Sensor Size

[Ko.Fe.]

DPReview still hasn't figured out how to process Fuji Raw files. Just compare their Raw and jpg image tests.

JPEG1 looks way better, on low ISO. 🙂 Flash and low ISO JPEG1 rules !
____________________________________________________________________________________________________


It is not just DPR problem, actually, it is problem on FujiFilm side. They can't adopt DNG like Leica and Pentax did and it seems to be more difficult to Adobe to deal with FujFilm proletary RAWs. They have mentioned in-camera TIFF for X-T4, but not for less expensive cameras.

And not just FujiFilm is doing it wrong. I'm dealing with Canon snafoo a.k.a. .CR3 files at this moment. My computer was totally fine with .CR2 files. But Canon went with odd .CR3 files on mirrorless.
To be able to work with them I have to use only Canon DPP4 software, because my Adobe of LR, PS don't read .CR3.
I ended up with swapping PC and burning OS Drive. It wasn't fried, but became subject for RMA with WD.
All of it is just to have working, non crashing DPP4, which work with .CR3 way better than any third party converter I have tried.

This is why sometimes I think - screw them all, I just stick with straight forward DNGs from Ricoh and Leica cameras I have.

I just see all of those DNG converters, DPP and such as totally unnecessary waste of my time. Extra step to get compatible file with my trusty standalone versions of LR and FS. While Adobe via Cloud is way too clunky and overpay for next to nothing, IMO. And will need another more powerful PC.

 

[RObert Budding]

Raw processing of RAF files works well with C1P. It just seems that adobe doesn't care.

 

[jsrockit]

Raw processing of RAF files works well with C1P. It just seems that adobe doesn't care.

I wouldn't say that... they've made huge improvements over the years. In the past, it was true in some scenarios. However, basing one's thoughts on Fuji's IQ over what dpreview does in one scene maybe could be an issue. There is room for error on their end.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The acceptable size of the circle of confusion is part of the calculation for depth of field. The actual circle of confusion created by a specific lens will not change when used on sensors of different size. The calculated Depth of Field does change as the definition of acceptable size of the circle of confusion does change. Smaller sensors have smaller acceptable size for the circle of confusion.

 

[RObert Budding]

I wouldn't say that... they've made huge improvements over the years. In the past, it was true in some scenarios. However, basing one's thoughts on Fuji's IQ over what dpreview does in one scene maybe could be an issue. There is room for error on their end.

The other unknown is how DPReview processed RAF files. My processed images are much sharper than what they show in their reviews, and I'm always careful not to over-sharpen.

 

[Dante_Stella]

4) The RX1Rm2 as carry along when I have special photographic interests. Also good as an unobtrusive street- and social camera.

@FranZ

What do you do with flash with this camera? It looks like the only thing that might fit it with the EVF up is the Metz 26AF.

D

 

[Dogman]

Flash? What's flash? 😉

 

[Out to Lunch]

the circle of confusion

Ah, I feel right at home.

 

[Pioneer]

I don't think I am the right one to comment on this topic.

My 11x14 has about the right sensor size but it is a bit slow.

If I need it done today, or decide I want color, I use my Pentax *ist DS. Absolutely love the color from that sensor! My M9 was almost as nice but it died an early death.

 

[Godfrey]

I did years of my professional work with Pentax APS-C and Olympus/Panasonic FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds. Not one client ever complained about the quality of my work with those cameras. For me, the Olympus FT and mFT bodies/lenses were a better pick over the others.

As I am now retired and shoot only for my own projects/pleasure, I tend to prefer larger formats, however, for more DoF control and the usual added dynamic range. I like Leica Ms so the M10-R and M10 Monochrom now my standard digital cameras.

I also love Hasselblad V system (6x6 cm) in film, and use a Hasselblad 907x/CFVII 50c digital (44x33 mm format). I have the digital back on my 500CM about half the time, and on the 907x body the other half. (Using the smaller format on the 500CM generally means swapping to the next-shorter focal length in my lenses, and also nets me effectively a longer telephoto due to the crop factor.) The CFVII 50c sensor is very very good on resolution and dynamic range, for when that's critical.

G

 

[boojum]

Size, sensor and otherwise, is a distraction. It is not the size of the sensor so much as how it is used. I have gotten some great shots with my very old Sony DSC S70 with its 3.2MP sensor. And the X2D with the HB color science and image detail and IBIS yield great results. But at the end-up the most important thing in the image is the content. Composition, color, and interest. Interest is, to my way of thinking, primary. Review the works of the shooters you admire. Mono or color. big sensor or small, something has to catch your eye.