The New Fuji X100T, 56 1.2 APD, Graphite X-T1 and 50-140 Zoom.

The New Fuji X100T, 56 1.2 APD, Graphite X-T1 and 50-140 Zoom.


The new X100T – The new flagship X100 – $1299, November ship date. Buy Here.

Well, the new Fuji stuff has been announced and so far it is everything I have been told it would be. Cool updates but nothing really “WOW” or groundbreaking..yet.  Today’s announcement brings us a new version of the X100 that will replace the “S” version, yes the X100T is now a reality. Basically it has a better build and improved Hybrid viewfinder. In reality, a rehash of the X100S. Coming in at $1299, this now Flagship version of the X100 will be shipping in November in black or silver.  The X100T has the same sensor and IQ as the X100s and will still work with all X100 accessories such as the wide and tele adapters. 

The X100 is a classic and IMO the best camera in the entire Fuji lineup. I’d take an X100 over any other Fuji camera made today. I expect the T will do well, but since it is a rehash, I doubt it will sell in the same numbers as the X100s or original X100. You are gaining a new Hybrid VF, enhanced controls and faster shutter speeds. Will be available in black or silver.


Press Info for the X100T

“The X100T comes newly equipped with an advanced Hybrid Viewfinder with an Electronic Rangefinder that now gives users reduced display lag times, automatic brightness controls and a Natural Live View shooting display.

The new FUJIFILM X100T blends award-winning image quality with a renowned design that gives enthusiast and professional photographers the most important controls and functions at their fingertips. The X100T combines the resolution and power of the APS-C X-Trans CMOS II Sensor and EXR Processor II with a bright FUJINON 23mm F2 fixed lens for optical excellence.
And to give photographers a new type of film simulation to work with, the X100T ships with Fujifilm’s new ‘Classic Chrome’ film simulation that delivers muted tones and deep color reproduction for beautifully dramatic images.

Advanced Hybrid Viewfinder with Electronic Rangefinder
The FUJIFILM X100T uses an improved Advanced Hybrid Viewfinder with Electronic Rangefinder that allows focusing as if using a mechanical rangefinder. While in optical viewfinder mode, pushing the OVF / EVF switching lever to the left will switch the viewfinder to electronic rangefinder mode. Additionally, Focus Peak Highlight and Digital Split Image can be selected, and the magnification of the focused area can be changed. Compared to the X100S, the frame coverage in the X100T has been increased from 90% to 92%, and the field of view can now be accurately checked closer to the actual subject. The X100T also uses Real-time parallax correction for more accurate image composition. Reframing after bringing the image into focus is no longer necessary, allowing for a seamless shooting experience.

Photographers also now have access to Shooting Effect Reflection settings within the Hybrid Viewfinder to recreate selected camera effects, including Film Simulations. When turned off, users can see the natural view. The image within the finder is displayed at the maximum frame when shooting under dim light and dark areas such as night scenes, enabling shooting while looking at a smooth image, all while greatly reducing display lag time.


Range of controls expanded, upgraded body
The FUJIFILM X100T now allows photographers to set the aperture to 1/3 steps using the aperture ring, while the exposure compensation dial has been extended to ±3 stops. Also, the command lever has been changed to a command dial, and through the adoption of a 4-way controller to improve operability. The X100T is also now equipped with 7 customizable Fn buttons for a truly personal shooting experience.

The FUJIFILM X100T has an upgraded body that is die-cast magnesium on the top surface and bottom of the body for a highly durable and functional design. The X100T’s aperture ring, shutter speed dial, and exposure compensation dial now have a groove shaped pattern for an improved feel and grip. The X100Talso features a high-definition 1.04M-dot 3” LCD has for extraordinary visibility.

New “Classic Chrome” film simulation
Fujifilm’s unprecedented image quality has been cultivated through the development of photographic films over the past 80 years and helps to reproduce warm skin tones, bright blue skies and rich green trees, just as photographers remember the scene. The X100T ships with the new ‘Classic Chrome’ film simulation mode, which delivers muted tones and deep color reproduction.”


The Fuji X-T1 Graphite Edition – $1499, shipping in November 2014. BUY HERE.


Fuji has also announced and are releasing a new flashy version of the X-T1 in a graphite finish and other enhancements over the original X-T1. I think it looks nice but you can check out the press info below:

“The new special edition FUJIFILM X-T1 Graphite Silver, a weather-resistant premium interchangeable lens camera with a large OLED electronic viewfinder (EVF) that delivers an instant image preview. The X-T1 Graphite Silver also includes the latest generation 16.3 Megapixel APS-C X-Trans CMOS II sensor and the segment’s fastest autofocus of 0.08 seconds*1 for professional photographers and enthusiasts who want the ultimate in image quality in all weather conditions.

Triple layer coating for a remarkable Graphite Silver finish
The new FUJIFILM X-T1 Graphite Silver edition uses a triple layer coating to give it a unique and durable fit and finish. Following an antioxidant treatment on the magnesium body, a matte black undercoat (primer) is applied to the X-T1 as a first coat. The black undercoat tightens the colors of the shadowed areas and makes the highlighted areas stand out. Then, the X-T1 body is rotated at a high speed while thin coats of ultra-fine paint particles are layered using a computer controlled “Thin-film Multilayer Coating Technology” for a smooth and luxurious Graphite Silver finish. Finally, the X-T1 is given a clear coat for extra durability and a deep gloss finish that subtly changes its appearance depending on how it is struck by the light.

Natural Live View and increased shutter speed
The FUJIFILM X-T1 Graphite Silver edition has been upgraded with a new Natural Live View in the EVF that displays images just as the naked eye sees them. With the X-T1 Graphite Silver edition, users can disable the Preview Picture effects from viewfinder image while shooting to display a truly natural image composition just as they would see with an optical viewfinder.

The FUJIFILM X-T1 Graphite Silver edition is now equipped with a high-speed electronic shutter that has a maximum speed of 1/32000 second that can be set in 1/3 steps when using the FUJINON XF23mmF1.4 R, XF35mmF1.4 R, or the XF56mmF1.2 R lenses. Additionally, the mechanical shutter will not operate when any speed for the electronic shutter is selected for a completely silent shooting experience.

X-T1GSE_front_hand X-T1GSE_top

New “Classic Chrome” film simulation
Fujifilm’s renowned image quality has been cultivated through the development of photographic films over the past 80 years and helps to reproduce warm skin tones, bright blue skies and rich green trees, just as photographers remember the scene. The FUJIFILM X-T1 Graphite Silver edition ships with the new ‘Classic Chrome’ film simulation mode, which delivers muted tones and deep color reproduction.

Exciting firmware update coming December 2014 (X-T1 Graphite Silver and X-T1 Black)
Fujifilm will release a free, comprehensive firmware update in December 2014 specifically for the new FUJIFILM X-T1 Graphite Silver and the original X-T1 Black that will give users exciting new features and controls to dramatically enhance their X-T1 shooting experience, including:

AF Area direct selection – Users can select the focus area with the 4-way controller, without pressing the Fn Key.
Function replacement for the AE-L/AF-L buttons – The currently locked AE-L/AF-L button function will now be interchangeable, depending on the user’s preference.
Focus Area size variability during MF – Users will be able to change the focus area in Manual mode during One Push AF with the AF-L button.
Macro Mode direct selection – Users will be able to directly turn ON or OFF the Macro function in Auto Focus mode to expand the distance measurement range to the short-distance range. This will be possible without accessing the pop-up menu screen.
Q Menu customization – The update will render the items and layout of the Q Menu, used for quick access of frequently-used items, changeable to the user’s preference.
Video frame rate selection – In addition to the existing 60fps and 30fps selections, 50fps and 25fps, as well as a 24fps selection will become available to users. 50fps and 25fps allow video editing in the PAL region, such as Europe and elsewhere, without converting the frame rate. The 24fps will offer movie-like video capture and play back.

Video manual shooting – Users will be able to select ISO sensitivity prior to shooting videos, as well as adjusting the aperture and shutter speed during video shooting.
Phase Detection AF support for One Push AF – With One Push AF, operated by pressing the AF-L button during manual focusing, the update will enable Phase Detection AF with quicker focusing speeds.
Metering area focus area interlocking – The update will enable users to interlock the AF area position with the metering area when spot metering is selected.
Expansion of the Program Shift setting area – The update will enable the current Program Shift, in which the low-speed side is 1/4 second, to be shifted to a maximum of 4 seconds.


The new Fuji 56 1.2 ADP – $1499, ships in December. BUY HERE!


Then we have another Fuji rehash! A new version of the 56 1.2 that will have better 3D pop and smoother Bokeh because of the “Apodizing Filter”. When the Nocticron beat out the original Fuji 56 1.2 Fuji must have decided that they needed to update the lens, which is not even old, leaving original 56 1.2 owners out in the cold. For $1499 you can now have the 56 1.2 APD version, with a better/smoother and more blurred Bokeh.  Press info is below:

“The new FUJINON XF56mmF1.2 R APD (Apodization) is a fast and nearly silent lens for FUJIFILM X-Series CSC’s that has a maximum aperture of F1.2 to make it the world’s brightest autofocus lens for digital cameras with an APS-C sensor. In addition, the new apodizing filter makes it the ideal choice for portrait photography where every detail is crystal clear, with images set on a gorgeous bokeh with smooth outlines for pictures with a three-dimensional feel.

The XF56mm F1.2 R APD is constructed of 11 glass elements in eight groups, including one aspherical glass molded lens element and two extra low dispersion lens elements. Spherical aberrations are corrected by the aspherical glass element to deliver high resolution at the maximum aperture setting. Additionally, thanks to the combination of two extra-low dispersion lens elements and three cemented lens elements, chromatic aberrations are greatly reduced.


The 50-140 F/2.8 Zoom – $1599, ships in December. BUY HERE!


Finally, a new Zoom has been announced from Fuji, the 50-140 f/2.8 with a price tag of $1599. This will be like a 76-213 f/2.8 lens, so one for the tele zoom guys who love their 2.8 aperture. Press info is below:

The new FUJINON XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR has a focal length equivalent to 76-213mm, and a constant F2.8 aperture throughout the zoom range. The length of the lens barrel remains constant throughout the entire zoom range, and features a weather resistant and dust-resistant finish that can also work in temperatures as low as 14°F. Thanks to a high-performance gyro sensor, a unique image stabilization algorithm and the bright F2.8 aperture, hand-held photography is possible in a wider range of shooting conditions. The XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR also now uses the world’s first Triple Linear Motor for fast and quiet autofocusing and shooting.

The FUJINON XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR has a lens construction of 23 glass elements in 16 groups, which features five ED lens elements, and one Super ED lens element with low dispersion to substantially reduce chromatic aberrations. The XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR also uses a new Nano-GI (Gradient Index) coating technology that ensures this high-performance lens delivers the outstanding imaging results that photographers have come to expect from the award-wining X-Series.

So there ya have it, new stuff from Fuji just announced and super scorching off the press!

You can pre-order the new Fuji items at B&H Photo.


  1. Steve, I think this may be your strongest endorsement of the original X100 yet. I agree with your assessment 100%. I love mine. The X00’s IQ has a beautiful organic quality I haven’t seen from anything else, except Leica.

    • Calvin, yes, you ought to know that it’s the latest craze and soon everyone will want one. :p) Gawd knows what it does, though.

      Seriously, for a moment. For me the body design is the best of the retro-look designs to date, and if the price includes the kit zoom, not too bad, although it is in Sony A7 territory here. However, did you notice that the kit zoom, whilst of standard 18-55 focal length, is an f2.8 to f4 instead of the ubiquitous f3.5 to f5.6, a full stop faster at the tele end. Very handy.

  2. Got slightly excited for a minute thinking T meant telephoto. A 24-70 lens would be good but no doubt add a lot of bulk and weight. Maybe they should have bought out a 50mm (equivalent version) as this is not much different to the X100s.

  3. According to the specifications there truly is the rumored OVF power safe mode that allows up to 700 shots with one charge. This is a major achievement. Furthermore there is a magnification mode displayed into the OPTICAL viewfinder. Wow, if this works well in practice. Fuji demonstrates the potential of mirrorless cameras. I dare to say a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera with OVF & long battery life is getting closer.

  4. A couple things about the X100T sound awesome to me: +/- 3 exp comp, new top dial control, customizable buttons, and 3 customizable auto ISO settings. Sounds like they finally got the usability down!

    Electronic high shutter speeds are nice, but not really necessary with the built-in ND filter. And I actually prefer full stops on the aperture dial.

    What is “electronic rangefinder?” Is this another focusing simulation, like the split image display? Sounds fun, if not entirely necessary. I didn’t read anything about it, so I assume the EVF is the same resolution as the X100S?

    Zach Arias has a preliminary review on Dedpxl with examples of the “Classic Chrome” film simulation. It looks sweet! The previous film sims just looked like saturation boosts to me. This one actually looks like a real film simulation. I’m guessing (and hoping) that they’ll include it in a firmware update for the X100S 🙂

    Based on what I’ve read, I don’t think many X100S users will be upgrading. There just isn’t anything
    wrong with the S, unlike with the original.

    • And there isn’t anything wrong with the original since all the firmware updates improved it so much…and of course it has the bayer sensor which some prefer over the X-trans.

    • Check out the fuji website for better explanation of the digital rangefinder and The Fuji Guys latest videos on YouTube.. freakin’ awesome! Finally! A true digital rangefinder!

      Will share my thoughts about that and try to explain a bit below…

      I always suggested (not to suggest I was the only one who has) a good many improvements to the Hybrid VF and AF/MF system in any discussions about the next X-Pro camera (and consequently it relates to X100 model as well) in the past, and now has implemented these suggested improvements to the Hybrid VF and AF/MF system in this new X100T.

      I always liked my X100 and the X-Pro1, the only 2 X cameras to have the Hybrid VF. Great idea, but it was never really executed the best, imho… you can only focus using AF with the OVF, and it’s been too many personal hit or miss (more misses to make it annoying) to trust the AF using the OVF.. so, you really have to use the EVF to get accurate focus confirmation and framing (framing generally not being nearly as big a deal as the AF when using the OVF). This negates the benefits and fun of using the OVF, in my opinion, and using the EVF was the only way to focus and frame with most confidence… and at the time, X100S is much improved, the X-Pro1 still the oldest, lower res and laggy.

      I also wanted an improved refresh and magnification much like the X-T1, and they’ve done nearly as good with the new X100T! Thank you Fuji!

      Going back to the hybrid VF and AF & MF of the X-Pro1 (and X100), it sucked not being able to get a more true digital rangefinder experience using the OVF.. you can’t MF at all! All be it I felt a bit over the top and high tech to implement in the near future, I really felt I wanted a small focusing patch digitally overlaid within the OVF and adjusting frame lines to match the focusing area just like a real rangefinder.. didn’t think they could do it, but it would have been the best thing to make a true digital rangefinder.. and guess what, they did it! I wanted the patch to be centered like in a Leica M, but being in the bottom right corner works for me.. as that patch actually shows what’s in the focusing square and the frame lines adjust SMOOTHLY TOO! to the focusing you are doing manually!.. it use to be much more choppy, flash on and off as you autofocuses.. no more in the X100T! And that patch can still be used with AF and you can finally see not only the exact point of focus to confirm, but that little window should also show you the overall framing so you have highest confidence you are getting the best & most accurate framing while using the OVF! Again, Freakin’ awesome!

      This X100T’s features described above and a significant list of other improvements and added features makes me finally jump back on board with Fuji as this really does seem like ideal digital rangefinder experience that won’t break the bank like a Leica.

      Word on any news regarding a new X-Pro has dropped off for a while.. supposedly supposed to be announced at Photokina coming up next week, but I feel it will be delayed longer since this big Fuji announcement so soon to Photokina.. regardless, with the way the X100T has advanced the X100 line, I am very optimistic the next X-Pro will have all of the above and then some.. will be really really cool.

      • I watched their video, but they didn’t talk about the “digital rangefinder” function (at least not from what I saw). But regardless, the X100T is not a digital rangefinder. There is no rangefinder window or RF focusing mechanism. A digital image overlay is just a simulation, it’s not actual rangefinder focusing.

        Don’t get me wrong, I love the X100 series! The X100S is the best camera I’ve ever used. It doesn’t matter to me that it’s not a true RF. I think rangefinders are fun, but they get trumped up in camera folklore. I could never use an RF as my main camera because of the focusing patch’s limitations.

  5. Hey Steve – I’m keeping my original, classic X100 with its gorgeous 12mp sensor. There is something special about the IQ coming out of the original X100. And with the latest firmware update for the X100, it is a very different camera and much improved over the camera when it was first launched.

  6. Oh, and I always liked the X100’s viewfinder (even though I never had an X100, but have tried it through friends). Can’t wait to see this new version.

  7. I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned anything on the QX1 or QX30. Although I can see the negatives in these new “cameras” certainly there are interesting new innovations that warrant attention. 🙂

      • F/2.8 is “equivalent” to f/2.8 only. Always. Regardless of format. Aperture is a measure of aperture only, not of depth of field. Stop trying to redefine basic photographic terms.

          • The size of the sensor doesn’t matter with regard to aperture markings on a lens. That’s why an external light meter doesn’t need to know the size of the sensor in order to give you an aperture reading. It just needs to know your ISO and shutter speed. If a light meter gives you a reading of f/2.8, that’s a constant f/2.8 no matter how big or small your sensor is. Aperture means aperture, not depth of field. Focal length and aperture are not an “equation” to be adjusted on both sides. That’s simply wrong. To say that this lens is equivalent to a 76-213 f/4.2 is to suggest wrongly that it gathers less light than it does, or that it can’t be used at the same aperture settings as a full-frame 2.8 lens.

        • It’s either 55-140mm f/2.8 or equivalent to 76-213 f/4.2. What it is not is 76-213 f/2.8,because in algebra, you can’t adjust one side of the equation without adjusting the other side as well. So how about we all just call it a 55-140 f/2.8 and be happy?

          • I have the same problem with apple calling their iPhone 4s camera a 35mm f/2.4. It’s really a 4.28mm f/2.4. Believe me, a 35mm f/2.4 full frame equivalent will perform much better and low light and do much better with shallow depth of field than a iPhone 4.28 f/2.4 (among other things).

      • I have to disagree with you there.

        I will say first though that you would be right say the actual focal length and the actual f-number of a lens do not change regardless of the size of the sensor that is behind it. These characteristics will never change.

        However, when you talk about equivalence to full frame and effective focal lengths and apertures with regard to the “look” or depth-of-field of the image produced, the Fuji 50-140 2.8 lens mounted onto an aps-c sensor body (i.e. XT-1) will not behave like a 76-213 2.8 body would on a full frame camera. This can be explained in two ways:

        1) When you shoot with a camera with an aps-c sensor, you have to be 1.5x further away from your subject to achieve the same framing that you would with the same lens on a full frame camera, due to the fact that an aps-c camera has a 1.5x smaller field of view to work with. Being further away from your subject in this way increases your focus distance by a factor of 1.5 and therefore increases the depth of field. Increasing your focus distance in this way extends the depth of field, similar to shooting at a higher f-number. So the effective f-number (considering to the depth of field achieved) is in fact higher than 2.8.

        2) If you are going to use the actual characteristics of the lens to obtain a full frame equivalent, you have to apply the crop factor to both the focal length and the f-number because they are both part of the definition of aperture (f-number). The f-number, as you probably know is equal to the focal length divided by the diameter of the iris opening in the lens. If you are going to multiply the actual focal length by a crop factor of 1.5 to obtain an equivalent full frame focal length, you are also multiplying the actual f-number by 1.5 because of the definition of aperture given above. Basically, if the effective focal length increases by a factor of 1.5, so must the effective f-number. You simply cannot multiply the focal length by the crop factor and not the aperture because that would violate the definition of aperture and the math would not add up. So in fact, the 50-140 2.8 lens mounted onto an aps-c camera would produce images similar to those produced by a 76-213 4.2 lens mounted onto a full frame camera.

        If you don’t believe me, try it for yourself. Having said that, this lens still looks awesome for those who own an x series camera and I am sure it will make beautiful images. But it will never produce the same images that can be made by a 70-200 2.8 lens on a full-frame camera.

        Also keep in mind that in terms of total light gathering ability, 2.8 on an aps-c sensor body is not the same as 2.8 on a full frame body. As everyone here knows, a full frame sensor is roughly twice as big in area as an aps-c sensor. So even if this lens is a 2.8, it will still gather only half as much total light as a 2.8 lens on a full frame camera. So also in terms of total light gathering ability, the Fuji 50-140 2.8 lens has an effective 4.2 aperture full frame equivalent, if you pit it against a 2.8 lens on a full frame camera. Basically, a 76-213 4.2 lens on full frame would gather the same amount of total light as the 50-140 2.8 on aps-c.

        • “Basically, a 76-213 4.2 lens on full frame would gather the same amount of total light as the 50-140 2.8 on aps-c.”

          Right, so I’ve got my two cameras, one APS-C onto which I’ve got the 50-140 f2.8, and the other with this “mythical” 76-213 f4.2. Now I take an independent exposure reading and at 100 ISO and with the lens at f2.8/140 mm setting, I get a shutter speed of 1/250, say. Now common sense tells me that if I want to shoot at f4.2, the necessary shutter speed should be somewhat less than 1/125 to maintain the same effective exposure. So why does the camera meter indicate the same exposure as the independent meter reading?

          The issue is it is not the total light falling over an area that matters for exposure, it is the intensity of light at the sensor or film surface. It is not difficult to explain. A 5×4 sheet film gathers far more photons than a FF sensor, but effective exposure would be the same using equivalent ISO settings. The intensity of light of the f4.2 lens would not be the same.

          Naturally, a lens with any given focal length will provide identical depth of field on whatever size sensor/film with which it is used, with the sole proviso it has sufficient covering power for the larger formats. Hence, why the argument that sensor size is irrelevant holds true.

          The problem with equivalence is it is trying to normalise DoF over different format sizes. And I would dare argue that the percentage of photographers to whom this is relevant will be small. How may use an APS-C camera and a FF and take identically framed images with two different lenses set at apertures to given identical depth of field? Not many.

          We’ve seen the relevance argument taken to extremes where manufacturers have been accused of blatant lying about their lens’ specifications, simply because the argument hasn’t either been well promoted or, even where it has, has so befuddled readers that they don’t truly understand.

          • “Naturally, a lens with any given focal length will provide identical depth of field on whatever size sensor/film with which it is used, with the sole proviso it has sufficient covering power for the larger formats. Hence, why the argument that sensor size is irrelevant holds true. ”

            You clearly did not actually read my post. I simply stated that the depth of field would be different if you desired the same framing of your subject across different camera formats. Using an aps-c camera was an example of this since the cropped field of view requires you to be further away from your subject than if you were to use the same lens on a full frame body. This increases the focus distance and the depth of field. Now if you don’t care about consistent framing/composition of the shot between different camera formats and will shoot both pictures without takign the different field of view providied by eac into account then sure, the depth of field would be the same. But when equivalent framing/composition is desired, your working distance is impacted by the sensor size because of the field of view provided by that sensor, affecting the focus distance used and the depth of field achieved.

          • Jonathan, I don’t think we are too far apart in reality, just viewing it from two distinct positions. The problem with forums is each side must necessarily post its whole view first, and I admit not always being easily understood, whereas in a face to face, we’d be able to interrupt for clarification as we went.

            I did read your post, and I think I summarised the equivalence camp in the first line of my penultimate paragraph. It is the substitution of the lens’ actual technical specification for something that, importantly, is not a truly recognised format. Only for that small number of photographers for whom it may have an application.

            50-140mm f2.8 is universally understood and as I said, will be applicable over any format it is used with. Equivalence means “equal” and 76-213mm f4.2 is not equal in the accepted sense. And this is due to the f4.2 not being an equivalent aperture for exposure, but for providing a comparable depth of field. Any mathematician will tell us that both sides of an equation must be equal, and with the “equivalence” argument, they are not.

            In the case of this lens, its spec remains a constant throughout, but for viewing it has an equivalent FoV to 76-213 but it is still an f2.8 optic. And this is why in FoV terminology equivalence it can correctly be described as a 76-213 mm f2.8.

            It is when we come to crop sensors that the equivalence points, in part, are useful. The focal length equivalent is a very useful figure, as I’ve stated a number of times as it enables us to make sense of the myriad of true focal length lenses that will be found on digital cameras from entry level compacts to APS-C. How else are we to make sense of, for example, 4.1 to 12.3mm, save knowing the lens is a 3x zoom? The actual focal length tells us nothing about the FoV covered. The equivalence figure does.

            The awkward position equivalence creates is by not being able to be expressed in a simple way without causing confusion.

            In the case of the lens we are addressing here, it is simply not true that it is equivalent to 76-213mm f4.2. For this statement to be correct, it requires being qualified as to exactly what the f4.2 is equivalent to. One simply can’t leave for the vast majority of people who don’t know that it solely relates to equivalent depth of field, and only that, when framing for equivalent FoV. And we know this message hasn’t got out by comments about manufacturers lying about the spec of their lenses.

            I know Robert didn’t want to see any more arguments about equivalence because he knows, as do I and many others, it is of limited interest and, frankly, most actually probably don’t need to know.

          • “50-140mm f2.8 is universally understood and as I said, will be applicable over any format it is used with. Equivalence means “equal” and 76-213mm f4.2 is not equal in the accepted sense. And this is due to the f4.2 not being an equivalent aperture for exposure, but for providing a comparable depth of field. Any mathematician will tell us that both sides of an equation must be equal, and with the “equivalence” argument, they are not. ”

            First, the key thing to understand here is that when we talk about equivalence, we are talking about the settings that can be applied to produce the same pictures on different platforms, not different pictures.
            As I said before, if you change the focal length by any factor to acheive an equivalent, the effective aperture must also change by the same factor, as per the definition of aperture. There is no way around that. To apply the crop factor to only the focal length and not the aperture is being inconsistent and is incorrect. Also, the expousre of the 4.2 full frame lens would be the same as the 2.8 cropped lens, because of the total amount of light gathered by both cameras to take the same picture (i.e. same framing./composition). The exposure does not depend on the lgiht gathered per unit area (i.e. intensity). This is intuitive since we know full frame cameras to be better in low light becuase they can gather more of the light to make the same pictures, giving them the apparanet edge in ISO performance. For example, lets say that you are framing a landscape shot with an aps-c camera with a 35mm lens @ 2.8. If I frame that same shot (i.e. same framing/composition) but with a full frame camera with a 50mm lens @ 2.8, the exposure on the full frame camera will be roughly 1 stop higher than on the aps-c camera beacause there is twice as much sensor area used to create the same image on the full frame sensor (since intensity is the same on both). So to acheive the same exposure on the full frame camera, I would have to stop it down to f4.2.

          • “For example, lets say that you are framing a landscape shot with an aps-c camera with a 35mm lens @ 2.8. If I frame that same shot (i.e. same framing/composition) but with a full frame camera with a 50mm lens @ 2.8, the exposure on the full frame camera will be roughly 1 stop higher than on the aps-c camera beacause there is twice as much sensor area used to create the same image on the full frame sensor (since intensity is the same on both). So to acheive the same exposure on the full frame camera, I would have to stop it down to f4.2.”

            Completely incorrect statement. Exposures will be identical.

            It is clear to me that you have not grasped what the difference in light gathering capabilities is between different sensor sizes. You are confusing the discussion as to why larger sensors offer, ceteris paribus, superior noise performance at low lighting levels (i.e. better high ISO performance) with the “equivalence” argument as it relates to aperture and depth of field for equal field of view.

            The sensor is an electronic device, and like any electronic device it creates noise. With audio equipment we hear it, but with a photographic sensor we can see it. The sensor has a native sensitivity and by increasing ISO we are merely amplifying the signal, hence adding more digital noise, the more amplification that is employed. The more light the sensor captures, the better it responds to this amplification.

            But although the larger sensors capture more photons, each photon captured over any part of its area is of exactly the same strength. This is why exposure over different sensor sizes is a constant, providing the same illumination levels apply.

            Now to your incorrect statement. I’m not sure if this is purely what you believe, but it is not born out in practice. And I can very easily demonstrate the point in a practical test using my A7. This is advantageous as it rules out any differences between camera models’ metering characteristics or image processing engines affecting the results. The only variable on the A7 for this test is whether it is set to FF or APS-C crop mode.

            Firstly, I set the A7 to APS-C crop mode and framed the Canon zoom lens at 35mm, f4, ISO 400, Aperture priority and noted the exposure, which was 1/100 sec.

            Now, setting my Sony A7 in FF mode, I set my Canon zoom to 50mm at f4, ISO 400, in aperture priority mode and noted the exposure given. Now according to you, you are expecting one stop higher exposure, or to restate by keeping the aperture the same, you’d be expecting something in the region of 1/200 sec. But it was again 1/100 sec.

            This result won’t come as a surprise to the vast majority of photographers who know that for similar ISO, a lens of whatever focal length will always pass the same amount of light if their f stop is the same.

        • Hey Terry & Jonathan, interesting to see you are both correct but view photography from two different point of views. It is so sad that we all have managed to somehow buy into a format for different reasons but then constantly compare it to another format we didn’t buy or don’t have with us, so strange. I believe we should stop working out equivalents, stop comparing, understand the format we use, whether APS-C, 35mm or medium format and what characteristics they offer, what field of view your lens offers, what depth of field is on offer with your format, taking focal length and subject distance into account. And why full frame, whats full frame? Full according to what? So misleading! Terry, like myself view aperture from a light perspective first and foremost, then along with our format, focal length and subject distance, understand what depth of field it offers. Jonathan, you may also see aperture the same way, but by doing the math on both focal length and aperture for equivalence, one gets the impression, that depth of field is foremost and how the lens handles light is secondary. May be wrong here and I apologise if you are only bringing up a mathematical fact to prove a point. I have seen many people using this math to prove a point in positions of influence and actually land up giving the impression, especially to newbies, that light is no longer important, shallow depth of field is everything, and if you don’t get this, you are being ripped off and have an inferior product. It also gives the impression that the actual focal length and aperture physical change and companies should label the gear correctly, so damaging. As you know, the focal length given to a lens is its physical characteristics and so is its aperture, they cannot change, so why do we multiply? Please lets stop multiplying these, maybe in the fine print if really necessary or for whatever reason, companies should say equivalent field of view is X or equivalent depth of field (at a certain distance) is Y and leave it as that, for the sake of anyone new to photography. Just my 2 cents, cheers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.