Stop OBSESSING Over SENSOR SIZE! 102MP (Fuji GFX100s) vs 26MP (Fuji X-T4)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 кві 2021
- Go to www.squarespace.com/markdenney to get a free trial and 10% off your first purchase.
🔘LIGHTROOM VIRTUAL SUMMIT (May 3rd-7th)
VIP Pricing 👉 geni.us/LRSummit
🔘Download My FREE Guide to Mastering Light
markdenneyphotography.com/join
In this week’s episode, we discuss why you should stop obsessing over sensor size, and I conduct a real world comparison between the new 102MP medium format Fuji GFX100s and the 26MP APS-C Fuji X-T4. Now I'm not a guy who relies too heavily on a camera's specs as what matters most to me is what I can see with my naked eye. On paper the medium format Fuji GFX100s should blow the APS-C Fuji X-T4 out of the water, but I wanted to put the comparison to the test in a real world scenario during my recent trip to Utah.
In this video, I take you along on a hike to an overlook that I've never been too before, but have seen images of, to perform this Medium Format vs APS-C camera test. I picked this location as it's a vast and tremendous scene that stretches for miles. I figured this would be a great scenario to test the resolution of the 102MP Fuji GFX100s and the 26MP Fuji X-T4. Also, I get to this location as the sun is rising which also creates a good opportunity to test the dynamic range of both of these camera sensors as well. So nothing real scientific here just a real world comparison to see if the difference between the Medium Format and APS-C is so great that you can easily see it with your naked eye! I hope you enjoy this week's video and thanks for watching! - Mark D.
MEDIUM FORMAT SETUP
🔘FujiFilm GFX100s: geni.us/B0sKNO
🔘FujiFilm 32-64mm: geni.us/qRSQO
APS-C SETUP
🔘FujiFilm X-T4: geni.us/x-t4
🔘FujFilm 10-24mm: geni.us/fuji10-24
RECOMMENDED GEAR PAGE
🔘geni.us/myfavoritegear
PHOTO GEAR I USE
🔘Stills Camera: geni.us/M8SIy
🔘Action Cam: geni.us/oRhupMT
🔘Super Wide Lens: geni.us/superwide
🔘Long Lens: geni.us/longlens
🔘Super Long Lens: geni.us/longtelephoto
🔘Favorite Tripod: geni.us/rrstripod
🔘2nd Tripod: geni.us/fotopro
🔘Favorite Backpack: geni.us/actionx
🔘2nd Backpack: geni.us/explore40
🔘Ballhead: geni.us/rrsbh40
🔘Filters: geni.us/nisikit
🔘Big Filter: geni.us/widepolarizer
🔘Printer: geni.us/canonpro1000
🔘Backup: geni.us/gnarbox2
🔘Full Photo Kit: geni.us/photokit
🔘Full Video Kit: geni.us/fullvideokit
🔘Shimoda Camera Backpacks
Use Code DENNEY10 for 10% Off
shimodadesigns.com
WATCH THESE PLAYLISTS NEXT
🔘Composition Tips: geni.us/composition
🔘Beginners Guide: geni.us/BeginnersGuide
🔘Editing Tutorials: geni.us/Editing
🔘Tips & Tricks: geni.us/TipsandTricks
FAVORITE TOOLS & SERVICES I USE
🔘TubeBuddy: www.tubebuddy.com/MarkDenney
🔘Music & Sound Effects I Use: goo.gl/Qh9scf
As an affiliate marketer & Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. I earn a small commission on the above links if you decide to purchase the item at no additional charge to you.
#landscapephotography
*LETS CONNECT*
Newsletter: markdenneyphotography.com/join
Instagram: / markdenneyphoto
Facebook: / markdenneyphoto
Twitter: / markdenneyphoto
What do you shoot with?
I shoot with an XT-3, best camera I've ever owned!
@@walkermorris954 It is a great one!
I shoot with a nikon d5600 and I love it!
Sony A7RIII!
Panasonic lumix s5!!
better title: me trying to stop obsessing over sensor size but failing 😉😉😉
Good one!!!
The X-T4 file is slightly more exposed than the GFX file, so it makes sense that the X-T4 colors are more washed out, doesn't it? :)
It would also be interesting to compare the details at no more than 100% of the X-T4 file.
I kind of thought that too. In the first set, the darker areas of the picture were brighter on the XT4 than the GFX100s in addition to the highlights, so I kind of felt like there was an exposure difference between the two. I think there would have been a better result with the XT4 with about a 1/2 less exposure. That said, I still want the GFX 100s. That's the next one on the block for me.
I learned that two cameras from different brand or even different models have different output at the same settings. ISO is basically meaningless number that makes them roughly the same, but not exactly. And even when images seem roughly the same, RAW files can have exposition - they may be underexposed which makes highlight recovery easier or they may have more saturated highlights and less noise in dark areas (or greater dynamic range with both ends better)
The gfx file was created like a minute earlier or so. At sunrise this makes a big difference. Would be nice to see them on 2 tripod's taking a pic at exact th same time and set to a way that the pictures are equally lit. That would be nice ;)
@@Fordham0815 Exactly, at the same time. And the same lens. Otherwise, it's not a fair comparison.
@@noplastik I don't think you really need the same lens because they are two different Systems. And he wants to compare these Systems and not just the sensors. But the timing and base exposure makes a HUGE difference. When comparing the dynamic
I appreciate all the extra video work you do with your B roll filming , that has to be a lot of extra work for you and time consuming but it pays off in your final video !
I know you said most of your work is through social media etc. but I'd love to see if there's a notable difference when the images are printed at a size you might typically use for your work...
Tries to make a video about why you should "Stop OBSESSING Over SENSOR SIZE!" Proceeds to make a video about why you should obsess over a sensor size.
Mark, it was great to meet you in Utah at Outsiders, your presentations were great. Thanks for being there and sharing your knowledge and passion.
Love your videos man! I’m still currently using a cropped sensor camera (Canon T7i) and I’m loving it. Learning the basics of landscape photography and portraits. You landscape videos are a huge help with composition 🙏
Pretty much the same here, I have an SL3. I like to outgrow my gear no matter what the hobby. To me learning so much that you need a new camera and not WANT one is the best. It's the same with cars, I could buy an extremely fast car off the lot but, I prefer upgrading along the way as my skills increase.
@@riothero313 That’s a very good way to put it!
I’ve been to Zion five times and every visit feels like the first time I saw it. It’s like no other place on earth.
do you know any other gorgeous place on earth where you would not say this? Since retired, we live in a gorgeous place. Every day we make long walks. Every time it is different. Every day I look at it differently.
Hi Mark, a good comparison will be if you print both images and then compare the quality/details of the two images side by side.
I forget the video but someone did this, maybe Peter McKinnon or friend. They did blind tests of same images, different cameras and it was super surprising they kept guessing wrong haha. They blew it up poster size too.
@@dp91c Yeah I saw that too. Was like a really old DSLR body with something like 12MP vs a modern 40+MP and the difference was negligible.
Printers don’t print details beyond 150dpi
@@daydaykeyis lol what? Even consumer printers print at 300dpi and professional printers can do 600 or even 900dpi. If you were printing this as a 12'x9' mural for an art gallery you'd absolutely be able to resolve every bit of detail when viewing up close
@@dp91c yeah i also saw that peter video as well but we're talking about a medium format camera vs a crop sensor camera... If you printed them side by side anyone (even non-photographers) would be able to tell which one was the gfx (not because of the amount of pixels). Have you ever seen what a medium format print looks like? They're unbelievable
Great comparison. Makes me feel more confident that my MFT is still the best choice for me
Thanks for watching Wim!
I find myself using my Sony RX100M6 more and more (1" sensor).
There's a huge jump between M43 offerings and the X-T4, if you leave the base ISO.
It wasn't a good comparison, because the GFX was shot later and the dynamic range of the scene was lower, thus feeding into the expectation!
They're not identical shots. Sun is probably one stop brighter in X0T4 photo, because it is earlier.
Amazing information Mark that one would look forward to while making a switch. Your videos are always very practical, to the point and loaded with information. Thanks a ton for brining out such unique content 🙏🙏👍👍
Medium Format is cool, but 100 megapixels eats a lot of data. I'm good with my Sony a7iii.
Zion is really at the top of my list - I just cannot get enough 🤩🤩
Amazing place!
You should check out Observation Point while you're there. That's where you get that really iconic Zion shot. It's amazing
The hike up Many Pools to Deertrap Mountain is really nice
I decided years ago to be a luddite and stop the camera upgrades and focus more on enjoying photography... still LOVING my 5dmk3!!
thanks for the video
Great Tom. I still have my Sony a6000 and see no reason to upgrade, but have to admit I still keep looking - just like with my wife.
Excellent presentation. Thank you. The medium format resolution is impressive. What actually surprised me is how well the 24mp crop sensor camera did. But as they say in drag racing, there's no substitute for cubic inches. Seems that applies to sensor size too.
Mark as you’ve stated you can see the difference. I have a 24mp and new 47mp camera, there is a difference in tonality, detail (without pixel peeping), depth of field, etc. Across a range of subjects it is a plus. With that said everyone has to decide what works fir them.
I’ve been to that spot 3 times now. It’s an awesome view!!! Biggest difference in the images is the brightness. I would have turned down the exposure compensation on the XT4 to match the other camera. Then, I bet the color and tones would look much more similar. -2/3rds, I’m estimating. I often shoot landscapes at -1/3 or -2/3 with my old XT1. At that same location, I was using -2/3 to -1 1/3 range, if I remember, to keep the blue sky and the color on the distant peaks. The EC dial is my most used adjustment.
XT4 does look overexposed.
Setting same exposure won’t guarantee both are exposed the same. Lenses may have same f-stop, but likely slight difference in their unspecified t-stops. Also, bodies likely have differences in their ISO accuracies.
@@teesee03 I agree. And, slightly over processed, to my eye, in the edited version....
@@teesee03 Can we ask the sun to stay in place and to get the same amount of light? I think no ... while the bodies were replaced the light amount has changed.
@@vaidaskazlauskas185 I assume it was done rapidly for a valid comparison.
An independent lightmeter would have confirmed it of course.
Generally if someone is asking what equipment you use in relation to an image, they’re asking the wrong question. It should be does that image move you? Very few images are technologically driven.
Another great video Mark! Youre always in depth. I enjoyed taking photos at this location nearly 10 years ago now.
Great video, and very interesting to see the side-by-side comparison! I was particularly interested in the dynamic range and color rendition.
I shoot with a Canon 90D (an upgrade last year from my Rebel T6), and am totally happy with it. To your point, I'm not sure in typical settings anyone would tell I wasn't using a full frame or larger sensor. Besides, you shot with the X-T4 professionally for quite a while, so crop sensors can't be all bad 😉
Biggest "flaw" of the GFX 100 for landscape is that it has the exact same pixelpitch as the XT4/3. As medium format has a much shallower DOF you will need to stop the lens aperture down a lot more to get everything in focus. The result is that diffraction starts a lot earlier. To counteract that effect you would need to do focus stacking (not fun with three 100MP files).
You are so wrong on so many levels 😅
@@claudianreyn4529 I am 100% right about it. If you say I‘m not you‘re saying physics is wrong 😃. The diffraction on the 50R/S starts being visible at smaller apertures than f11. With the 100 MP GFX sensor (or 61MP on full frame/ 26MP on APS) diffraction will already be visible at f8. As you would often use an aperture like f11 or smaller on the gfx when shooting landscapes, the gfx 100 will have a much softer look compared to the gfx 50. There are many professional landscape photographers complaining about that and end up selling the camera because the only way to counteract diffraction is shooting at a bigger aperture and therefore focusstacking images (you end up with a 1GB image)
@@claudianreyn4529 on top of that many things are wrong with the information in this video. Shooting at the same aperture with different sensor sizes is bullshit, he should have shot the images with equivalent settings. Different exposures on both and saying something about dynamic range without even touching a slider. And so on… not a very useful video I‘m afraid.
I agree about the video, but the 0.79 factor applies to the aperture as well, so f11 means aprox f8 in terms of 35mm, but compared with X-T4 is actually 0.5. So f11 on GFX means f5.6 on X.
On top of that the GF primes are better.
@@claudianreyn4529 yes that‘s what I‘m telling you. In order to get the same DOF you will have to stop the medium format down more than full frame or APS. Diffraction on both APS and GFX will start at around f8, but in order to get the same DOF with the GF you will need to stop down more (about f16 in this case) which will lead to more diffraction. This is actually a problem for landscape photography (as you often want everything in focus from front to back)
Having a big-sensor camera is like having a zoom lens built into the body. You can crop the photo and still retain detail. But for an amateur like me, the cost is just too great. Heck, I can't even justify full-frame.
You can get a good full frame from ebay used if you hunt. I picked up a 6D for £400 (body only) and it was boxed like new. Just had to blow dust off the sensor and clean the mirror. Got a used 24-105mm L lens too for around the same money. Even at f4 the bokeh is delicious zoomed in. My cheapo 50mm looks good too.
@@ArcanePath360 Ya the Canon 6D was the best value for entering the full frame world. I started with a uses 5D MK2 before I get a brand new 6D on eBay but bow that I have a mirroless R6, I would never do back to a mirror for sure! Even the cheap RP would be a pretty good choice.
Jumping from APS-C to FF isn’t a big transition tho. Better invest to a good lenses and if budgets allowed go from APS-C to Medium Format.
@@PanzerIV88 Why would you say mirrorless are so much better?
@@ArcanePath360 Mirrorless is better for more accurate focusing especially when using extremely fast glass f1.2, f1.4, Eye AF and face/animal tracking. You can easily check exposure in the electronic viewfinder as you shoot. If all you shoot is landscape and general street/ travel then mirrorless doesn’t offer any major upgrade. Oh I forgot one other you tend to get more frames per second in mirrorless cameras and it’s less noisy as no mirror to move out the way. In the future coming cameras with improved sensors electronic shutter will make them silent!
Loved the story and experience at the beginning! Looks like you’re getting familiar with Capture One 👍
Hello from Sweden! I wish to thank you so very much for this most interesting comparison! (I am considering to purchase the Fujifilm GFX 100s) ! Wishing you both health and safety and all the best!
In Sweden a GFX100S cost 7000$ and then lenses to that. I think my better half would say "have you lost it completely" 😀
Assuming you've already converted to U.S.$, that's "ONLY" 16% more than the U.S. price. Are you the man of the house, or a mouse? ;-)
The GFX has twice the resolution of XT4 not 4 times. It has 4 times the number pixels but twice the resolution. Almost everyone gets this wrong
Huh? What do you think resolution is?
You probably are speaking about sensor size. And still your statement is incorrect. APS-C sensor size is 16x24 = 384 mm2, MF 33x44 = 1452 mm2. So APS-C to MF is 1:3.8 (almost 4).
you just killed the sales arguments of good sales men :( You should say everything, in all great details, as often as people love to hear it, everything, but ... the truth
@@simankus No I am not. The responses I am getting proves my point that most people don't understanding resolution. Resolution is not a function of just pixel count. You have to consider resolution in two dimensions. Why? because a photo is a 2 dimensional object. To understand that, consider two sensors, each with 24 million pixels but one that is 6000 pixels wide and 4000 pixels high and another that is 1 pixel wide and 24 million pixels high. They have the same number of pixels but the second one can't resolve anything unless you are photographing a worm 1 pixel wide.
So, resolution is a function of width and height.
Imagine you have a sensors that is in 3x2 format and has 3000 pixels along the x-axis and 2000 pixels along there y-axis, given you a 6 MP sensor. If you want to double the resolution you will need to double the pixel count in both directs i.e. 6000 pixels along the x-axis and 4000 pixels along the y-axis giving you a 24 MP sensor. 24/6 gives you 4 meaning that to double the resolution you will have to increase the pixel count by 4 times.
Now, there is a small matter of sensor's resolving power which is function of pixel density (number of pixels per unit area) but that is different topic.
@@Amaraldo See my reply below. It is not question of what my definition of resolution is. It is a question what is the accepted definition of resolution,
Mark I’ve been to Zion Overlook a number of times and as soon as I saw the metal foot bridge I know where you we’re headed. It is a great view. The Fuji does have great resolution...
I've watched two of your videos featuring the Fuji GFX100s, trying to get a bit of handle on medium format. Very informative and I think very balanced and objective. As a complete amateur who's dabbled in digital and Photoshop, I can follow you easily, which speaks well to your prep. The compare/contrast approach you use is very useful to a potential purchaser. Really good work and appreciated.
Might be fun to do a comparison with a 50-60 MP Full Frame Mirrorless camera with the Fuji GFX100s?
Quite a lot of such comparisons were provided on the Internet, as a result of which full-frame cameras obviously lost even GFX50
Someone did a video of a GFX 100S vs The Sony A7Siii
@@thephenom6327 yes with properly edited photos on a large screen, but when edited to look the same, or when put on something that will crush the photo such as social media sites, you can't tell the difference.
@@neogod29 of course, but such a technique is not acquired in the first place in order to simply post photos on Instagram or Facebook - for these purposes even 24 megapixels are redundant, 6 is enough.
FF cameras have a major lens advantage. In terms of horizontal field of view, the GFX's widest lens is about a 20mm equivalent - simply not wide enough for some landscape photographers.
Hi, Mark. Very interesting review and comparison. One thing I wanted to call-out is, when you mentioned the comparison of dynamic range and color rendition differences between the two, the X-T4 was at a higher ISO but same shutter speed and aperture. So, because the X-T4 is overexposed, it's going to be brighter and appear more washed out because of the higher ISO setting compared to the 100S. Ideally, having both cameras at the same iso and aperture, and let the shutter speed adjust so that both images have similar histogram shapes would be a much fairer comparison. My guess is that if you reduced the exposure on the X-T4 image by 2/3 of a stop, it'd be a much closer comparison. As far as what I shoot with, I shoot with a Nikon D850.
This. One shot was 1.6x brighter. They are not equivalent.
Thanks Mark! My brother and I are quite happy for now. But I'm looking to up my game! But as others have noted, no one else seems to notice except other photographers. I'd like to see a print comparison though, as that's what I'm doing.
Thank you Mark, excellent comparison. I have a 24MP camera (Sony A7ii), and although there is a difference in the GFX100 and it's dynamic range as you show, I can't quite justify the cost. Really appreciated your video, and as always, never I'm never disappointed.
As a olympus shooter, when I learned that the GFX100s was a 4/3 format, I screamed : "Reject humanity, return to micro 4/3" ahahah
It looked like the xt4 was exposed a tad bit brighter even though the settings were the same. I wonder if there would be any greater sharpness difference if the aperature where at f8 range rather than f16 with diffraction getting closer at f16? Also, with such a distant scene was the atmospheric conditions softening the detail as compared to a wide angle shot up close to compare? I would be interested to see it retested at different apertures, and on an upclose scene. I print up to 4 x 8 feet, so every bit of detail is always welcome!
Good point about atmospheric conditions, more often than not gets forgotten when UA-camrs are discussing how to get "perfect sharpness"
Another great Job Mark. I bought a GFX50 s in 2018 and I love it. I have many Canon lens including the 24mm tilt shift. I use the Techart adapter and it works great with the GFX 50s body
Great video Mark. I appreciated your style of telling it like it is not trying to push one thing over another.
Thanks Les - glad you enjoyed it!
What a great video! Makes me happy that I’m deciding to go with the X-T4.
Glad you enjoyed it Daniel!
interesting: same settings at iso 160 does not handle the lights as good as at 100!?! Wouldnt it make sense to compare iso 160 to 160?
Or in order to compare optimum image quality, shoot the GFX at 2/3 stop slower shutter speed to equalise exposure.
@@chrisogrady28 If one of the two is brighter constantly the exposure obviously is not equal!
@@chrisogrady28 Agreed, but also taking into account that apertures need to be stopped down to equivalents or else the depth of field will also throw it off. If he shot the X-T4 at f/8 then the GFX should have been shot at f/15 if available or just rounding up to f/16.
Iso is aplied gain, so in order to compare both camera equally, we need to shoot at base iso or no gain applied at all
I became really impressed with the Fujifilm GFX system AFTER they released the GFX100S. I also am seeing more and more GFX cameras in the field among landscape photographers. The color fidelity and colors out of these cameras is pretty impressive. I still prefer FF for maximum flexibility but perhaps that won't be a problem when we have 150+ MP GFX cameras with plenty of room to just crop multiple compositions from one photo!
One of my two X-T3 cameras is demaged. Now I have to decide: X-T4 or GFX. Your Video is the perfect support. I will follow you and buy both! ;-) I like your VLOGs. greetings from germany
Sticking with my Sony a7iii. But, still hanging on to my Canon 5Dmrk2. Just can't seem to let that thing go. I take it out all the time a click a few photos.
5dmkii? No thanks, the x-t2 had better shafow recovery!
The stronger the image the less the resolution and technical perfection matters to the viewer.
There are videos around that showcase the comparison between low mp and high mp prints
Definitely agree with you. No relationship between the number of pixels and a great photo. Plenty of great songs done on a cheap guitar
I always feel so relaxed when I watch your videos, Mark. And that location... wow! Just wondering, how do you get those nice tight shots of your stills camera's rear screen while still manipulating the controls and not getting in the way of your video camera? They're so well done.
Thanks Peter! Loads of practice I guess:)
@@MarkDenneyPhoto Touché.
I’m hoping to drive the Blue Ridge Parkway in October and this video just might have convinced me to rent the camera for my trip (to play second fiddle to my trusty D5300 of course 😂). Thanks for the comparison!
If you only had the X-T3 files on their own (no comparison) i suspect you would be extremely happy with them.
The base raw image and dynamic range was impressive on the GFX! Almost made me consider upgrading my xt3! But once you showed the edited pictures i decided ill save my money for lenses instead. I think the gfx is more for people who print very large or need insane levels of crop for product images and such.
Also, Topaz gigapixel is cheap thrills if you're looking for more resolution. OBVIOUSLY it's NOT the same, but sometimes it can offer surprising results. Try Denoise as well
@@07wrxtr1 just saved your comment. I like my Z6II but sometimes I envy higher megapixel cameras
I’m not really surprised that there are big differences between a 100MP medium format camera and a 26MP APSC with far smaller files and a much lower cost. To me, the more relevant question would be whether to step up in price and computer requirements from a 40+MP full frame to the 100MP Fuji. I’d love to see you do that comparison.
Excellent comparison video Mark. Thanks for posting. I agree 100% with your credo "What Does It Look Like". Yes, more pixels do provide higher resolution and dynamic range, but it comes at a $$ cost; added size; and weight. Also, to your point, whether it adds value to your work ultimately depends on the end use of the images. Large poster size prints will benefit. Instagram posts not much. I'm very happy with my 45 MP Canon R5 (for now). This said, as a landscape photographer, the GFX 100s looks mighty tempting!
Printing is the only real way to see IMHO
zooming in with a good screen on a tabled is also the way. but who on earth does it
Chris Hau did a video with the A7S3 against the GFX. Nobody could tell the difference between 12mp and 100mp printed out.
@@professionalpotato4764 Just like digital audio replay. two files of a same a pop music which is loud but dynamaic range is narrow. one is mp3 & another is 24 bit HRes. Many people then said not much difference betweeen mp3 & 24 bits HRes.
The X-T4 image is brighter overall. I’d be curious to see the differences if in tonality etc if they were exposed similarly.
Indeed. Reason number 1 is higher base ISO, number 2 is the moment of capture - a bit later from the sunrise (just look at the mountains)🙂
@@marcinbogdali5348 could also be the a difference in t-stops between the 2 lenses he used
I was considering M43 a couple of years ago in order to consolidate my photography and video gear into one system. But after doing a lot of testing I for one saw a big downgrade in the M43 camera system compared to the full-frame camera system in terms of image quality and capability. Thus, I decided against downsizing. There is definitely some true that larger sensors equals better image quality. But we also have to weigh the quality against size and weight. Full-frame mirrorless is my choice, Nikon Z-mount to be specific, because we can't ever forget the weight and versatility of lens design.
Z6II or Z7II?
Ohhhhhh Mark forgot one of his tips from last week and didn't turn off the sound :-D Just joshin' ya. Love the video and your work. Might be getting a consultation here in the next few days from your site.
So jelly. I'd really love to do that hike some time after the revolution.
Indeed! Such a cool spot - wish I had more time to explore that area, loads of possibilities there!
Would be interesting to upsize the XT4 file using Adobe Super Resolution or Gigapixel Ai, and then compare the two files.
Capture One is better for Fuji RAWs.
@@swissheartydogs depends, if you use the 'enhance' feature in ACR/LR it produces great IQ and resolves the foliage issues. on the other hand C1 doesn't need extra steps to produce great IQ from Fuji (and Sony raws also look slightly better in C1).
Thanks a lot for this comparison test. Very interesting for my as a X T3 user. One question for me still is, how much of a difference can you see in in prints of different sizes …
Another indepth analysis Mike, thanks. Your attractive looks are back in this video
I watched a video Chris Hau made the other day comparing small prints and large prints from a 12mp Sony to 102mp Fuji and I got both wrong even on the large prints so I guess it really don’t matter unless you like to crop a lot haha
I think the GFX100s is certainly better than the X-T4 in quite a few area's but are the differences viewed at a "normal" distance worth the price difference - that's the real question I suppose.
That video was debunked here: ua-cam.com/video/HikdMnXde44/v-deo.html
@@MarkDenneyPhoto if you take lens selection into perspective, the choice is obvious. GFX glasses are just a class above the best of xf lenses.
@@frankluo230 Unless you want to shoot ultra wide. GFX is very limited in this regard.
The question then, is how much is the added detail due to the big. heavy, expensive lenses and how much is due to the sensor?
I feel like that 100MP sensor is really being held back by the lens he used because when you zoom in on a lower res camera paired with high end glass, the individual pixels are A LOT sharper.
My current understanding is that the best of the best FF lenses resolve around 45MP of detail, but high resolution FF cameras have already exceeded that in MP count.
(and APS-C lenses are even worse, maybe a little over 16MP of lens resolution for a 24-33MP sensor)
Great video, thanks Mark. After some years I've realized that good lenses are more important than the size of the sensor.
Great photos. I am just a beginner and I like the night sky too. I could imagine this location beautiful full of stars and maybe a milkway too.
8:42 proves med format handles challenging conditions better then anyone.
That comparison is not really fair since especially during sunrise one minute makes a huge difference…
Nah! It proves that if you shoot a bit later when the sun is weaker, the scene has lower dynamic range, thus easier to handle for a sensor! LOL
Thanks for this video. This is why I decided to “downgrade” to a Nikon z6ii from a D850. I felt I was sharing all my photos on social media and the extra resolution of the D850 was totally unnecessary for it. That’s why I went to the Z6 instead of Z7.
Most sites will downsize your image anyway.
Good morning Mark. Thanks for your work here, one of the best I've seen on the topic. One thing that comes to mind for me is, how does the GFX handle long, under, and high ISO exposures. I shoot quite a bit of nightscape stuff, and what you have shown here has me wondering (which to be honest, before today, I had blown off) how it compares to a newer Nikon ("purple haze") or Canon ("screen door") in astro/long exposure and under exposure (because even 30sec isn't enough for the MW with a true dark sky).
They both look great! Sorry, which lenses were you using for this one? Thanks so much for all the great videos!
It appeared to me that zooming in on the unedited RAW files showed quite a marked advantage for the medium format image, but in the edited versions that gap in quality narrowed very significantly.
After all, is said the only thing that matters is what you can afford?
Thank you for such a fantastic video. You're a great speaker & photographer in one. Happy shooting👍📷😃
Really nice comparison video - keep up he great work!
Legend Zack Arias has an amazing and hilarious called "Crop Sensors vs Full Frame :: Crop Or Crap?" you should check out. It really puts "full frame" into perspective.
I'll have to check that out!
Hi,very interesting comparison.I love the colour depth and dynamic range of the medium format camera.
If one want to see the difference in resolution between a 24 versus 42/ 50,etc Mp camera you have to find a scene with fine detail and shoot from a close distance.
You'll see the difference without having to zoom in.
I have always wanted a medium format camera. Now I want one even more! Great video. Thanks for doing that.
Sure thing buddy - I’m loving the GFX100s , sure it’s a bit of an overkill, but it’s incredible!!
Surely the reason that the highlights on the XT4 are much brighter is because you didn't shoot at 'exactly' the same settings. The GFX was at ISO 100 and the XT4 was at IOS 160 - so nearly +2/3 of a stop brighter? You could have raised the ISO on the GFX to match the XT4.
Fuji's APS-C sensor is awesome. It really holds its own against the GFX100. Sure 102MP gives you room to crop or make gigantic prints... but damn, is it 3 times better IQ? I don't think so.
medium format
what is IQ ?
@@EmirhanSanl4 image quality
Dude... Your gear setup is amazing ❤️
Looks like a great choice
Much appreciated:)
@@MarkDenneyPhoto do you have any ideas for a "cheap" allround setup?
(Only continue reading if you have time to spare 😉)
Currently i use sony a77ii
I've owned an a7ii but lenses are way too expensive for me, so 1-2 reasonably priced lenses should be able to cover from 16mm to about 4or500 (best would even be 600)
I'm currently having a 16-50ssm (sony), 70-300 (tamron), 200-600 (tamron) and Minolta 28-105 (which i don't use very often 😅
Nice Video. I switched from a Pentax to a Nikon D750 about 2 years ago. Love the full frame. When you did the comparison, how much do you think the different lenses impacted the images?
Hi Mark, actually both cameras have a difference of twice the resolution and not four times the resolution. It has four times more pixels but twice the resolution.
how does that calculate?! the Fuji GFX100s has roughly twice height by twice length res.
The medium format is clearly superior in IQ, even fully zoomed out. I'd be interested in seeing the telephoto lenses for GFX against the X-T4 though. The price, size, weight, and availability of those lenses is a pretty big deal.
Great comparison video! Thank you :)
Great video Mark, I honestly don't see what all the fuss is over some of these large sensors. I shoot Sony A7iii and it's more than enough for me right now.
Haha, first you downsized FF -> APS-C, because 26M was enough, now you're thinking of the medium format 😁.
I'm wondering how much of the inital rendition simply has to do with how Lightroom handles its initial tonemapping from both fileformat. In the end it seems both files had enough dynamic range to preserve shadow and highlight details
I knew where you were from the first second of the video haha. Awesome stuff!
Good video Mark. Was a pleasure to meet you in Kanab and unfortunate I couldn't hang around a little longer to get out with you. Maybe next time. Look forward to hopefully getting out with you in the future!
Thanks so much Jim! It was great meeting you as well - Next time!
G.A.S. is a photographer's and musician's most wonderful and evil affliction.
Indeed
And my two hobbies are photography and guitar...fook
@@AcidicDelusion You will be broke for life. Penniless with tons of stuff. Congratulations!
"For me its the real life experience what counts, what you see on paper!" - "... Let's do some pixel peeping ...". 👀
Would be fun to see a comparison between the 80MP high res mode on Olympus/OM System MFT bodies to the 100MP GFX100s files. Interestingly, the aspect ratio is identical.
2 minutes in and I'm like "ohh that's Zion" - can't tell you how many times I've done that hike! Great video! I want to edit/continue my video -- as a fellow photographer in SWUT...thank you for posting this, as yes sensor size is "important" but what is more important is skill and composition.
Damn the beginning was sooo calming
Glad you enjoyed it Julien!
try sony FF sensor vs GFX, then there should be almost no difference
Great tips. I like your style- sharing your honest opinions and not biased or pushing tech on us.
We are hiking Angels Landing next month. I plan to get plenty of great shots. Can you possibly recommend any less known areas you might recommend for the perfect snap? I didn't plan on wading in the water at the Narrows- don't want to slip on a rock or deal with the bacteria blooms but you make it sound pretty epic. If I did shoot at the narrows, which filter(s) do you recommend? Neutral Density and a Polarizer?
Thank you for another great video Mark. Utah is definitely on my list, it will happen one day! I see you use peak design straps, have you ever tried the travel tripod or would you ever do a video on it? I'm considering picking one up and I would love your opinion it. Have a great day!
Thanks so much! No I havent tried it
I shoot both GFX (a 50R) and X-T3. There really isn't much between them but the GFX just has something that sets it apart and I prefer the images from my GFX. Shooting though, I much prefer using my X-T3.
I think the biggest difference between the systems is the lenses. Fuji's GF lenses are nothing short of superb
Ok so straight out of the camera with pixel peeping it looks better, my next question is could a little sharpening and vibrance make it look the same?
Nice video Mark. Very interessing, this compare. 😉😉👍🏻👍🏻
P.s very wonderful place.
Very useful comparison Mark, the GFX100s is becoming more and more tempting.
This was a really helpful video. Thanks Mark! I currently use a Fuji XT-4 for landscape photography and I had been debating on whether to jump into medium format but obviously there is a lot of money that I would have to tie up to do that. Although I would say the GFX 100S is better, I’m actually more surprised how a minimal the difference is. I am curious, if you bumped the vibrancy and/or saturation slider in editing software, could you get the XT-4 closer to the GFX 100S colors?
I definitely agree with the point of doing more editing of the XT 4 image to see how close it can come to the GFX image. Identical settings is one experiment, but what you eventually can create in post is what really counts. If you don’t print, I suspect there is not that much difference keeping it all digital. And now we have super resolution in Adobe Camera Raw which increases our cropping ability of the smaller sensors.
I moved on from a Canon 80D (24MP, crop) to a Canon R5 (45MP, full-frame) and the best I can express my first visual impression in words is moving from painting to cinema. At least for landscapes, I always found the 80D to have a more painterly look, while the R5 has a cinematic look.
At pixel level, the narrower dynamic and chromatic range on the 80D manifests as more abrupt transitions with more contrasting edges, while with the R5 transitions are smoother, with more discrete edges. In other words, go for chiaroscuro portraits with an 80D and for sfumato style portraits with the R5.
So, besides the obvious resolution gap, there's a subtle overall look and feel difference. Indeed, it doesn't matter much when you post to social media, but those photos taken with Hasselblads of Fujis have a certain look of their own, even when scaled down and posted on facebook.
Good Morning from New Zealand. Great Photography Vlog, Great comparison and advice , Brilliant video, thanks for sharing
Much appreciated Tony!
Like always your videos are very honest and useful (beside your gentleman attitude which I like a lot). Today I was testing my gfx s vs xt4. As you said images from gfx are more deep, color tones, deep, and hdr even if don’t magnifying it in small comparison i cloud say which one is by with camera, same as asking my friends who are professor of painting. But I doubt if 99% of people can see any difference!