Fujifilm X100VI Lens Review - Can it Render 40 MP? ft. X100V
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 07. 2024
- Fujifilm X100VI Lens Review - Can it Render 40 MP? ft. X100V
Fujifilm X100VI - amzn.to/3TcCPTY
NiSi UV Filter , Lens Hood and Cap Kit - amzn.to/3JzFLFA
NiSi UHD UV For FUJIFILM X100 - amzn.to/3WghnjO
Fujifilm X-H2 - amzn.to/3t9KFAW
Viltrox AF 27mm F1.2 Pro XF - viltroxstore.com/products/vil...
More videos:
Fujifilm X100VI Review - The Phenomenon [ Fuji X100VI ]
• Fujifilm X100VI Review...
1 year with Fujifilm X-H2 - Long Term Review [ Fuji XH2 ]
• 1 year with Fujifilm X...
Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR Review / Fuji X-T5 & X-H2
bit.ly/Fuji23mmF14review
Viltrox AF 13mm F1.4 XF - Review w/ Fujifilm X-T4
bit.ly/ViltroxAF13mmF14
Fujifilm X-T5 Review - On the Right Path [ Fuji XT5 ]
bit.ly/X-T5review
Follow me on Instagram: / william_svrcek
Please note that if you use the affiliate links above to purchase products, I will get a small commission (1-6% of the price). It helps funding the production on this channel, but it won't cost you any extra money.
0:00 Intro
0:58 40 MP Sensor and a bit of theory
1:36 Perception megapixels
2:13 X100VI vs the sharpest X-mount lenses
3:06 X100VI vs X100V Lens Comparison
4:44 X100VI Qestions and Myths
6:23 RAW Detail in Lightroom
6:44 Low light
7:07 Bokeh
7:29 WR and NiSi Filter / Lens hood
8:12 Summary - Věda a technologie
*Fujifilm X100VI Review* - The Phenomenon [ Fuji X100VI ] - czcams.com/video/uanCYFoeZX0/video.html
Regarding the "GR III is shaper" claims: I don't have a GR III, so I am not able to test that. Considering the comparison between the X100VI and one of the sharpest APS-C lenses shown in this video, I don't see how the GR III with 24 MP sensor could capture more detail than X100VI, so I am extremely skeptical about "GR III is sharper" claims.
I haven't found any comparison between X100VI and GR III with decent testing methodology, so there is not much more that I can say about that.
Currently, Tony & Chelsea Northrup have 1.62 M subscribers and you have 119K subscribers. With respect to Mr Northrup's comments on the X100VI lens sharpness, you've given a much more definitive review, and arguably a more accurate conclusion, compared to their given shot in dubious lighting on a print. Your crops on my 43 inch monitor revealed that the X100VI was clearer for all apertures shown, perceivably due to the higher sensor resolution. Thus the lens is certainly capable of delivering the optical quality for the 40 MP sensor.
I’ve seen so many people saying on his video and on that video by that Ricoh shooter (can’t remember his name but he seems to be German and Japanese?) saying Ricoh lenses have been confirmed sharper and everybody knows it, and that this lens doesn’t resolve. And no matter how many times I ask people don’t send me to any rigorous testing on the subject, it’s just “trust me bro”. I’ve been waiting for an in depth technical analysis video of this lens
completely agree with you here. Tony and Chelsea feel like they are doing quick tests for the views only. Their recent video about complaints on the x100vi make them seem like amateur photographers rather than the pros they say they are. Lost respect for them when they said image quality is close to phone..
Tony and Chelsea are sellouts they are paid to talk good about a product it’s how they make money.
It's called the democratization of the internet, those two are a couple of noobs that shouldn't be doing any kind of gear reviews, the subscriber numbers mean nothing an offer no guarantee of great knowledge
Northrop’s suck. Clickbait content creators
I have to say, this was best technical X100VI review I have seen on X100VI. Great comparisons for lens performance.
Thank you!
I’m not sure what critics of this camera were expecting. It is pretty much identical to the V with the exception of a much faster processor, subject tracking, and IBIS. The 40mp was a nice bump, but the IBIS made this camera night and day different… better… than the already awesome X100V. For me, Fujifilm hit the nail on the head. The VI lens resolves perfectly well. I have zero complaints.
Great review.
40mp is actually a drawback for an apsc sensor. That may not sound like much, given how full frame is pushing 60+ megapixels in most flagships, but apsc is smaller so the pixel density is much higher. More pixel density = more noise.
A 26mp apsc sensor has equivalent pixel density to a 61mp full frame sensor. 40mp is equivalent to 100mp full frame. The 61mp sonys and leicas are getting close to being too noisy to use in low light - IMHO this 40mp is going to be way too noisy to use in darker settings.
That's not a problem if you are using lighting (flashes, lamps etc,) to compensate, but this isn't a professional interchangeable lens camera. Its a compact camera that needs to be more versatile.
@@JimIBobIJones I’ve been using two of Fujifilm bodies with 40mp sensor. Not a drawback at all. I was worried because ostensibly the dynamic range should suffer but I have not found that. The resolution gains were quite helpful. The IQ is as beautiful as with any Fujifilm camera.
@@NotAnotherChannel_Channel what's your comparator though. The only 40mp apsc I am aware of is the XT5 and that has a reputation as a particularly noisy camera that requires a lot of editing in post to clean up.
@@JimIBobIJones There were 3 bodies with the 40mp sensor. Now there are 4 with the XT50.
The XT5 does not have a reputation as a noisy camera. I use both the XT5 and X100VI. I get great results from either without post processing. Plenty of people do.
@@NotAnotherChannel_Channel uh what? The XT5 is insanely noisy. Pretty much everyone who uses/reviews it says it's useless past 1200/1600 iso and it starts getting plenty noisy at 800, some people have reported it even at 400.
Are you shooting raw or JPEG? The XT5 has insanely aggressive Noise Reduction if you are shooting JPEG. That sorta out the noise but flattens and "smushes" images as well.
you're one of the best reviewers of photo gear on CZcams. Thanks very much for your great work.
My pleasure, thank you for watching!
Valid information, better than other clickbaiting YTers as Northrup or Granger. Respect!
Thank you"
Finally a review i have been looking for! Thank you!
You’re welcome, thank you for watching!
Great content! Well done! 👍
Thank you!
Excellent video, thanks. Posted the link to DPR's comment section of their most recent article on the camera.
Thank you!
Great information, thanks for sharing.
My pleasure, thank you for watching!
Very well done, as are all your videos!
Thank you!
As a XT5/16-55f2.8 user and a first time v100 user, I am very happy with my x100vi image quality, including with the WCL. And, it is simply fun to use!
Agree it’s a great little camera and weighs 40% of my Canon Pro DSLR and wide prime. Love the film sims too. Used Fuji film for 40yrs and loved every iteration, negative, velvia, Provia, Reala the lot.
There is a good quadrant based graphic I’ve seen that basically says Provia for reality, Velvia for impact and Reala (Ace) for that 1990s print look - but without the 20yrs of fading in the album..
Great idea for a video. I was going to test mine out if I ever get it…. People shoot Fuji because of the style and trying to get film like pictures. Crazy sharpness is not needed. Another CZcamsr said in video it was as sharp as his A7IV so people just want to complain.
Thanks for reporting on the NiSi filter. IQ was a concern of mine.
If you want full resolutions, you got to give the camera enough exposures, that means low ISO and expose just under the highlight gets blown. You will get full resolutions abd without artifacts with lenses that is not even labeled as a full 40 mp resolutions lense. Another thing the shutter needs twice the shutter speed as a 26 mp in order to get sharp images handheld. Off course the IS helps so you get slower shutterspeed.
So defferently 40 mp are more demanding for those that have no clues with 40 mp. If you know what you are doing 40 mp are mindblowing.
I'm curious how they compare when filling the FoV equally after crop, meaning, if the VI is center cropped to 26MP while standing further from the subject, how close is it to the detail in the V when closer. Because if a "crop zoom" gets you decent images, that can make the 40MP worthwhile.
VI has ibis which imo comes in really handy at night and low light conditions 6ev is huge.
Nice video!
Thank you!
Ik ken de X100VI beter dankzij je professionele video. Behalve het speciale ontwerp en de handige draagbare ervaring. Heb je aanbevelingen voor andere doe-het-zelf camera-accessoires?
first like , an then watch the video :)
Thank you!
Excellent video, as always. I hope those who claim that the X100V & VI lens is 'soft' will take your clear evidence to heart. Thank you.
My pleasure, thank you for watching!
The best video comparison on CZcams 👌👏🏻👍 this video really hits the nail on the head for other CZcamsrs who talk so much crap 💩 one question is that does the Nikon fz camera have better image quality than fujifilms 40 mp cameras? At higher iso values?
I have the Zf and x100vi, while not testing as rigorously as this it seemed to me pretty strongly in favor of the Zf for high ISO
But the Zf with a lens is significantly heavier and larger…
But it’s smaller and doesn’t have that videography flip out screen
I appreciate your perspective. Hopefully, I will get my X100 VI before 2025. lol
I’d like to see close focus performance / sharpness
Maybe next time.
I have been using the Fuji X100VI and found the sharpness difference between Jpeg color film profiles and RAW to be significant. All the file modification for Jpeg are off, (i.e. Smooth Skin Effect). I will continue shooting Jpeg & RAW but would be interested knowing which Jpeg color film profile would be the sharpest?
You are increasing sharpness and clarity settings, yes? As for RAW it would depend on how much sharpening is done by default and what software is being used.
I have Sharpness and Clarity settings set to 0.
Would you be able to compare it with an original Leica Q which is not that much more expensive used? Thank you!😊
Unfortunately not, I have never seen original Leica Q.
The critics are the people who paid above msrp for their x100v 😂, technology improves, get over it.
Great analysis, TY! Hope you'll do a head-to-head comparison with the Ricoh GR III. The comparisons I've seen suggest that the Ricoh is sharper despite the resolution disadvantage.
In practice, I have found that the X100VI is "sharp enough" for most real-world scenarios. So far, I only have only ever taken one real world image where I might have wanted a sharper lens.
Thank you! Unfortunately, I don't have a GR III, so I am not able to do a comparison.
Another youtuber mentioned that the raw images are pretty soft compared to the jpegs, which was not a thing with the X100V. Did you try out the jpegs or the war images in this review? Can you pls check raw and jpeg sharpness difference?
You can see in his video he uses RAW files processed with the enhance function of Lightroom
Could have sworn that was Barcelona.
in a nutshell... THX!
My pleasure!
It’s my first Fujifilm camera (I’m a alpha shooter) and I’ve had it for about four days now and am pretty satisfied for what it is. I haven’t explored Fuji’s colour science enough or tested the limitations of a fixed lens camera enough yet but I was prepared for the slower AF and all. But what I can say is that for 2450CAD.. the sd card limitation and panel door jiggle/cheap buttons were a let down. It is a camera that I will enjoy though but the product should should be solid.
I'm perfectly happy with my X100V and don't feel a need to upgrade, only thing I really want is IBIS.
Clearly, the image stabilization in the X100VI give it an advantage over the V in handheld lowlight shots of still subjects. However, I also wonder about how the low light capabilities of these cameras compare in terms of noise. Other things being equal, the larger pixels in the 26MP camera should give it an advantage over a 40MP camera in this regard. On the other hand, if the 40MP is a better sensor with newer technology this isn't necessarily the case.
ISO comparison between X-Trans 5 HR and X-Trans 4 is here: czcams.com/video/Q1zi-X_Z2uE/video.htmlsi=8iNWiUsauYd31-nL&t=170
Better low light with lower resolution is an old myth, it doesn't work that way, due to the effect of downsampling.
@@TheHybridShooter a myth? are you sure? That is quite a statement
@@ianmcpartland9306 I obviously am sure, I have shown bulletproof evidence in numerous comparisons, including the one posted above.
@@TheHybridShooter I was under the impression that downsampling reduces the resolution of an image.
@@sl-rt5kv Yes and it compresses the noise in the process, which is why high-res cameras are not wrose in low light.
Just a comment here: yes, the X100V also has compressed lossy or lossless raw files.
I didn’t think so, unless it was added by a FW update.
@@TheHybridShooter So I just checked my X100V right now- yes, it has compressed RAWS, but only lossless, not just compressed as it shows on menu (i.e. lossy compressed). So I guess they added this in firmware upgrades along the line.
That's the thing about Fuji - when there's reviews on its AF, etc. one has to ask which version of the firmware they are using :-)
@@Raist3db It was that way when I was testing the camera. The regular compression is the one that matters in this context, because it gives you X100V file size with the X100VI.
@@TheHybridShooter Well I only want to make clear, you can reduce the size further also on the X100V- that you can have that option. But cool, if doing lossy on the 40MP RAWs gives you a much more manageable size. Thanks for reading and replying.
The quite different results on other channels makes me wonder if there was a problem with pre-production units or if there is poor quality control that may be ongoing. Samuel Streetlife showed a remarkable difference between the X100VI and his Ricoh GR3x.
There is no reason why there would be any quality control issues, Fujifilm has been making this lens since 2020. Considering the amount of misinformation and poor testing methodology that I have seen, I only trust my own testing at the moment. I prefer not to comment on other videos, but the testing methodology in that video doesn't exactly inspire confidence to put it hyperpolitely.
I’ll only pay attention to Gordon from camera labs for lens test. Indoor close up isn’t realistic for comparing two lenses. Gordon does infinity testing at long distances.
Two words regarding outdoors lens testing at long distances: atmospheric haze. Relevant lens testing can only be done in interior.
Both lenses seem to be inferior to ricoh gr's. The 100VI IS noticably sharper.
Thank you for the video.
Considering the amount of misinformation surrounding this topic and ridiculous testing methodology that I have seen in some videos, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some catch the GR comparisons.
You're welcome!
@@TheHybridShooter I made my statement based on my experience using the Ricoh GR III. I am blown away by the quality of this lens, taking into accout that I have a Fuji 18 1.4 lens and use it together with the GR III lens, and I find that the small lens of the Ricoh GR III can compete with the Fuji's 18 1.4. lens. I also have a Fuji 27 2.8 lens which seems pretty dull to me, and I used to have a Fuji 23 2.0, which was pretty good, but not impressive. Therefore, unfortunately I didn't have a chance to test the Fuji 100V or VI lens, but the GR lens is that good, that I highly doubt it can compete with it.
Your comparison is crazy good!
@@kalistratov_photos As you can see in the comparison with Viltrox 27mm F1.2 Pro, it can actually compete with any lens. That is why I am extremely skeptical about those GR claims.
Thank you!
@@TheHybridShooter Viltrox clearly outperforms the X100VI lens, but it's decent.
It will be interesting to see your review of the Ricoh GR III lens, may be some of your skepticism will fade away :)
@@kalistratov_photos No, it doesn't, as you can see in the video, at least not at F5.6 in the center of the frame. I don't intend to review GR III, so it will remain a mystery for me :)
2:44 (and 8:25) Different boxes left and right
Yes, I copied wrong label, sorry about that. 2:44 is correct.
Edit: both are actually correct.
@@TheHybridShooterThe label seems right. I mean prints are slightly different
@@TheHybridShooterFor example, letter "E" in word "MAGNETIC" has white spot in its corner in the right image
@@atselykovskiy Yes, the labels are correct, I got confused for a second. It is the always same box. White spots are optical imperfections / artifacts.
@@TheHybridShooterI thought you put two different boxes in central and corner parts of the frame
Ricoh gr is much sharper
I don’t believe that.
@@TheHybridShooter I am shooting the x100iv side by side with the Ricoh griiiX HDF and yes the files are sharper. Megapixels don’t mean anything at this point. I print large 20x30 with 20 megapixels all the time and it looks incredible. The lens of the Ricoh cameras is in another league. And I don’t really care about sharpness tbh I throw a pro mist filter on most of my lenses and use my film presets. But there’s no denying the Ricoh is much sharper.
@@SneakyCaleb I have already busted one of these "undeniable" claims, so I don't care about written statements anymore. I would be happy to look at your testing, but considering the comparison with Viltrox 27mm F1.2 shown in the video, I am extremely skeptical about your claim.
@@TheHybridShooter the Ricoh GR lens is sharper than the Viltrox. But again sharpness isn’t everything.
@SneakyCaleb Impossible. Nothing that I have ever tested on APS-C is sharper than that Viltrox. Not even Sony GM lenses.
Whether you care about the sharpness is up to you…