Fuji X series vs Sony A7/A7r: A tie? Maybe!

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
4:26 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
I now own an A7r that I bought for full frame coverage for my Noctilux and use with a few select Leica M lenses. I have also tried out the 55mm 1,8 Zeiss for the A7r and was blown away by the quality. BUT here is the other side of the coin: I feel the Fuji lenses are just as good as the Zeiss in terms of resolving power , bokeh, etc,,. I actually held the Fuji 35mm f1.4 in front of the A7r sensor and it was incredibly sharp. I also could see it does not have full frame coverage at all. That does not matter. Fuji's claims of the X Trans behaving like full frame are true. Secondly, I feel Fuji is hard at work at the next generation sensor that will probably perform as well as the A7r in terms of resolution, color rendition, etc,,,. The Fujinon lenses are capable of that level of performance I am sure. Fuji may very well make full frame mostly irrelevant with the new technologies coming in 2015. For us Noctilux users, yes full frame is the way to go as well as other legacy glass, but Fuji has proven and will prove their APS-C technology is superior. Olympus is married to micro 4/3 and although impressive, Fuji has a much better formula for a small sensor yealding full frame quality. They just got it right and Olympus did not.
 
Interesting.. Thanks for commentary.

I think in the future, Fuji may end up w/ both a ff and apsc sensor sizes eventually. Only time will tell.. Both Nikon and Canon have done well w/ both line ups.

I am still holding out that Fuji will make a ff, not because my photography needs it.. But more because as I think about it over the time since Sony announced theirs, that it would be nice to use some of my old rf lenses in ff. I have no doubt that a decent number of my old lenses will have problems on a digital sensor not designed specifically for them :( but the xt1 dual image view and split image capability along w/ a Fuji ff sensor could very well be the setup that will finally make me consider a ff. Hopefully by then the new organic sensor tech will be available as well.. Even if I were to buy a ff, I would not give up my apsc stuff.. The apsc in my mind is the best compromise between image quality and weight.

I have to admit.. The Sony ff has tempted me very much..but so far I have discovered most of the lenses that I would love to use on it have one problem or another.

Enjoy your Sony
Gary
 
Fuji Rumors discusses the idea of the xPro2 coming in 2015 being FF and NOT using the existing lenses...

I agree that the xtrans APS-C files seem to be as good as most FF files today...I can only imagine what an xPro2 with FF would produce...probably much more than I really need :)
 
Needs!! It's about want. I have an early XP1 and still wonder about the Xtrans sensor. It seems the various processors have pretty well conquered it. I fine the files I create with Aperture to be as clear as anything I created with the X100 and near the files I got from my M9/50 Summicron. I'd probably be first in line for the FF XP2 but very interested. Personally I just don't like the looks of the Sony. I'd love to handle one but there aren't any camera stores convenient to my area.
 
I agree about first in line...it took me a couple of years to step up to a FF DSLR and I still use the old D300s APS-C body just as much as FF.

That said, like you, I'm very interested. :)
 
I've started using the A7r as well (currently with the 35mm sonnar 2.8) and I'm impressed with it. I have to figure out how to get the 55mm. I love my Fujis as well. All I know is that both work great for photography.
 
If Zeiss is committed to the Sony a7 family, u will always c some good lenses for this camera. The main worry is more Sony's own commitment to making quality lenses. But if Sigma ends up supporting the a7, it won't matter. In the past, Sony has made more consumer grade lenses for their Nex line.. By going w/ the alpha naming, let's c if they commit to making a better set of lenses.

Having both Fuji and Sony w/ ff and great lenses will just add to competition and the consumer end up the winners.

Gary
 
so OP to be clear what you're saying is an average performing fast 35 on a 16mp aps-c sensor is the same in output quality as a lens which legitimately reaches 55 distagon levels of performance stopped down in front of a 36mp full frame sensor?

despite having twice as many pixels.
despite having twice the area and therefore a 50% smaller enlargement factor for any given output size.
despite having a technically better lens.

is that about the extent of it?

because I can show you some numbers where an A7r returns 50% higher values than the Fuji system and that's only with the 35, which isn't quite as good as the 55.

If you're not seeing a difference, may I suggest a different downsizing routine? Try downsizing the A7r to the Fuji's resolution with a multi-step downsizer. You will see a difference. You will see a BIG difference.

Of course the 35/1.4 Fuji is sharp on a FF camera. Size and contrast go hand in hand in lens design, as Leica, who fight so hard to minimize size and charge thousands of dollars to do so. If the Fuji covered the whole frame, at 100% it would be what it is now when you take it's image circle into account. Average. Not bad. Not earth shattering.

Congrats on your purchase, I hope you enjoy your noctilux on the A7r as it's probably the first camera that gives that lens the legs to justify it's price tag. I'd love to have one myself.
 
It will be interesting to c what the late April announcement from Leica is going to be given the rumors are occurring.

Gary
 
After having owned the A7R and 55/1.8 for a few weeks now, my expectations of future lenses are suddenly raised. Now I find myself thinking about saving enough money for an OTUS for my D800e.

I would also like to see a 28/1.8 FE and 85/1.8 FE that perform at the same levels as the 55/1.8.
 
Camera-wise, comparing an old APSC CMOS to the latest FF CMOS, is, well, fine..
I mean Fuji is doing great, but I'm looking forward seeing the new product catching Sony's A6000. Basically, all these years, mirrorless APSC cameras (some great DSRLS)are all about that SONY IMX071. Fuji, Sony, Pentax, Ricoh, Nikon..
That's why these days M43 are quite comparable to APSC's, too. Tech drives this industry. Nothing old could not be surpassed, technically. But they can sell, we can make good photos with them, that's another conversation I guess.

We all know Fuji makes superb lenses all the time.
 
APS-C lenses are NOT directly comparable to FF lenses when we are talking about IQ. The size of the imaging circle is directly related to how well the balance between design parameters must be achieved. Even the 55mm F1.8 does not outperform slower APS-C lenses on the NEX-7. And that's the issue, you can't design a FF lens and expect it to perform as well in the center as a nice APS-C lens - Fuji has some nice glass, Zeiss has some, but while you can certainly look at the Fuji 16-50mm and claim that it's much, much better than the Sony OSS, the 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f1.4 cannot be compared with the same benchmark.

Same goes for sensors. The Fuji sensor is simply outdated. I know this from over a year's use of the X-E1 and a month with the X-E2. The X-E1 has at least a stop less processing latitude compared to the NEX-7, and maybe a bit more than two stops compared to the A7r. Microlens arrangement and AA-less benefits aside, the sensor in there is as old as the X2 and A55. There's not a lot to be squeezed out of such an old sensor, but I will say that's it's more than anything a Canon body has ever offered :D
 
I just got myself a Sony A7 as well. Coming from Fuji I totally agree with the OP about their lenses, and I love their sensor. Pixel peeping aside, it is such a treat to be able to use all my favorite MF lenses at their intended focal lengths :)
 
redisburning said:
so OP to be clear what you're saying is an average performing fast 35 on a 16mp aps-c sensor is the same in output quality as a lens which legitimately reaches 55 distagon levels of performance stopped down in front of a 36mp full frame sensor?

despite having twice as many pixels.
despite having twice the area and therefore a 50% smaller enlargement factor for any given output size.
despite having a technically better lens.

is that about the extent of it?

because I can show you some numbers where an A7r returns 50% higher values than the Fuji system and that's only with the 35, which isn't quite as good as the 55.

If you're not seeing a difference, may I suggest a different downsizing routine? Try downsizing the A7r to the Fuji's resolution with a multi-step downsizer. You will see a difference. You will see a BIG difference.

Of course the 35/1.4 Fuji is sharp on a FF camera. Size and contrast go hand in hand in lens design, as Leica, who fight so hard to minimize size and charge thousands of dollars to do so. If the Fuji covered the whole frame, at 100% it would be what it is now when you take it's image circle into account. Average. Not bad. Not earth shattering.

Congrats on your purchase, I hope you enjoy your noctilux on the A7r as it's probably the first camera that gives that lens the legs to justify it's price tag. I'd love to have one myself.
Click to expand...

This, again!?
 
YYV_146 said:
APS-C lenses are NOT directly comparable to FF lenses when we are talking about IQ. The size of the imaging circle is directly related to how well the balance between design parameters must be achieved. Even the 55mm F1.8 does not outperform slower APS-C lenses on the NEX-7. And that's the issue, you can't design a FF lens and expect it to perform as well in the center as a nice APS-C lens - Fuji has some nice glass, Zeiss has some, but while you can certainly look at the Fuji 16-50mm and claim that it's much, much better than the Sony OSS, the 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f1.4 cannot be compared with the same benchmark.

Same goes for sensors. The Fuji sensor is simply outdated. I know this from over a year's use of the X-E1 and a month with the X-E2. The X-E1 has at least a stop less processing latitude compared to the NEX-7, and maybe a bit more than two stops compared to the A7r. Microlens arrangement and AA-less benefits aside, the sensor in there is as old as the X2 and A55. There's not a lot to be squeezed out of such an old sensor, but I will say that's it's more than anything a Canon body has ever offered :D
Click to expand...

Outside of the sensor tech, I think most of the last of the improvements are basically coming from what is being done in the rest of the digital path. The current Fuji sensor is getting a bit old in the tooth comparative speaking. The big question for us is really whether it is still good enough for your needs or not....

I believe Fuji has not released a 24 or higher yet like its competition mainly because they feel their work on the organic sensor is just around the corner. If it turns out to be half as good as the press relapse claims, both Panasonic and Fuji will have a great sensor for their future needs.

The other question really becomes the one that Bill Pierce asked in his thread.. Is 16mp enough? Given that I don't print bigger than 13x19, for me it appears to be enough.. Would it be nice to have more? As a gear head of course, but for me, it is because I am plan lazy. Think 24 or 36 mp, apsc or ff, a 24f2 (fov) lens and nothing else.. I once said who needs a high speed 24f1.4. If Fuji made a 24 or 36mp apsc, I could c buying it.. Because I would just leave that lens on the camera and crop to the perspective I want (yes plain lazy and I know a 75 fov crop will not have the same out of focus look). I am just looking for 24 to maybe 75 fov.. I think so long as I can retain around 12-16mp worth of info, my max print size should not be a problem. For those who print much bigger, no question, more mp is so much better.

Gary
 
YYV_146 said:
APS-C lenses are NOT directly comparable to FF lenses when we are talking about IQ. The size of the imaging circle is directly related to how well the balance between design parameters must be achieved. Even the 55mm F1.8 does not outperform slower APS-C lenses on the NEX-7.
Click to expand...

Is that true? Which lenses out-resolve the 55/1.8 on an APS-C? I suppose the Nex-7 does have a higher-res-per-area than the A7R (crop mode is like 15mp, right?), though most shots I got out of my Nex-7 were pretty mushy looking (with the 24/1.8), despite this. That could be a side effect of my love affair with the DP Merrill cameras, however.

Besides that...

If Fuji releases a FF camera, I'd be hard pressed to prefer the A7R, which is kind of wonky and soulless. But the 55 and 35 are pretty amazing, aside from the considerable vignetting.
If Sony releases a monochrome FE camera, I'll 100% stick with Sony. If they release a Foveon-style camera, I'll stick with Sony. We'll see how the organic sensor tech turns out for Fuji, but that could sway me...

All I know is that I am sick of CMOS sensors. I greatly prefer CCD and Foveon Merrill. I'm also sick of focus-by-wire. So those manual focus Zeiss FE lens rumors are kind of interesting, too.
 
My dream camera..

Foveon like sensor on a camera body similar to Fuji xp1 :D. Never gonna happen, but I can dream..

Gary
 
OP: ''Fuji's claims of the X Trans behaving like full frame are true.''

no theyre not, and the difference is palpable. it may behave enough like FF for you, and thats great, but its certainly not a universal truth.

OP: ''Fuji may very well make full frame mostly irrelevant with the new technologies coming in 2015.''

no, they won't. again, they may make the differences irrelevant to you, but not to others who see discernible differences in the two formats, nor to those who objectively measure results.

there is absolutely no point to these constant attempts to objectify what is at its core subjective opinions about 'what looks better'. its even more disconcerting when, as is the case here, whatever truly objective measurements that do exist point to a contrary conclusion.

be content with what makes you happy and share it with all of us. we'd love to share in your enthusiasm and see some great results. but please stop telling us what is 'true'-ly best. all that does is cause people to tune you out.
 
Two good companies. Competition is good for the consumer, but bad for the bank account.

I do think that Fuji does a better job supporting a camera once it is out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom