A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Resolution on Fuji cameras; highly impacted by ISO setting?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 30th 18, 11:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,647
Default Resolution on Fuji cameras; highly impacted by ISO setting?

On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 04:50:00 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 21:38:09 UTC-5, Savageduck wrote:
On Dec 27, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ):

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 14:33:02 UTC-5, Savageduck wrote:
On Dec 27, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ):

Reason I asked is that I saw a shot with a 56mm f/1.2 and at 2000 ISO it
was soft, very poor resolution, almost as bad as I've seen with an old Canon
56mm f/1.2 I had. Then I saw a shot from about the same distance (a few feet)
with the lens at 200 ISO and it was completely different, nicely sharp
wide-open.

I do not have the XF56mm f/1.2, but it has a very good reputation among Fuji
users who use it primarily for portraiture. Where did you see this
particular comparison/test?

One guy was complaining about the resolution of the lens on DPreview, (that
was the 2000 ISO image) another was just a shot at 200 ISO. The guy's 2000
ISO image was in focus, no motion blur, so that's why I wondered about the
high ISO wiping out detail. One guy blamed it on lighting.


As I said, I have no personal experience with the 56/1.2. For the most part
with my X-T3 I have no issues with sharpness from ISO160 to ISO6400, higher
than ISO6400 things get slightly soft. At ISO12800, and ISO25600 I still have
usable images. Check the black print on these boxes, the shots are SOOC JPEG
with no post processing using 16-55mm f/2.8 on the X-T3.

ISO6400
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-fg85FxM/0/5cbc830a/5K/i-fg85FxM-5K.jpg

ISO12800
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-KJgmghM/0/d2981458/5K/i-KJgmghM-5K.jpg

ISO25600
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...PxpmQVZ-5K.jpg

--
Regards,
Savageduck


Side issue; less powder, much heavier bullet with .45 than .40. Is that to keep them sub-sonic?


More like fashion - the image of a 45.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #2  
Old December 31st 18, 12:55 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,627
Default Resolution on Fuji cameras; highly impacted by ISO setting?

On Dec 30, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 04:50:00 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 21:38:09 UTC-5, Savageduck wrote:
On Dec 27, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ):

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 14:33:02 UTC-5, Savageduck wrote:
On Dec 27, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ):

Reason I asked is that I saw a shot with a 56mm f/1.2 and at 2000 ISO it
was soft, very poor resolution, almost as bad as I've seen with an old
Canon
56mm f/1.2 I had. Then I saw a shot from about the same distance (a few
feet)
with the lens at 200 ISO and it was completely different, nicely sharp
wide-open.

I do not have the XF56mm f/1.2, but it has a very good reputation among
Fuji
users who use it primarily for portraiture. Where did you see this
particular comparison/test?

One guy was complaining about the resolution of the lens on DPreview,
(that
was the 2000 ISO image) another was just a shot at 200 ISO. The guy's 2000
ISO image was in focus, no motion blur, so that's why I wondered about the
high ISO wiping out detail. One guy blamed it on lighting.

As I said, I have no personal experience with the 56/1.2. For the most part
with my X-T3 I have no issues with sharpness from ISO160 to ISO6400, higher
than ISO6400 things get slightly soft. At ISO12800, and ISO25600 I still
have
usable images. Check the black print on these boxes, the shots are SOOC
JPEG
with no post processing using 16-55mm f/2.8 on the X-T3.

ISO6400
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...fg85FxM-5K.jpg

ISO12800
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...KJgmghM-5K.jpg

ISO25600
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...PxpmQVZ-5K.jpg

--
Regards,
Savageduck


Side issue; less powder, much heavier bullet with .45 than .40. Is that to
keep them sub-sonic?


More like fashion - the image of a 45.


Fashion?

Here is my, ...er, fashionable Kimber PRO CDP II .45 ACP.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-tHWv8BL/0/7bee7357/5K/i-tHWv8BL-5K.jpg

--
Regards,
Savageduck

  #3  
Old January 1st 19, 12:40 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,647
Default Resolution on Fuji cameras; highly impacted by ISO setting?

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 15:55:11 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

More like fashion - the image of a 45.


Fashion?

Here is my, ...er, fashionable Kimber PRO CDP II .45 ACP.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-tHWv8BL/0/7bee7357/5K/i-tHWv8BL-5K.jpg


No doubt it carries more weight in almost every sense than the Kimber
Micro Advocate.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #4  
Old January 1st 19, 02:44 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,627
Default Resolution on Fuji cameras; highly impacted by ISO setting?

On Dec 31, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 15:55:11 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

More like fashion - the image of a 45.


Fashion?

Here is my, ...er, fashionable Kimber PRO CDP II .45 ACP.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-tHWv8BL/0/7bee7357/5K/i-tHWv8BL-5K.jpg


No doubt it carries more weight in almost every sense than the Kimber
Micro Advocate.


While the Micro Advocate is a fine, compact, carry hand gun, I am not a fan
of the .380. If I was going toward a lighter caliber I would choose the newer
9mm loads over the .380. My preference is more for the heavier .40 S&W, or
1911 type .45 ACP, or in a revolver a .357 Mag.

My Kimber Pro CPD IIhttps://www.kimberamerica.com/pro-cdp-ca has an empty
weight of 28 oz the Micro Advocate weighs 13.8 oz. 15 years ago I paid $1200
for the .45 ACP, today it is priced at $1380.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Resolution on Fuji cameras; highly impacted by ISO setting? David Taylor Digital Photography 0 December 29th 18 06:53 AM
Dpreview's reviews "Highly Recommended" is highly questionable Giftzwerg Digital Photography 7 August 18th 09 12:03 PM
Internet prints at specified resolution (ppi setting)? none Digital Photography 2 October 17th 05 03:45 PM
Fuji S500: What resolution setting? Luke Webber Digital Photography 15 July 26th 04 12:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.