G
Guest
Guest
Pretty soon the sensors will be bigger than the screens we watch them on.
Fuji GFX100S 100Mb Medium Format shoots 4K 30p and 10bit, IBIS
- Thread starter Sam Scoggins
- Start date
The Cornea TV?
In any case, this looks to be a totally awesome stills camera - a $50,000 Hassy for $10,000 - but will probably be kind of/sort of challenged by the next generation of full frame cameras with 65/70 MPX sensors and a significantly lower price point.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
That might happen.
But the real key is the GLASS, and that is what Fuji started with with the GFX line.
This glass is made to out resolve the 100 MP sensor of the GF100, and the GF lenses I have are some of the sharpest I've seen on any camera, including the Zeiss Otus, which were the next sharpest.
If Sony, Nikon and Canon are going to come out with much higher MP cameras, the existing glass will not cut it.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
OK, on full frame there's also f/1.2, and even some f/1.1, f/1.0 and f/0.95. I didn't even think about them because for me f/1.4 on FF is already too shallow most of the time. But yes, if you want just 200 pixels in your image to be in focus, FF is the way to go, I don't think there are many f/1.5 lenses for MF 44x33...
(personally I stopped lusting over high-mpix-FF cameras when Sigma brought out the very nice 56mm f/1.4 for APS-C: it's sharp-enough, shallow-enough, the out-of-focus areas are lovely -this is what I was missing on other APS-C lenses-, and it's also cheap small and light)
Wider aperture can be helpful when you want to maximize background blur and the subject is farther away from the camera: e.g. they'll be completely in focus at F1.2 (full body) at 6.1m (about 20 feet): https://dofsimulator.net/en/?x=ENSAYQL6gAAAJEwkAAADgAA
If the Zeiss 50mm F.7 could be mounted to FF, the subject would be fully in focus at 4.5m (15 feet): https://dofsimulator.net/en/?x=EH0AOQIygAAAJEwkAAADgAA
So I guess one could say 'You can never be too shallow!' lol
Canon 28-70 F2 is deemed the best zoom in its class. It's pricey at $3,000 but the reviews have been glowing. Nikon is being panned in some circles for its upcoming 58mm F 0.95 as being far too too expensive at $6,000 - i.e. pricier than simply pricey - but, assuming the next line of sensors will be in the 65-70 MPX range and that Nikon will make a high end Z-mount camera with them, the idea seems wholly reasonable. And besides, with Canon and Nikon switching to mirrorless and all new mounts, the new lens lineups are a sure bet. Some will be in the F4 range for the entry level models - where an old EF or an F mount glass with an adapter will do just fine anyway - while others will be the premium products on the pro-tier level.
Sam Scoggins
Well-known member
First time-lapse from the GFX 100, shot in 12K (4K on Vimeo):
https://vimeo.com/334130852
https://vimeo.com/334130852
Looked cool when it played briefly (4K). It's been many years and Vimeo still won't play 4K smoothly at my location, nor can pausing the buffer help (player flaw). YouTube does 4K and 8K fine.
That's over 10x the needed download bandwidth (22Mbps). Guess that's why I never upload videos, use or recommend Vimeo anymore. There was a brief period when it provided better quality than Youtube. Now it's not even close, which is unfortunate as competition is good. Another possibility is the ISP is throttling Vimeo content and not YouTube (which would also be uncool re: competition).
If that video is truly 12K, they can get more bang for buck uploading to YouTube as 8K (whereby the handful of people watching on an 8K display can have something new to watch
).Haha- not a bandwidth issue at the ISP level, their platform/player is broken, debug info:
Note in Safari 8K is an option (tried Chrome, Firefox, Safari).
Last edited:
Vimeo doesn't have a modern era codec required for 4K. YouTube has their own VP9 but H265/HEVC has been tied up in litigation and licensing disagreements. There are a few other codecs being currently developed but whether or not Vimeo will splurge on them is anyone's guess.
See the debug data: they’re serving a 25Mbps stream with 224Mbps avail bandwidth- that’s about 10x more than needed! H.264 is fine.
CPU load is low. It starts playing fast, then buffering stops, frames drop, repeat forever. Seems like a bug in their player at this point. Maybe the bug is due to too much bandwidth- could try throttling the network lol.
Going slightly off topic as we never do, here's 4K 60p that plays fine here (racing simulator I wrote a few years ago):
Here's what YouTube used to look like back in 2012! (HD):
Watch both full screen, especially in 4K. There's a slight quality difference (the thumbnails do not represent actual quality).
Kinda like comparing cameras in 2012 to the 100Mpix Fuji! (e.g. 5D3's HD vs. GFX100's 4K). Now we're back on topic
Or YouTube hasn't placed the file on the closest server.
I looked up the "official" bit rates - they vary even for a given video quality - but I also recall being unable to watch 4K until I got ~ 80. There was this great F65 clip of a Bengal tiger in 4K and I wasn't able to watch it until 2015 or so.
Even at 10Mbps the player should simply buffer, let ya wait a bit and still be able to watch without pausing. Perhaps related to the HLS/DASH and stream switching. That said, the player should work/buffer correctly no matter what network speed if the user turns off Auto (HLS/DASH) and picks a resolution to download. One could use e.g. WireShark and figure out direct link to CDN so you can download to your computer and play normally lol (or use one of the video downloader sites).
Sam Scoggins
Well-known member
GFX100 uses a true 16-bit sensor
up to 5.5 stops of IBIS
Cinima4k video in 10-bit internal and external
Internal is 400mbps
Log/hybrid log gama
The camera doesn’t use the full 100MP but it uses the full width of the sensor
The image circle is just a hair under 50mm
Tilt adapter gives traditional video camera ergonomics
Some 35mm size lenses and tilt shifts will cover GFX
Premista do cover the GFX
G-Mount lenses will work for video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=67&v=adgifDcu_mk
up to 5.5 stops of IBIS
Cinima4k video in 10-bit internal and external
Internal is 400mbps
Log/hybrid log gama
The camera doesn’t use the full 100MP but it uses the full width of the sensor
The image circle is just a hair under 50mm
Tilt adapter gives traditional video camera ergonomics
Some 35mm size lenses and tilt shifts will cover GFX
Premista do cover the GFX
G-Mount lenses will work for video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=67&v=adgifDcu_mk
G
Guest
Guest
...Kinda like comparing cameras in 2012 to the 100Mpix Fuji! (e.g. 5D3's HD vs. GFX100's 4K). Now we're back on topic
Speaking of camera comparisons...
Lee Morris at F-Stoppers compared different formats in a blind test that will be revieled in a video next week sometime.
https://fstoppers.com/originals/can-you-guess-which-camera-took-which-picture-383354
I think most of know the differences and benefits of the varying formats. For example if you are making 2MP images, then there is probably little reason to spend more for medium format cameras. But we also know that there is a big difference between medium format lens at f4 with 100MP image, vs 16MP m43 camera at f1.8.
...we also know, these types blind comparisons are mostly pointless click bate. But good fun nonetheless.
G
Guest
Guest
These were fun! Thank you so much for sharing!