Tag Archives: f/1.4

Fujifilm X-E1: From DSLR to Mirrorless

(March 2014: Fujifilm has continued to update the X-trans cameras since I acquired my X-E1 in the spring of 2013. While this article refers specifically to that model—since updated to the similar but improved X-E2—the experiences recounted here should still be relevant to others looking at the Fujifilm system. For broader and updated coverage also see Taking Stock of the Fujifilm X-E1, X-E2, X-T1 Mirrorless Cameras, and check out links to the Fujifilm line of cameras at lenses at the end of this article.)

Recently I have read a lot of good things about some of the new “rangefinder-style” (a useful though not completely accurate description) or “mirrorless” cameras from Fujifilm. As a result I acquired the Fujifilm X-E1 with a few lenses, and I have now had the chance to start using it a bit. I thought I would share some initial thoughts and impressions now, with more thorough reports later on as I use the camera and lenses more.

Background

I am primarily a confirmed full-frame DSLR photographer – I rely on the versatility of these cameras, their speed, the availability of a wide variety of lenses and other accessories, and especially on the excellent image quality that they can produce. However, one downside of this equipment is that it is most certainly not small nor light, especially once you add some (or all!) of the lenses I like to use.

While much of my photography requires what the full frame DSLR system provides, sometimes I have wished for high-quality but smaller and lighter equipment – for example when doing certain kinds of street photography, for certain types of travel, or when I just want to have a camera with me when I’m out and about. I have used a few of the smaller high end point & shoot style cameras ranging from the Canon S95 back to the old Canon Pro One, and I have looked at quite a few others.

I have heard enthusiastic reports on various cameras, including a number of the four-thirds cameras, but I decided that I did not want to consider a camera with a sensor smaller than APS-C, the size of the “cropped sensor” DSLRs. For my intended use, that level of quality – in terms of resolution, useful range of apertures, low-light performance, etc. – will work quite well. Recently several mirrorless cameras with such sensors have been introduced, and they all have their attractions. What led me to settle on the Fujifilm cameras was the combination of an expanding selection of excellent lenses, their somewhat “retro” design that provides hardware knobs and buttons to control settings, and encouraging reports on image quality.Fujifilm X-E1 Mirrorless Camera

I considered the more expensive Fujifilm X-Pro-1, with its hybrid optical-electronic viewfinder, but decided that for my intended use the electronic viewfinder (EVF) of the X-E1 would likely work. (As I read reports from other users, quite a few reported that they used the optical viewfinder option of the Pro-1 less than they expected.) I did not consider the reportedly-excellent X100 since I want interchangeable lenses.

Initial Impressions

What follows is highly subjective, and some of my initial reactions will likely need revision after I adapt to the camera. Speaking of “adapting,” some of this is perhaps based as much on my familiarity and comfort with my Canon DSLRs as on the nature of the X-E1 itself. I have used my Canon EOS 5D II so much that its operation is very much second-nature for me at this point. I rarely have to think about how to do something on that camera, since the “how” has become more or less instinctive. I’m far from that point with the X-E1, but that is to be expected.  Continue reading Fujifilm X-E1: From DSLR to Mirrorless

B&H Updates: Canon, Sigma, Fujifilm, More

Here is an update with some additional holiday pricing from site-affiliate B&H on Canon Rebel Bodies/kits, Sigma Lens, Fujifilm X10, and tripods/heads. Click links for full information and see the Deals Page on this blog for more updates.

Canon Rebel T4i Packages

Canon Rebel T4i body
Canon EFS 18-135mm IS lens
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake lens
Value $1497.00, but add to cart and pay only $899

Canon Rebel T4i body
Canon EFS 18-135mm IS lens
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake lens
Canon EFS 55-250mm IS II lens
Value $1797.00, but add to cart and pay only $999
(B&H instructions: “Click Add to Cart & click Buy Together & Save & Add”)

Canon Rebel T3i
Canon T3i body-only
16 GB memory card
Price when added to cart will be only $499

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens for Canon DSLRs
$140 “instant savings” price is $349
(30mm is a good “normal prime” focal length on cropped sensor cameras)

Fujifilm X10 kit – $100 off and now $499

Tripods and Heads

Manfrotto 701HDV Head & MVT502AM Tripod System – $70.00 off
Manfrotto Mvh502A Head, 546B Tripod With Carry Bag – $110.00 off
Oben AC-2310 3-Section Tripod with BA-1 Ball Head Kit – $110.00 off

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | FacebookGoogle+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

More B&H Holiday Deals

I’m occasionally torn about these posts, but then I see that folks are using the posts and their links to order at these seasonally-reduced prices… so I hope that some of you will find the information useful.

Some new holiday deals from site-sponsor B&H follow. You may have to add some of them to your cart to see the lower pricing:

Note that some of these expire very soon – as soon as tomorrow.

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | FacebookGoogle+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

Sharpness and Aperture Selection on Full-Frame DSLRs

(Note: This article was originally posted in 2007 and I should probably update the test using newer gear – though the point of the test and the post remains.)

Last month I wrote about a set of tests (“Full Frame Lens Test“) that I conducted with my lenses and my Canon 5D body. My object was simply to better understand how the camera/lens combinations would behave so that I could make better decisions about appropriate lenses and apertures while making photographs.

One discovery was that, compared to using a crop sensor DSLR, I can get excellent results when I shoot at smaller apertures with good lenses on the full frame body. I tended to avoid apertures smaller than about f/8 on the crop sensor camera, but there seems to be little or no real liability in using f/11 or even f/16 on full frame.

To illustrate I put together the following composite image. (The image appears in reduced form on this page. Click the link to see the full size version.)

Diffraction Blur Test Image
A sequence of text photographs illustrating diffraction blur at several apertures on a full frame camera

The example includes five versions of a small section from near the center of a photograph taken with the Canon EOS 5D using the EF 24-105mm L IS lens at a 50mm focal length. The camera was on a tripod, MLU and a remote release were used, and the AF was turned off. The images are 100% crops – in other words, actual pixel size is displayed in these tiny excepts from the much larger original images. (You would virtually never view a print at this magnification. These are equivalent to tiny sections from a print that might be about 5 feet wide!) The images have been slightly sharpened in post-processing, but are otherwise unaltered.

I shot at apertures of f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, and f/16. In terms of the sharpness of this portion of the image, I am quite certain that all five examples are plenty sharp for making prints. That said, there are some differences. To my eye:

  • The f/4 and, to some extent, the f/5.6 versions are slightly but noticeably softer at this magnification.
  • The f/8 and f/11 versions seem to me to have approximately equal sharpness. Some parts of the f/8 image seem slightly sharper, but other parts of the f/11 image seem sharper. In the end they are pretty darn equivalent, though I’d maybe give the f/11 a very slight edge overall.
  • The f/16 image may be slightly less sharp than the f/8 and f/11 versions, but the difference would not be noticeable in a print, even a rather large one. In any case, f/16 appears sharper than either f/4 or f/5.6.

After doing this test I no longer hesitate to shoot at f/11 or f/16. Not only does this give me the possibility of getting greater depth of field when I need it, but it also means that I can compensate for corner softness on some lenses (e.g. the 17-40mm) by using a smaller aperture without fear of losing center sharpness.

(Addition: 4/23/07 – Other Canon L lenses seem to give similar results, including my 17-40mm f/4 L and my 70-200mm f/4 L.)

Added 2/23/08:

In response to a question in a photo forum I put together a sample image showing corner sharpness from the same original images used in the example above. (The earlier example shows 100% crops from near the center of the frame.)

(image temporarily unavailable) Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens corner sharpness test

Technical info: Shot using a Canon 5D with the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens at a 50mm focal length. In aperture priority mode, the aperture was changed manually between shots. Initial focus was with AF, which was then switched off before shooting the series. Camera was on a tripod and MLU and remote release were used. Shots were converted from RAW with ACR and no additional post-processing applied. Print made at this resolution would be approximately five feet wide. The crop is from the far lower left corner of the frame.

In addition to noting the softer image in the corner at f/4, also note that the image is a bit darker due to the expected increase in corner light fall-off (“vignetting”) at the largest aperture. Sharpest version in this series shot with a FF body seems to be at f/11 as in the center crop example above. But note that f/8, f/11, and f/16 are not very different in overall sharpness – and in the end any of these apertures would produce a very sharp print.

In response to another forum discussion, I have added another example, this time using the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens and showing performance at f/5.6, f/8, f/11, and f/16. In other respects the test is the same as described already in this post. This image is seen to the right and below.

(image temporarily unavailable)

Conclusions: Based on this set of images and other taken with different lenses under similar conditions, I have come to some conclusions that work for me with my Canon lenses and full-frame Canon 5D body.

  • In general the sharpest whole aperture seems to be around f/11.
  • It is very difficult to distinguish any resolution differences at f/8 or f/16 – there are subtle differences when viewing the test images at 100% magnification on my monitor but these are essentially invisible in prints.
  • f/5.6 or f/22 will tend to be a bit less sharp, though perhaps not for the same reasons. At f/5.6 I begin to notice a bit more of the diminished sharpness as a lens is opened up – more on some lenses than on others. At f/22 the effects of diffraction become just a bit more noticeable. However, if the shot demands it I do not hesitate (much) to use either of these apertures as the very slight decrease in sharpness is quite tiny if visible at all in a print and both provide some other advantages in certain situations. (I’ll even use the largest f/4 aperture on the test lens when isolating the subject is important or when low light demands it – and the results will typically be just fine.)
  • At larger apertures the performance becomes more tied to the particular lens so it is more difficult to make any generalizations beyond the fact that vignetting increases and sharpness will be less optimal.
  • The smaller apertures decrease any corner light fall-off (“vignetting”) or softness, generally to a point where both are insignificant.
  • With all of this in mind, unless I have a reason to select some other aperture I typically use f/11 as my general starting point when shooting with my full-frame DSLR body.

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | FacebookGoogle+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.