 |
| Example of one of my 'test' images. All the images in this post were edited and sharpened in Lightroom Classic, which we all know does just an okay job. That said, I think these images look good. I suspect they will look even better once DXO includes the X-T5 in their PhotoLab software. That software, with its Deep Prime noise reduction and DXO's camera/lens calibration modules, produces more detail and additional sharpness. (click to enlarge) X-T5; 16-55mm f/2.8 lens @ 55mm; 1/250th sec. @ f/11; ISO 125 |
One of the concerns that many of us have in reference to the new 40mp X-H2 and X-T5 cameras is the question of how well the various Fujifilm lenses will perform when it comes to the ability to resolve all those extra pixels—roughly a 53% increase in pixels. A couple of years ago, Andreas Georghaides, Fujifilm’s UK Head of Marketing, Imaging Solutions, mentioned during an interview on the Fujicast podcast that, initially, their lenses were designed to resolve up to 32mp. To which lenses specifically was he referring? He didn’t say.
Since then (I’ll deduce from what I’ve seen transpire), in anticipation developing a sensor with greater than 32mp, a couple of years ago Fujifilm started introducing second generations of some of their of their most popular lenses with updated optical formulas. Also, (again I’ll deduce) from listening and reading various informational sources, the original “Red Badge” lenses were developed to a higher resolution standard than the regular XF lenses and the newest zoom lenses were also developed with the higher resolution sensor in mind.
 |
| X-T5; 10-24mm f/4 lens @ 24mm; 1/350th sec. @ f/8; ISO 125 (click to enlarge) |
When the X-H2 was introduced there was a bit of confusion as to which lenses would perform best with the new camera. I planned on buying the X-T5 and I know I, along with many others, questioned which lenses I owned would be able to take full advantage of the additional pixels. Would the lenses I owned work well or would I have to buy new lenses? That is something I needed to determine before I made a purchase decision. Finally, Fujifilm published a chart listing the lenses they recommended using with the new sensor. See below.
 |
| From Fujifilm |
One thing to keep in mind during this discussion is that even the oldest lenses will resolve 32mp and that is an improvement over what was achieved with the older, 26mp cameras. An improvement in resolving fine detail would be achieved but not at the 40mp level. At least that is something.
Based on all of the information I had learned, I decided to buy the X-T5. Once I received the camera, of course, I wanted so see for myself how the Fujifilm lenses I owned performed so I set up a simple scenario to test each of my lenses. The test was not scientific and not extensive, but it gave me the information I needed about each of my lenses as to whether or not I would be satisfied with their performance with the X-T5.
Here are the lenses I own:
10-24mm f/4 OIS (1st version)
16-55mm f/2.8 (Red Badge)
23mm f/2
55-200mm f/3.5-4.8
70-300mm f/4-5.6
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 (Red Badge)
I did not test the 55-200mm lens simply because I haven’t been using it and forgot to take it with me for the test.
In a nutshell, with one exception, I was very pleased with how each of the other lenses performed. Without empirical data but by very close visual examination, all were sharp from center to edge. I will be happy with the images produced by the various camera/lens combinations. Also, as a general statement, I found f/8 to be the best aperture to use with my copies of the lenses. Although f/5.6 and f/11 show high sharpness, f/8 is just a tiny bit better. I am guess that at f/11 a little diffraction softening is occurring due to the very small size of the photosites on this new sensor.
 |
| X-T5; 70-300mm f/4-5.6 lens @ 300mm; 1/340th sec. @ f/8; ISO 125 (click to enlarge) |
What was the exception? The 10-24mm lens, at 10-13mm, showed quite a bit of smearing of details as you move toward the edges of the frame. The center was very sharp but as you moved about 3/4 of the way toward the edges, you can start to see a degradation in the resolution of detail. By the time you reached the edge of the frame, the image quality was unacceptable. That occurred even stopped down as far as f/11. That said, that lens showed much the same with my 26mp Fujifilm cameras so this was nothing new. I don’t think the X-T5 made the smearing any worse or any better. I think the issue may be my copy of the lens being subpar. That said, I am not satisfied with the performance of this lens so I will need to figure out what I am going to do about it. I won't keep it. I haven’t yet made up my mind how to resolve this. There are a couple of different alternatives available to me.
 |
| X-T5; 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens @ 400mm; 1/250th sec. @ f/11; ISO 125 (click to enlarge) |
In sum, I am pleased with my Fujifilm lenses’ performance with the X-5. I was able to answer my lens questions adequately. I won’t hesitate to use them and if my images don’t look good, it will be my fault, not the fault of my gear.
Thanks for looking. Enjoy!
Dennis A. Mook
All content on this blog is © 2013-2023 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.
I see you used the same scene for this test as with the Z7II on Oct. 21st. Have you compared these results to the Z7II images. I'm guessing the difference in detail is slight, if any, but I wonder about the smoothness of the transition of detail across the buildings. Thom Hogan wrote a positive report on the XT-5.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the comment and question. I use that scene because it has a wide variety of objects, textures, building materials, signs, fine detail, vegetation, etc. I find I can get a pretty good idea of how well a lens will perform at that distance using it. I haven’t had an opportunity to test the Z7II against the X-T5 as of yet, but I probably will sometime over the next month. When I tested the 26mp X-H2S against the 46.7mp Z7II, I could discern a bit more detail in the Nikon files but I really had to look closely for it. Truth be known, I’m quickly coming to the viewpoint that, under almost all normal circumstances, the visual differences between moderate and high megapixel cameras is so minute that, in effect, it really doesn’t matter. It only matters when you crop in extensively or make really big enlargements.
Delete