• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / GFX 100 / Nikon 24-70/2.8 S on Z7, Fuji 32-64/4 on GFX 100

Nikon 24-70/2.8 S on Z7, Fuji 32-64/4 on GFX 100

December 26, 2019 JimK 4 Comments

This is one in a series of posts on the Nikon Z6 and Z7. You should be able to find all the posts about those cameras in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “Nikon Z6/7”. It’s also about the GFX 100, and is in that category, too.

After my testing of the Nikon 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S showed it to be an outstanding example of the breed, I thought I’d test it against my favorite mildly-wide-to-normal zoom, the Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 G-mount lens. I mounted the Fuji lens on the GFX 100, which gives it a resolution advantage over the Nikkor. The more time I spend with the GFX 100, the less I’m interested in using the GFX 50x cameras, which biased my body choice.

Here’s the scene with some trees 47 meters from the camera:

GFX 100, Fuji 32-464 mm f/4 at 47mm, center, f/4

Making three shots for each variation and picking the sharpest, I exposed at base ISO 64 for the Z7, and 100 for the GFX 100.  I used AF-S and the pinpoint spot for the Z7, and the small spot for the GFX 100, focusing on the target grove of trees.

Capture conditions were:

  • Heaviest RRS legs
  • Arca Swiss C1
  • 2 second self-timer
  • EFCS
  • 47 mm for the Fuji, 35 mm for the Nikkor, to keep the vertical field of view constant

Images developed in Lightroom, with default settings except:

  • WB set to cloudy
  • Exposure to equalize brightness
  • Adobe Color Profile
  • Sharpening 20, radius 1, detail 0
  • Pick the best of three images at each test condition

I did not try to defeat Lightroom’s silent distortion correction.

We’ll look at some tight crops.

If you’ve seen these here before, just jump to the images. If not, I need to spend some time telling you how to interpret them. They’re at roughly  250% magnification, enlarged to 700 pixels high on export from Lightroom. If you just want a rough idea of the differences, just look at the images as displayed in-line in the posts. However, if you wish to compare these images in detail, you should view these images by clicking on them to see the source files, then set your browser for 100% zooming. Even better, download them and make Photoshop stacks.

No matter what you do, these crops are all going to look horrible. I’m blowing them up so much so that they will represent the original file after JPEG’s discrete cosine transform has had its way with them. If you want to get a good idea of what the images would look like printed, get far away from your monitor. No, farther than that. Put a bunch of the images up on the screen and back up until the best one starts to look good. Then look at the others. There’s another reason why these images won’t look like the best thing the camera/lens combination can deliver. They’re demosaiced with Lightroom. Lightroom is not awful, but for a particular image, there are usually better raw processors. I use Lr because it’s a de facto standard, because I know it well, and because it’s got good tools for dealing with groups of images.

Here’s how to use these highly-magnified crops. The dimensions of the Z7 sensor is 8256×5504 pixels. If we make a full-frame print from the Z7 on a printer with 360 pixels per inch native driver-level resolution, like the Epson inkjet printers, we’ll end up with a 23×15 inch (58×39 cm) print. The 317×246 pixel crop you’re looking at will end up 0.8×0.68 inches (2.12×1.74 cm).  The Fuji crops are 448×347 since it is a higher-resolution sensor.  Let’s imagine that you or your viewers are critical, and will look at the 22×15 inch print from about 18 inches (conventional wisdom is that the distance would be a little greater than that, or 28 inches (the diagonal), but you did buy a high-resolution camera for a reason, didn’t you?).

The next step is dependent on your monitor pitch, which you may or may not know. Turns out, you don’t have to know it. Just take the 250% crops and view then at 1:1. How high are they? Get out your ruler and measure, or just guess. Let’s say they are 6 inches high. 6 inches is about 7 times 0.8, so in order to view the crops the way they’d look from 18 inches on the print is to view them from 7 times as far away, or 10.5 feet.

Everything here scales proportionately. If the image on your screen is bigger than 6 inches, increase your viewing distance by the ratio of your image height to 6 inches. If you think your viewers are going to almost get their nose to that print and look at it from six inches, divide that 10.5 feet by 3, and look at the image on the monitor from three and a half feet away.

Near the center of the frame:

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, center, f/2.8

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, center, f/4

There is more aliasing, and possibly more longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) in the Nikon image. The advantage of the higher-resolution camera is apparent.

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, center, f/4

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, center, f/5.6

More of same.

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, center, f/5.6

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, center, f/8

The pattern continues.

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, center, f/8

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-464 mm f/4 at 47mm, center, f/11

In the upper-right corner:

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, corner, f/2.8

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, corner, f/4

The Nikkor is soft enough in the corner that the aliasing has pretty much gone away, but it is sharp enough that the resolution advantage of the GFX 100 sensor is negated.

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, corner, f/4

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, corner, f/5.6

The Fuji has crisped up enough that it is sharper and cleaner than the Nikkor/Z7 combination. There is LoCA visible in the Nikon image.

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, corner, f/5.6

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, corner, f/8

The Fuji look much better.

Z7, 24-70 mm f/2.8 Nikkor S at 35 mm, corner, f/8

 

GFX 100, Fuji 32-64 mm f/4 at 47mm, corner, f/11

The Fuji combination continues to impress.

GFX 100, Nikon Z6/7

← Nikon 24-70/2.8 S, 50/1.8 S on Z7 Ring out the old →

Comments

  1. David Berryrieser says

    December 27, 2019 at 7:46 am

    Thanks for this. I have been rather curious how the newest line of full frame lenses would stack up against the venerable GF glass. The nikkor is clearly an excellent lens and a step up from the previous generation of full frame DSLR zooms. I would also note that I have found the middle of the zoom range to be the weakest on the 32-64, though it is clearly still excellent.

    Reply
    • Phil Lindsay says

      December 30, 2019 at 1:04 pm

      Even if the 32-64 is weak in the center range it is still superior (as it should be) to the new Nikon 24-70mm Zoom so why bother with the Nikon lens on a Fuji?

      Reply
      • David Berryrieser says

        December 31, 2019 at 9:33 am

        I don’t think anyone is suggesting using the Nikon Z lens on the a Fuji body. I doubt that it is even possible.

        Reply
  2. Erik Kaffehr says

    December 31, 2019 at 1:22 am

    The amount of color aliasing shows that Nikon needs a camera with a higher resolution sensor than the present one.

    Other than that I would say that the Nikon zoom is impressive, but that also applies to the Fujifilm zoom.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.