As the owner, and user, of two Fuji X-T2 and one X-T30 bodies, I am NOT in search of more megapixels. HOWEVER, I've pre-ordered the X-T5 because I love Fuji's top of the line XF 16-55mm f2.8 lens which does not have image stabilization (OIS). Having reached the age where handholding is significantly enhanced by OIS or IBIS, the X-T5 has IBIS and will, hopefully, pair well with the XF 16-55 lens. The extra megapixels will enhance IQ and allow for more cropping. Matter of personal preference, I guess.
lwerthe1mer wrote:
GAS is usually unproductive, except for the camera companies. Most of the features on modern camera, in my opinion, just make photography more complicated than it needs to be.
And the 495-page manual proves it.
lwerthe1mer wrote:
GAS is usually unproductive, except for the camera companies. Most of the features on modern camera, in my opinion, just make photography more complicated than it needs to be.
I fear that I have hijacked this conversation and influenced it in a different direction than was intended. If so, I apologize.
Is it really about the MB? Cameras are a tool. How do you use your tool and for what…..lots of people don’t know how to use the full potential of their equipment. When I got the Nikon 810 I learned what was my weakness. Today I’m looking for light, composition and I know the 810 handles easily every task. A 36 MB FF vs 21MB DX yes I know the difference. When you look Fuji line of cameras between the medium format and different DX format, point and shoot it’s unbelievable. It’s my opinion and it’s my experience.
wdross
Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
Dragonophile wrote:
I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - the X-T5 - holds little appeal to me at this point. I don't think I need or want a 40mp sensor. Now, I understand many people might find that highly desirable. So be it. But I take many pictures and the extra storage costs do not seem worth it to me. And I see no reason to buy it and lower the pixel count.
What am I missing? I get that more pixels can equal superior IQ but I will be interested in reading reviews to see how people rate IQ between the T4 and T5. If the difference in IQ is noticeable to the eye on standard prints, I might change my mind. But if it is only noticeable if I were printing posters or billboards, then no thanks.
I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - ... (
show quote)
Your not necessarily missing anything. Unless you get something you want or need in the upgrade, there is no need for GAS. More megapixels does not necessarily mean superior IQ but does mean that you can crop heavier. And if it is hard to tell smartphone photos from regular 8X10 camera photos for most people, more pixels is not necessarily an answer. Take a look at your X-T3 and X-T4 and see if there is something that you would like improved or additional. Then see if the X-T5 offers what you would like improved or additional - and still at a price you are willing to pay for. For some the answer will be "Yes". But possibly for you, the answer could be "No".
dpullum wrote:
In the beginning of the great pixel race it was pointed out that the smaller the individual pixels get the smear/bloom from one to the next gets greater.
https://www.adimec.com/ccd-versus-cmos-blooming-and-smear-performance/https://www.blurbiness.com/web/en/blog/megapixel-myth-more-megapixels-does-not-mean-better-quality-photosBeyond MP increase there are other improvements which may be an advantage if needed:
https://www.photographyblog.com/articles/fujifilm_x_t5_vs_x_t4_head_to_head_comparisonIgnoring these comments... we print or project or TV display our photos. If printed, the printers are just so so good and may not display the MP difference... if they do can our eye perceive the difference. Old study on super audio cables, electronically no difference, audio no difference... unless the group was told that A is good cable and B is a super cable costing 10x the price. On a TV, the T-3,4, and 5 images are limited by the TV.
Consider the MP race is not needed and an old Fuji with 3 MP may be fine. If taken at high shutter speed then all the stabilizer features are not needed, even dynamic range differences can be software compensated.
In a recent study I did images from my historically wonderful, expensive, Kodak DC4800 3.1 MP were cleaned, sharpened, and MP enhanced by the Topaz AI Trio, De-noise AI, Sharpen AI, and Gigapixel AI. Once the magic has been performed, a huge photo print of quality is possible from a humble 3 MP beginning!!
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-753293-1.htmlIn the beginning of the great pixel race it was po... (
show quote)
I just did the same thing you did with some automobile photos that were texted to me to clean up and print. The were about 400k. I ran them thru the topaz trio and printed some 12x17 for my friend. They looked excellent.
Dragonophile wrote:
I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - the X-T5 - holds little appeal to me at this point. I don't think I need or want a 40mp sensor. Now, I understand many people might find that highly desirable. So be it. But I take many pictures and the extra storage costs do not seem worth it to me. And I see no reason to buy it and lower the pixel count.
What am I missing? I get that more pixels can equal superior IQ but I will be interested in reading reviews to see how people rate IQ between the T4 and T5. If the difference in IQ is noticeable to the eye on standard prints, I might change my mind. But if it is only noticeable if I were printing posters or billboards, then no thanks.
I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - ... (
show quote)
I have an XT2 and am happy with it. I would look at other features before I would consider an Xt5 such as in body stabilization, battery life, eye tracking as well as the pixel count. Of course the number of pixels may enable you to crop more without loss of detail but do you really need it? I do like the fact that Fuji kept the dual sd slots. Perhaps money used to buy another lens or upgrade the ones d that you own would be a better use of funds.
Is a camera with less than 40MP even worth owning?
AndyT wrote:
The old D70. I had one of those.
The D70 was a great little camera. I went to a NYC camera store intending to buy whatever the Canon digital was at the time, but the store clerk told me to check out the Nikon as well. As soon as I held it, I knew that was the right choice for me. I've been shooting Nikons ever since.
kymarto
Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy
Dragonophile wrote:
I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - the X-T5 - holds little appeal to me at this point. I don't think I need or want a 40mp sensor. Now, I understand many people might find that highly desirable. So be it. But I take many pictures and the extra storage costs do not seem worth it to me. And I see no reason to buy it and lower the pixel count.
What am I missing? I get that more pixels can equal superior IQ but I will be interested in reading reviews to see how people rate IQ between the T4 and T5. If the difference in IQ is noticeable to the eye on standard prints, I might change my mind. But if it is only noticeable if I were printing posters or billboards, then no thanks.
I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - ... (
show quote)
I would be more interested in an upgrade if the new sensor had significantly superior dynamic range or high ISO quality, but even then, with the sophisticated noise reduction available today, it is not really an issue except in extreme conditions. I shoot 61 MP, but I also shoot in crop mode at 25 MP and I don't really notice any real difference. The place it could matter is if you do extreme cropping. Otherwise, for normal use, pretty much a non-issue.
Bigmike1
Loc: I am from Gaffney, S.C. but live in Utah.
I like to share photos via e-mail and I doubt there is a program in existence that can send a 40 megapixel photo. Some professionals may need the extra pixels. I don't.
Bigmike1 wrote:
I like to share photos via e-mail and I doubt there is a program in existence that can send a 40 megapixel photo. Some professionals may need the extra pixels. I don't.
It doesn't matter what camera you're using, you should be resizing the pixel resolution of your images down to 2048px on the long-side for digital sharing, especially email attachments. The how-to (and why) are presented here:
Recommended resizing parameters for digital images
ejrmaine wrote:
Well, I'm upgrading my X-T3 and buying the X-T5, but not for the 40MP. Rather, for the AI focus and the extended battery life. To each his own.
Yep, for me too it's the other features and updates...the 40 mp will provide some extra crop-ability if needed. The price is within reason.
AndyT wrote:
The old D70. I had one of those.
I still have mine and it works just fine.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.