test camera's to see the difference between the 100MP and 50MP MF.
But maybe in the future.
What should also be taken in consideration is the quality of the lense(s), but overall the point is made.
Thanks for sharing.
That would be a very interesting comparison. Thanks for the suggestion.
lenses go with the cameras though. You can hardly get away from a lens//body combo compared to another. Maybe upgrade lenses on the sony?
And I will like to see a Oly OMD E-M1 Mark III High Res shot in the same line but why to bring the latest if you can diminish the advances in technology by comparing a 3+ year old MFT against the latest from other formats, that by the way the same company Panasonic has a G9 model for the steel photographers out there instead of the video engineered GH5, so this videos are for the very unhappy UA-cam watchers or just bored out of our minds this days......
@@steveglassphotography2825 sure but when it comes to quality you can't give the camera all credit. Basically you marry glass and date a camera , so invest in good glass!!
@@ombertoyaa The MF sensor ist older than the mft sensor, I guess 2014. Fuji GFX 100 would have an new one, "high res" mode, too.
Might have been worth while having an A7III in the test too... I think the huge drop in IQ between the A7rVI and the APS-C/M43 cameras had as much to do with the big drop in resolution as it did sensor size.... the A7III would made for a more interesting comparison for the impact of sensor size..... Similar to the X1D2 to A7RVI comparison where much of the difference was obviously the size of sensor (and image processing)
Good points. Thanks for your comment and thanks for watching!
This is interesting... But we should keep in mind that those are also different lenses and they allow slightly different amounts light to the sensor. Even for the same F stop number. Which also affects the result.
Good point. Agree 100%. Thanks for you insight!
A totally fair point. I wish photo lenses used the T-stop measurement like cinema does.
Right, but at f8 the differences between f-stop and t-stop arent playing a big role compared to f-stops below f2
The Hasselblad also have a 16-bit RAW images, Sony 14bits, others probably also 14bits (for pictures), so this adds to the quality of the picture. PS: Good job on this video!
Good point! Thanks for your comment!
Hass does not use 16 bit.
I struggle to understand why you used a GH5 over a g9 when it comes to photos? Also, isnt Dynamic Range more tied to Pixel size and not Sensor size?
Jonathan Ormandy
Probably the Panasonic camera they had with them. Would be interesting to see what the G9 and EM1mk3 would do.
@@willrogers3702 thats my theory on the use of gh5.
Jonathan Ormandy
My friend uses a GH5 for his video business but also uses it for photos. It’s actually quite impressive, especially when you think how old it is now.
@@willrogers3702 yeah, I got one and love it, got a g9 on the way too. the Gh5 takes great photos. but, the g9 can do hi res.
We tested the cameras we could get ahold of. Next time we will do some other suggestions. Thanks for watching!
On those higher resolution small sensors you were measuring lens resolution, not sensor resolution. Basically, the very, very best lenses can barely handle 120 line pairs/mm. Film photo lenses use to be around 60 lp/mm. The Hasselblad was at 94 lp/mm, the A7R4 at 133, the A6600 at 127, and the GH5 at 149. The high density has always limited APS-C lenses. Really anything over 20MP in an APS-C (118 lp/mm) is pretty is more for marketing than photography.
The A7R4 should only be compared to the X1DII with the best Sony GM lenses, not one from Tamron. The A6600 has the same problem, but the best APS-C lenses are the Sigma 18-35 and 50-100. A Sony GM or Sigma prime also. The GH-5 just wasn't going to happen. For video the image is 3840x2048...not a problem.
The low light meant the big sensors had lots of signal strength, the small sensors were starved for photons. If you had shot in studio or in daylight, the small sensors would have had a much better dynamic range.
You should have shot a MacBeth card and calibrated it in post. The color rendition is both in the lens (a strong point of the old Leicas) and in the filters on the sensor. With the random lens selection the test is pretty meaningless here.
In video cameras and in some smartphones oversampling (e.g. 4 sensor pixels for 1 image pixel) allows direct sensing of each color rather than the demosaicing algorithm of the Bayer array.
Thanks for all the insight!
The did not only a resolution test. I See also a lot of other differences in colors, tonality and noise
Lots of great points. Thanks for sharing!
I REALLY would’ve liked to have seen how the A7iii or A9 did in conjunction with the other choices.
You and a lot of people. Thanks for the suggestion and thanks for watching!
Meaningless review. Misunderstanding of how cameras and lenses work. The “laugh” about m43 is telling. Conflating cause and effect.
So sorry you did not like it. Thanks for letting us know how inept we are. More to come on this topic.
@@TheSlantedLens I don't think you're inept. There sounds to be a fair amount of bias and misunderstanding and the impact is the outcome is skewed-that people who don't know as much now have a notion that smaller sensors can't produce quality images. That is false. Granted, a lot of ways medium format will win but it isn't a foregone conclusion. There is a great deal of responsibility on the internet to share valuable and valid information. As someone who has also shot with everything from iPhone cameras to medium format (Fujifilm) I can say that the only people who care much about sensor size are those who don't understand cameras and, therefore, on a UA-cam channel, propagate misinformation. I have photos hanging in museums shot with m43, APS-C, and 35mm sensors at the same size you show and people gawk at the photos because they are great photos. Only a select few have asked about what I shot them on but no one ever then says "well, that's why they could have been better." There was discussion about the quality of the stars in the image-that is not related to the sensors. The gradation of the cool tones to warm tones also may not be the sensor but the lens too-another example. That isn't to say that the whole system isn't to be taken into account when buying in-it is to say that this test doesn't do any of those systems justice. Not the medium format, not 35mm, not APS-C, not m43.
I would have liked to see the latest Olympus camera with the high res mode enabled. As you stated the Panasonic is geared toward video, the Olympus would be more geared to photography. And using a pro lense.
Good point. I added it to our list for next time.
Might you be able to do the same but with fuji MF and APS-C Xt4 and with an entry Sony A7iii? And G9?
Good suggestions. I have added your ideas to our list.
I have no experience with medium format cameras, but have read that they have shallower depth of field. Assuming this is universal for medium format cameras, wouldn't you have to use a smaller aperture on the hasselblad to get the same amount of image in focus as the full frame?
It would be interesting to throw these files into photoshop and use the stylize/find edges filter on the files. This will let you verify what parts of the image are in focus on each image, to confirm whether or not they have similar fields of focus at F8.
Difference between the hasselblad and a7riv seems negligible, particularly since these are suboptimal lighting conditions. Also, the A7RIV appears to be far sharper than the Hasselblad, particularly in the kitchen portrait photo. For sure the hassellblad is a letting in a weeee bit more light to give that slight advantage in color rendition and lower noise. However, both of those advantages are easily fixable in post. The A7RIV offers so many advantages to the Hasselblad thats its very difficult to justify the premium, particularly when you are just paying for a bigger sensor, and losing the speed and autofocus of the sony.
You make a lot of great points. You do need to use a smaller aperture to get the same depth of field. f4 on the medium format seems very close to 2.8 on the full frame. They are very close to one another in image quality. I feel the Hasselblad edged out the Sony slightly but you don't have a lot of features that the A7R4 comes with. Great comments. We are out testing again this week and will have more findings. With the indoor portraits the Hasselblad was slightly out of focus. That was human error. Thanks for your comments.
AARRGGHH.....great job on the video, BUT it really has me in a quandary! I have a Sony A68 (APS-C) with a few Sony lenses. It has been in my closet for a long while as I find that my cellphone works well for the travels due to size and weight. Recently we booked a 4-week trip to South Africa trip for Dec 2024, during which I turn 79. Well, I got out the Sony and put on an 18-250mm lens and was surprised at how heavy it fells. So, I've been looking at P&S bridge cameras with wide-range zoom lens. I wondered what the downside would be to the 1/2.3" sensor. Well, you confirmed my fears that I could be losing a lot dynamic range and detail. I really don't think I would ever need a large print. So, do you feel that a camera like the Canon PowerShot 740 HS would be acceptable? Or, would you have another similarly priced alternative?
This is where I wish portable drones had larger sensors (though I guess size is a limitation in the sky!). The largest sensor on a DJI folding drone is a four thirds and will be prone to graining in high contrast situations. I guess it is a pay off between amazingly unique composition and sheer quality.
I have to compromise by using ETTR!
Eventually they will get there!
Interesting video even if very debatable on many aspects . Mostly, the Hasselblad lens is way above the others wich would be still relevant if they were the main pro choice for the subjects but i doubt they would be . It also shows how much better a 'specialty' tool does over a jack of all trade one . I mean that when you shoot a still subject using a tripod , of course the Blad should win big time .
As for post, a top noise-reduction software is a must for crop sensors. I also find a sophisticated interpolation software like OnOne Perfect resize a must have for large prints from 24mp or less sensors. My point is : when you adapt your workflow to your file, you close part of the gap in the final result. It might not still be enough for pro use but it works fine for many of us.
I am going to look into OnOne it sounds like a great solution. Thanks for your comments.
@@TheSlantedLens OnOne is a nice suite of modules but i currently only use the Perfect resize 10.5 wich is already a few years old. In this category , Alien Skin Blow out is supposed to be slightly more powerfull but at the risk of artefacts wich i don't see in OnOne .
I first calculate the dpi from the original file to decide if it is worth it . Above 200, i won't proceed . When i do, i bring the file from my main editing software already with the right ratio for the print , tell OnOne wich target size and 300 dpi . I then check the resulting image in 'original size' to see if the details are there. I have proceed this way from a 16mp Lumix M43 G85/Lumix 42.5mm F1.7 at F4 (about 10mp cropped) and a Nikon FF 24mp D610 /Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro at F4 (about 16mp cropped) for 24x36 inches prints . Amazingly, looking very closely, the fine details are there.
On the other end, it is not always the case . I wanted to do the same with a Sony Nex 5N/Meike 35mm f1.7 at F1.7 but it failed as no more details than the original where 'found' on the screen, therefore i did not print that large. This is a cheap chinese lens that i really like for its unique tonality rendering, the picture was at close range and very little is in focus. All these where shot at low iso.
I don't have a hi-res camera to compair...but you do . Theorically, details can not be created but it is bluffing. I conclude that it is a great tool for occasionaly making huge prints from modest resolution system like m43 wich have great portability and versatility . It also make sense if you still like the rendering of some vintage glass on full frame as these won't usually benefit from higher res sensors.
But there is more that might interest you : cropping . Let's say you take a shot with your Hasselblad at mid-distance , then the same scene with same lens but from much further... you then crop heavily for same view and use Perfect resize before print and compare...
Great video. Thanks for sharing
You bet! Thanks for watching!
Since many are requesting other medium format comparisons, please add Leica S3 to the mix if you can. Different sensor to the others I hear.
Great suggestion. I have added it to the list.
Good study. Impressive. Thanks.
You are very welcome. Thanks for your support!
Don't underestimate how amazing is the Hassy glass. There should go some of the credit ,apart from the 6+ years old medium format sensor. At least in the first comparison.
True that. Thanks for your insight.
One important factor.Hasselblad has 16 bit, Sony has 14 bit for single shoot. Gh5 has 12 bit. Sony apsc has 12bit for long exposure NR/bulb and continues mode. The same wih fuji xt3. Fuji says nothing about it, but just check the files from fuji with rawdigger software.
For m43 it was worth checking out m1mii/m1miii. You have checked the latest apsc and ff sensor application but the oldest and not best for 20 mpx m43. For image resolution, lenses have a bigger impact than the number of mpx. It's not about the type of sensor, but how you can use it.
Good points. Thanks for watching!
Print calibration, profiling. For me, a couple years ago, the choice between Datacolor and X-rite was arbitrary, except. X-rite had the DNA of trusted brands from the film calibration days like MacBeth and others. And the "ColorChecker Passport". My choice was not better motivated than that. I have no complaints and they have been great at supporting me as a tiny user.
Now I see how you click on each square in the profile print, running the densitometer through a slot in a guide. I saw you do that, Jay P, and thought, "really?"
I print, set the software, run the device as a handheld scanner over lanes of squares (no clicking, no pausing) - very smooth operation. If i had to really click all those squares like that, the first time scanning would be the last time for me.
i1Studio - monitors, printer-ink-paper, projectors. Create profiles with the camera/lens/light-type with the passport and everything falls into place - color and tone. They have an app to create a "mixed profile" where you had two types of light alternating between shots, like an indoor event with outdoor light through windows. I can do about the same with the naked eye, but it takes much more time and attention.
Sharpening, contrast, dodge/burn, ..., crop, keystone, ..., artistic choices, ..., client desires, ..., retouch, ... - lots to do still and if we can reduce work elsewhere. Still remember retouching negatives.
Lots to think about. True about so much to do and not enough time.
@@TheSlantedLens - what, no time? Because of all those clicks? The fun. Of course, you have a business to run. Totally appreciated.
I don't have to earn money with it anymore. Is photography a hobby in that case? You know the definition of hobby: maximize spending while minimizing utility. No, that's not what I do, to be honest.
I like the video, how about comparing the Hassy with a Fuji GFX R and through in the Nikon D850?
Good suggestion. I have added it to our list of ideas. Thanks!
nice test. a nice bonus would’ve been a cell phone. perhaps iphone 11 pro. just to see how computational photography stacks up. maybe next episode?
That's an interesting idea. We will add it to our list!
Glad to see Slanted Lens “keeps on clicking” thru the quarantine... almost have to keep the price of these cameras systems right there with the images to keep things in context.
(Still messing around with my Nikon / Ninja Z6 ProRes RAW video commitment but Apple FCPX still doesn’t support the new codec with a profile and Atomos hasn’t delivered any LUTS, leaving us intrepid explores w/o a workflow... either use the Sony3/Cine profile - since Sony still makes the video chip - or use Nikon’s LUT for Nlog and color grade from there... 🤨)
Sounds like you are "Keep on clickin" as well. Thanks for your comment!
Wow, never expected this difference between the Hasselblad and the FF Sony! Incredible
They are both great cameras. It really comes down to how you shoot.
They use a $2700 native lens on the Hasselblad, but can't do better than a $300 3rd-party lens on the Sony? Or even use a proper-resolution FF camera?
What lenses did you use? Why change the color? What about pixel shift or High Res modes? Why not ETTR? So many variables not touched upon, making this comparison seem not serious at all. It would be like judging every capability of the Hasselblad by its ability do bird photography, it just wouldn't be fair
So many things to cover so little time. Can't do it all in one video. Next time!
to have comparable result shouldnt you have different apertures as the same aperture will give different results in depth of field for example on different sensor sizes
We chose a single aperture to look at sensors. But if you want to look at different apertures take a look at this lesson: ua-cam.com/video/WhEtMQXutBg/v-deo.html
For portraiture that is certainly true. That's one of the reasons we chose the landscape scene that we did: at that distance, with that wider angle view on each camera, the differences in depth of field are imperceptible.
@@TheSlantedLens you made the right choice. You want to compare Sensors not looks or effect of lenses
You are very correct. If they used the same f number between all shots, then this whole test is invalid. The shots are not the same. Just because its stopped down so we cannot see the difference in depth of field does not mean the shots are technically the same.
For such a test the difference is this: the depth of field is controlled by aperture size (the actual aperture size - we just set it using the f number). The size of the aperture also determines how much light can enter the camera. So if we change the aperture size and hence change the depth of field then we're also changing how much light is going in.
So if we're testing how well two cameras will perform on an identical shot, it MUST be technically identical: same field of view, same _technical_ depth of field, and same shutter speed.
To make an identical shot between two different sensor sizes one *must* change the focal length (to keep the same field of view), change the f number (to keep the aperture for depth of field), and change the ISO.
@@TheSlantedLens The look at the same aperture is different though
In most of the comparison images I tried but couldn't see the difference. Of course the GH5 had a lot of noise in some images. But overall it seems sensors are all pretty good these days.
Totally agree. Cameras are so advanced. Thanks for watching!
what happens at 8:37 with the color grading in the video? :O
Good point. Thanks for watching!
Are Sony´s full frames all bad with the colour noise? It seems like even their aps-c sensors are better at handling noise. Also, it seemed to me like the Hasselblad, albeit being better with the city shot, was not as sharp as the a7R IV when indoors from what I can see here.
It may have been the camera person.
This it's true entertainment for us photographers and videographers! Thanks for your time!
Our pleasure! Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for your support!
No Canon, Nikon or Fuji? Also if the lenses aren’t equal how do you compare sensors? Many APS-C and cheaper FF lenses aren’t too enough for the new 32MP APSC or FF sensors.
Good points. Next time! Thanks for watching!
Why would you use the Sony A7RIV as the FF option? It has almost medium format resolution. Wouldn't going with a 24mp FF be more representative of what's in the FF market?
We wanted to see if it would test out the same as the medium format. Thanks for watching!
Great, great review and analysis. I am so grateful when someone like you folks do the real hard work to get very practical information out. 95% of the reviews out in the market are talking heads that are youtube camera celebrities -- but you never see their work -- or get actual tests done. I work with a Sony A7RIII full frame -- and I travel on adventures in very remote parts of the world -- I cant go back after visiting due to visas or risks -- so knowing the best tools are so helpful -- allowing me to make smart decisions. Thanks again.
So glad you found it helpful. Good luck with your adventures!
It would be a good if you would focus X1D II correctly :) as then it's even a bigger difference.
Thanks for watching! Keep on clickin!
The A7R IV is a modern marvel. The X1D II appears to have a sort of magenta cast to my eyes (not unlike my old 50S). Can't wait to see if the Canon R5s 90MP rumors are true. I think Fuji is going to have a difficult time justifying their bulk & price over the next 2-3 years. I loved my 50S, but the a7riv produced better (and more in-focus) images than the 50S.
Good to hear your experience and thoughts. Thanks for sharing!
I would like to see the same comparison with better sharp lenses as the fuzziness comes from lenses.
Also would like to see comparo of
Gfx 100 vs x1d vs Sony a7r4 vs gfx50
All with sharp lenses.
Good ideas. I have added your suggestion to our list!
Thanks but would have been nice to have several very different photos in different light conditions compared.
Great suggestion! We will work that in next time.
The same result would happen between a 35mm negative and 6x7 medium format negative. So, nothing new here. What other outcome could there be?
There is sensor development, so its interesting to see
True that. The outcome was pretty much what we expected, but still super interesting to see them all lined up together.
Wouldn’t this comparison make more sense if you had tried to take the same image with each camera - with the same depth of field? This would involve setting the m4/3 camera to f4, the apc camera to f5.6, the ff camera to f8 and the medium format camera to f11 (say). Diffraction softening would also be avoided and it would give a much more relevant “low light” comparison.
Great points. Thanks for sharing!
Watching the video of your camera straps wildly waving in the wind invalidates all your testing. Random camera shake inevitable.
The wind wasn't constantly blowing.
Still was on a tripod. You mad?
You should add the FUji small medium format and a 1" sensor comera (like rx10iv) to get the full range.
Another time. Thanks for the suggestion!
@@TheSlantedLens Also if you want an alternate source for large print I have an HP3200ps and I am in the Los Angeles area.
Very interesting comparison, and well executed! Thanks for the effort.
Glad you liked it! Thanks for your comment!
Nice comparison. For us mere mortals a lower megapixel full frame is the sweet spot. Still good dynamic range and noise performance. For a big print shoot a pano.
Great comment. And the affordability is an important thing.
You mean that for you specifically, you prefer a lower MP FF. Don’t try and speak for everyone else re the sweet spot
You could get very good results with the D850 camera too but you should have tried the Fujifilm cameras in Medium Format and Crop Sensor to show better quality difference. I have shot fashion runway models on the Fujifilm X-T10 and they look great. I am looking forward in getting the new X-T4 for better professional work.
Great suggestions. Thanks for watching!
@@TheSlantedLens You are welcome!
I am surprised by how soft the the hasselblad is. The difference between a phase with the HC mkii glass is night and day. You guys really should test a proper medium format system.
So many options out there. Another time.
Using Standard shooting pretty well what everyone expected with the big looser being the Pano but take the new shooting science of say the Olympus Em1 mk3 and it could be a different story.
Yeah, that is a good suggestion. Thanks for watching!
The Hasselblad looks so goooooooooooooooooooooooood 🤩
Yep it does. If you can afford it, go for it!
@@TheSlantedLens Not realy a point and shoot, fast focusing monster, is it. ;-) More a niche kind of product.
valcked Ding Ding Ding!
Would like to see how Fuji X-Trans sensors compare.
Great suggestion. I added it to our list!
Would have loved to see a sigma foveon sensor in there as well.
Yeah, too many choices out there.
Interestingly I bought a 50MPX Canon 5dsr to use as a family runabout. Our studio and location based GFX50MPX - erstwhile known as 'Old Clunky' owing to its size (although in fairness not our biggest camera) does not even get into the same county let alone ball park of our GFX but surely it should be the same but it is not .So the question is what makes them different? It can't be the sensor - or at least shouldn't be. It might be the lenses - but my thoughts are is that it must be the processor.
If you look at the Fuji's flagship GFX100 - it's size determines that there is a lot going on behind the sensor, heat dissipation notwithstanding there must be some serious processing going on. I am surprised that the like of Canikony do not offer two versions of their cameras in the way that Fuji does. Many pros like myself will always buy a grip - if the camera came with one permanently attached but offered a beefier resolving power of the sensor surely that would be a win? But then maybe I am not taking all the 'video' ladies and gentlemen into account. Perhaps then Canikony are concentrating too hard on this one area of hybrid camera - a one size fits all which ends up fitting no-one? Who knows but adding MPX numbers are just headlines for sales. The Sony A7RIv for instance is a good stab in the right direction and what with its pixel shifting capabilities which is far too difficult a concept in the real world of editing but it is still nowhere near the GFX50's in terms of overall quality of output which lets face it is the final printed picture?
Lot's of great insights. Thanks for watching and thanks for sharing.
Great conparation
Thanks for you comment and thanks for watching!
I agree with most of the comments here. You bill this as a sensor size comparison, but the single biggest variable in image quality is lens quality. In any event, it's near impossible to draw conclusions from any sort of test when you are changing multiple variables at the same time, other than the obvious: 1) larger sensors give better quality images, and 2) lesser quality lenses will give lesser quality images.
All true. Thanks for sharing your point of view!
The results are what I would expect ... but I wonder how much of the difference is the quality of the lens.
That is a good question. Something to address in another video.
Interesting discussion especially around noise in smaller sensors. But they lose me when they say "M43 for only snapshots" and then these fellas go onto to show 24" prints as a comparison. That's kind of ridiculous. How many shooters even among some pros are printing 24" prints as a judge of output. I would challenge them to be able to pick out these 4 cameras on a properly exposed 11 x 14 print or even 16 x 20. I'll bet from a reasonable viewing distance they could not tell the difference.
They actually all looked pretty great in the prints. We could see the differences up close.
Can you compare fujifilm gfx 50s vs hasselblad x1d ii 50c
Great suggestion. I have added that to our list.
@@TheSlantedLens
Thanks. I am following you with great interest.
Cool. Thanks
You are welcome! Thanks for watching!
Interesting video, i do find it a pity you did not use native lenses on any camera; except for the Hasselblad. There can be a difference in resolving power of lenses; equally for color rendering, focus, etc.
The XCD 45mm f4 P costs 1000$ (on a 6000$ camera); the Tamron 35mm 2.8 Di III OSD is 299$. Maybe you closed the other lenses also to F4?
Great insights. And money definitely talks.
All lenses were at f5.6, which should mitigate some issues. It you are right that lenses do affect the outcome of the test. We’re a small operation here, and resources are limited 🤷🏻♂️
If dynamic range becomes an issue, why not use exposure bracketing, then blend is Photoshop or Lightroom ?
That wasn’t the point of the exercise. They are trying to see the tru capabilities of each sensor/glass from a single frame.
Definitely a good solution if you are dealing with that in your images.
i cannot understand, why you shot long exposure shot with the straps still attached on the cameras, the straps were moving a lot in the wind, that means movement, shaken photos ??+
Good point we are out shooting another one today and will remove the straps. Thanks
You are getting hammered in the comments and downvotes - and frankly you deserve all of them. This is the most ridiculous "comparison" I have yet to see on UA-cam and I've seen a lot of those. You're comparing pro glass to third-party consumer grade/entry-level glass. You guys are supposed to be professional photographers - you *KNOW* that lenses are as important if not more so than the sensor, right?? You're putting a medium format sensor paired with a $1100 lens up against smaller sensors using $299 lenses. It's almost like you "proved" nothing at all in regards to the sensors and everything about the quality of the glass you mount on those sensors.
The idea is to compare them and see how much difference there is. Of course the medium format would be better. The question was, how much better?
Just posted a comparison where we used high-quality lenses for all the formats (and all new cameras too!). Would love to hear your thoughts: ua-cam.com/video/aQH-LVZwahk/v-deo.html
Well because everyone is chiming in on what camera to do another around of tests. So I’ll just add mine, I would like to see a wet plate camera .
Whoa, now that's a twist. I will add it to the list.