• 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 / a7RIV / Three dimensionality and sensor format

Three dimensionality and sensor format

April 16, 2021 JimK 3 Comments

A conventional photograph, whether seen on a screen or printed, is two-dimensional. Yet some photographs appear to capture a sense of depth. There are several things that can affect this.

  • Chromostereopsis
  • Spherical aberration
  • Perspective effects

But the effect is not well understood, and there is much more heat than light when this topic arises in cyberspace.

One claim that I see a lot is that the effect is only observable with medium format cameras, and that the differences survive downsampling to web resolution.  Another is that it is a characteristic of Leica lenses. I am deeply suspicious of both assertions.

I don’t have many Leica lenses, so I’m not going to try to test the second claim. But I do have plenty of 33×44 mm sensor cameras, as well as many — too many, actually — full frame cameras.

I decided to compare the Fuji 45 mm f/2.8 on a GFX 100S with the Sigma 35 mm f/1.2 on a Sony a7RIV. I tested the Fuji lens at f/2.8, and the Sigma one at f/2, and cropped the full-frame images to a 4:3 aspect ratio. There is a problem: the 33×44 mm equivalent of a 35 mm focal length is about 48 mm, not 45, so the 45 mm images are a little wider in field of view than the 35 mm images. I could have used the Fuji 50 mm f/3.5, but I’ve found that, if you’re looking for a feeling of depth in images made with 35 mm lenses or their equivalents at a few meters distance, that f/2.8 on 33×44 mm sensors and f/2 on full frame sensors is better than stopping down more.

I’ve dealt with the lack of equivalence between the Fuji 45 and the Sigma 34 by presenting the Fuji images both cropped to the same field of view as the SIgma ones, and full frame. You can decide which is more useful. The Sony images are more magenta than the Fuji ones. A reader suggested I match the white balance. I’ve posted images with the Lightroom Daylight white balance, and with -a 10M correction. A reader noted that I should obscure the license plate, so I’ve done that.

All images developed in Lightroom 10.2, with Adobe Color Profile, Daylight white balance, sharpness amount 20, small exposure tweaks (the Sony is about a third of a stop more sensitive), and everything else at default.

Here goes, for four scenes:

 

a7RIV, 35 mm f/1.2 at f/2

 

a7RIV, 35 mm f/1.2 at f/2, -10M
GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8, cropped to same FOV as 35 mm on FF
GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8

 

 

Sony a7RIV, Sigma 35/1.2 at f/2

 

Sony a7RIV, Sigma 35/1.2 at f/2, -10M

 

GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8, cropped to same FOV as 35 mm on FF

 

GFX 100S, Fuji 45/2.8 at f/2.8

 

a7RIV, 35 mm f/1.2 at f/2

 

a7RIV, 35 mm f/1.2 at f/2, -10M

 

GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8, cropped to same FOV as 35 mm on FF

 

GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8

 

a7RIV, 35 mm f/1.2 at f/2

 

a7RIV, 35 mm f/1.2 at f/2, -10M

 

GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8, cropped to same FOV as 35 mm on FF

 

GFX 100S, 45mm f/2.8 at f/2.8

 

I do get some sense of depth in all of the images. I get more at around 4K resolution than I do with the above web-downsampled ones. I see very little depth differences between the two formats.

 

a7RIV, GFX 100S, The Last Word

← Shutter shock in the GFX 100s GFX 100S sensor is a 4-shot stitch →

Comments

  1. Bjoern says

    April 17, 2021 at 6:20 am

    Thank you for comparison. I look at these pictures with full hd resolution and it is hard to see diferences. But it is very obviously to see the color differences. From my understanding of sensor format comparison it would help, if both pictures were color adjusted. Actually I see the Sigma/Sony combo with strong magenta shift and Fuji with neutral colors at my profiled monitor (5300K/100cd). Thank you again for your good and helpfull work.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      April 17, 2021 at 7:47 am

      I didn’t want to introduce another subjective variable by manually altering the color balance from Daylight. Maybe I should rethink that.

      Reply
  2. Tom Hegeman says

    April 17, 2021 at 6:49 am

    hallo Jim,

    at first i want to thank you for all your efforts and inspirations.
    one idea from me (i got my first Fuji GFX 50r 6 months ago and it changed my “personal view” in photography)… to my opinion any cropped relativation in comparing different formats is misleading: i also would not compare cropped 16:9 vs. 3:2/4:3. Because it is the inherent perspective of each format with it specific side- relations, which makes the decisive difference. (plus the qualitative aspects of each sensor (size). ) .. nite: it is the same with the perspective comparison of different focal ranges- cropping is egalizing each genuine character ( in an objective manner… those comparisons mainly show qualitative technical aspects..)

    best, Tom

    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

  • 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
  • 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.