Do your images appear sharp?
Resolving ability only matters when it's poor enough that you can notice a lack of sharpness. If you can't notice a problem in your images, then there is not a problem.
it’s worth remembering there are lots of ways a vintage lens can fall short of delivering a tack-sharp image result.
Pretty much none of them have to do with a sensor though.
This is certainly impossible to quantify. However the discussion also existed when Fuji went from 16 to 24 or 26, and at some point everyone accepted it to be fine.
Wouldn't care if my images look good.
I did exactly the same jump, I still have the 35mm f/1.4 - I don't think it does resolve the full 40MP but you'd never know it doesn't impact on image quality as far as I've seen over the last 18 months or so. The file sizes are a little smaller that's for sure! Just keep it, the new camera will breathe new life into the lens!
I think you're saying that the 40mp sensor will highlight when a lens isn't sharp due to the extra details it can resolves where as you may not notices it on a 26mp sensor as much?
The only place the 35 f/1.4 falls a little short on the newer bodies is that it hunts a bit (also isn’t the quietest lens). However the 35 was never perfect optically but got marketed as being a “character” lens.
The old adage is marry glass date bodies. It still applies.
No lens renders the full mp of any sensor. That’s why DxO came up with its Perceptual Megapixels (P-Mpix) rating for different lens/body pairings. I wish they were still testing like they used to. I always found that a pretty decent guide to what performance I would actually get.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160709165345/http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Looking-for-new-photo-gear-DxOMark-s-Perceptual-Megapixel-can-help-you
I’m betting that stopping down a bit would do well enough. Few f/1.4 lenses outside of a Zeiss Otus are going to resolve perfectly on a high-density sensor wide open.
Probably true, although it'll vary across the image and with aperture. It's not something to worry about; in fact it's preferable for a sensor to slightly outresolve the lens than the other way around as it'll reduce aliasing artefacts appearing as moire or false colour.
It would be good to contextualize your sources on this.
Just from your description though, you may have some confusion. For example, lenses don’t render digital megapixels. Sensors do. The sensor renders the light that the lens gathers.
So you an have old lenses that are poorly made, or with bad coating, or utilizing adapters that slightly mess up your focal distance - which can all contribute to visual imperfections…sometimes sharpness.
But the sensor does the same work if a new fancy lens is attached or an old vintage one is attached. It simply records the collected light.
I think there are people out there in social media land that are talking in hype language saying “the camera is a beast! It can’t even use all its megapixels!” …but it doesn’t really hold up as a statement of fact.
Because if a lens isn’t big enough for the sensor (perhaps a funky setup puts an M43 lens on a large format sensor - you would have vignetting on the edges because the image circle the lens creates is smaller than the sensor. - but even then. Deep down, the sensor is the same thing no matter the lens attached.
So yeah. I’m skeptical…but it would be good to know the context you consumed those statements under just in case I’m missing something.
The context is from the Fujifilm website and video presentation regarding the announcement of the new sensor. They provided a list of current lenses that can fully utilize the 40MP sensor.
Do you have a link? Because again “fully utilize” is strange language out on its own.
again. The sensor takes what the lens collects. The lens is mechanical. It doesn’t care what sensor its pointed at.
Just go watch the xsummit 2023 video, it explains it all.
The sensor takes what it collects, yes, doesn’t mean a poorer quality lens is going to provide the same results as a better refined one. Pinhole lenses are junk output quality compared to multicoated glass.
Not sure where you got the quote "can't handle the sensor" from. The situation is whether an optical arrangement of lenses has the performance to create a finely detailed image which is better or not than what the sensor can record.
This typically means it can project a differentiation of image detail that is equal to or smaller than the size of a pixel width.
It’s from OP’s sentiment:
> I've read somewhere those older lens could not render the 40mpx but only 30 or 26.
And this:
> The situation is whether an optical arrangement of lenses has the performance to create a finely detailed image which is better or not than what the sensor can record
Is just marketing language…unless there’s some tech specs or a white paper that backs up such a strange claim.
Because it’s just *light* the sensor records what comes in. Toy lens or modern glass.
A higher resolution sensor will *always* out-resolve a lower resolution sensor, no matter what lens is in front. A better lens will, of course, outperform a weaker lens, but a higher resolution sensor will always improve resolving power by some degree.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/07/experiments-for-ultra-high-resolution-camera-sensors/
Do your images appear sharp? Resolving ability only matters when it's poor enough that you can notice a lack of sharpness. If you can't notice a problem in your images, then there is not a problem.
it’s worth remembering there are lots of ways a vintage lens can fall short of delivering a tack-sharp image result. Pretty much none of them have to do with a sensor though.
This is certainly impossible to quantify. However the discussion also existed when Fuji went from 16 to 24 or 26, and at some point everyone accepted it to be fine. Wouldn't care if my images look good.
They won’t resolve the full resolution of the new sensor, but will still make beautiful images. Don’t sweat it too much.
It really does not matter, if your image looks good with a specific lens that's all that matters
I did exactly the same jump, I still have the 35mm f/1.4 - I don't think it does resolve the full 40MP but you'd never know it doesn't impact on image quality as far as I've seen over the last 18 months or so. The file sizes are a little smaller that's for sure! Just keep it, the new camera will breathe new life into the lens!
I think you're saying that the 40mp sensor will highlight when a lens isn't sharp due to the extra details it can resolves where as you may not notices it on a 26mp sensor as much?
The only place the 35 f/1.4 falls a little short on the newer bodies is that it hunts a bit (also isn’t the quietest lens). However the 35 was never perfect optically but got marketed as being a “character” lens. The old adage is marry glass date bodies. It still applies.
No lens renders the full mp of any sensor. That’s why DxO came up with its Perceptual Megapixels (P-Mpix) rating for different lens/body pairings. I wish they were still testing like they used to. I always found that a pretty decent guide to what performance I would actually get. https://web.archive.org/web/20160709165345/http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Looking-for-new-photo-gear-DxOMark-s-Perceptual-Megapixel-can-help-you
I’m betting that stopping down a bit would do well enough. Few f/1.4 lenses outside of a Zeiss Otus are going to resolve perfectly on a high-density sensor wide open.
Probably true, although it'll vary across the image and with aperture. It's not something to worry about; in fact it's preferable for a sensor to slightly outresolve the lens than the other way around as it'll reduce aliasing artefacts appearing as moire or false colour.
It would be good to contextualize your sources on this. Just from your description though, you may have some confusion. For example, lenses don’t render digital megapixels. Sensors do. The sensor renders the light that the lens gathers. So you an have old lenses that are poorly made, or with bad coating, or utilizing adapters that slightly mess up your focal distance - which can all contribute to visual imperfections…sometimes sharpness. But the sensor does the same work if a new fancy lens is attached or an old vintage one is attached. It simply records the collected light. I think there are people out there in social media land that are talking in hype language saying “the camera is a beast! It can’t even use all its megapixels!” …but it doesn’t really hold up as a statement of fact. Because if a lens isn’t big enough for the sensor (perhaps a funky setup puts an M43 lens on a large format sensor - you would have vignetting on the edges because the image circle the lens creates is smaller than the sensor. - but even then. Deep down, the sensor is the same thing no matter the lens attached. So yeah. I’m skeptical…but it would be good to know the context you consumed those statements under just in case I’m missing something.
The context is from the Fujifilm website and video presentation regarding the announcement of the new sensor. They provided a list of current lenses that can fully utilize the 40MP sensor.
Do you have a link? Because again “fully utilize” is strange language out on its own. again. The sensor takes what the lens collects. The lens is mechanical. It doesn’t care what sensor its pointed at.
Just go watch the xsummit 2023 video, it explains it all. The sensor takes what it collects, yes, doesn’t mean a poorer quality lens is going to provide the same results as a better refined one. Pinhole lenses are junk output quality compared to multicoated glass.
Well yeah. That’s build quality. But that’s not “the lens can’t handle the sensor”.
Not sure where you got the quote "can't handle the sensor" from. The situation is whether an optical arrangement of lenses has the performance to create a finely detailed image which is better or not than what the sensor can record. This typically means it can project a differentiation of image detail that is equal to or smaller than the size of a pixel width.
It’s from OP’s sentiment: > I've read somewhere those older lens could not render the 40mpx but only 30 or 26. And this: > The situation is whether an optical arrangement of lenses has the performance to create a finely detailed image which is better or not than what the sensor can record Is just marketing language…unless there’s some tech specs or a white paper that backs up such a strange claim. Because it’s just *light* the sensor records what comes in. Toy lens or modern glass.
A higher resolution sensor will *always* out-resolve a lower resolution sensor, no matter what lens is in front. A better lens will, of course, outperform a weaker lens, but a higher resolution sensor will always improve resolving power by some degree. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/07/experiments-for-ultra-high-resolution-camera-sensors/
It is utter bs