Can Pixel Shift Give You the Best High Resolution Images?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ก.ย. 2020
- Does Pixel Shifting really work? Can the Pixel Shifting on the Olympus E-M1 Mark 3 Micro Four Thirds or the Sony a7R4 Full Frame match a Fujifilm GFX 100 Medium Format? Does Pixel Shifting make them comparable? See how the Fujifilm GFX 100, the Sony a7R IV and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III stack up in this camera comparison. #pixelshifting, #formatcomparison, #cameracomparison
Here are the lenses we used: Fuji GF 50mm f/3.5, Fuji XF 23mm f/1.4 , Olympus 17mm f/1.2, Sigma 35mm f/1.2, Canon 50mm f/1.2
SPECIAL THANKS TO LensProToGo for providing the cameras and lenses for this comparison.
Get 15% off your rental from LensProToGo.
Go to www.lensprotogo.com and use the Discount Code: SLANTEDLENS15
Enter the GIVEAWAY: You could win a KINOTEHNIK Practilite 802 LED Light!
gleam.io/idZef/tsl-september-...
Take a look at Kinotehnik Lights: kinotehnik.com/
B&H - bhpho.to/3hVgOF1
CAMERAS USED IN THIS COMPARISON:
Fujifilm GFX 100 Medium Format:
B&H - bhpho.to/2XvnvWa
Amazon - amzn.to/3iE9Sfs
Sony a7r IV Full Frame:
B&H - bhpho.to/2DaTi8b
Amazon - amzn.to/2PMthyw
Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III Micro Four Thirds Format:
B&H - bhpho.to/30sHQNR
Amazon - amzn.to/3iDZ8xP
SHOW US SOME LOVE! SUBSCRIBE!
Subscribe to The Slanted Lens and get new videos every Thursday
bit.ly/1RgdYoM
Support The Slanted Lens by shopping our affiliate links:
B&H: Weekly Photography Deals & More: bhpho.to/2AxlpH2
Amazon: amzn.to/1T7Z20D
Follow The Slanted Lens-
Facebook: / theslantedlens
Twitter: / theslantedlens
Instagram: / theslantedlens
Visit the webpage: theslantedlens.com
Visit our SPONSORS
Tamron Lenses: bit.ly/2mZgkoz
SKB: www.skbcases.com/
Platypod: www.platypod.com/
Westcott: www.fjwestcott.com/?acc=d09bf...
Datacolor: bit.ly/2lZk8Bi
FotoproUSA: www.fotoprousa.com/
Triple Scoop Music: www.triplescoopmusic.com
Litra: litra.com/
Kinotehnik: kinotehnik.com/
TSL Store: theslantedlens.com/tsl-store/
---
GEAR USED:
Canon C200
B&H: bhpho.to/2FJaH8d
Amazon: amzn.to/34aYAbJ
Canon 24-70 2.8
B&H: bhpho.to/2OCKjgl
Amazon: amzn.to/2O871PH
Sony A7 RIII
B&H: bhpho.to/2DZYHut
Amazon: amzn.to/2QFH0Zu
Canon EOS R
B&H: bhpho.to/2roExVE
Amazon: amzn.to/2QEnk8s
Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 G2
B&H: bhpho.to/2J2wp4j
Amazon: amzn.to/2KCVw0v
Tamron 28-75 2.8
B&H: bhpho.to/2FsWNno
Amazon: amzn.to/2KJ3rcD
Tamron 17-28 2.8
B&H: bhpho.to/2ItePur
Amazon: amzn.to/37qnWVh
Platypod
B&H: bhpho.to/30rqHlp
Amazon: amzn.to/2X7BnGD
Spyder Color Checker
B&H: bhpho.to/2JgfPCz
Amazon: amzn.to/3eofTeb
Sennheiser G4 Wireless Lav
B&H: bhpho.to/2BrOeei
Amazon: amzn.to/2Mreesc
Discounts:
15% off Lens Pro To Go
www.lensprotogo.com
Use Discount Code: SLANTEDLENS15
$10 off Luminar by Skylum
macphun.evyy.net/c/2073517/64...
Use Discount Code: LuminarTSL10
__
Jay P. Morgan has been working as a Commercial Photographer and Film Director in the Los Angeles area for more than 20 years developing an impressive list of clients from Paramount to McDonald's. Jay P.'s experience with elaborate set design and extensive lighting are key to the success of his illustrative work.
Thanks for a well thought out comparison, it’s always interesting coming at a problem from a different angle. It only works for static subjects of course but it gives way more flexibility and higher res options to cameras with lower resolutions. Great stuff.
Thank you. Glad you appreciated the video. Thanks for your comment!
Thanks for the video. I would also recommend a follow up comparing with the GFX100 pixel shift feature planned for release some time this year via a firmware update.
That will be amazing. Thanks for your comment!
@@TheSlantedLens pixel shift is now available for the gfx100 with firmware 3.0 released recently.
It’s time to plan for you follow up testing
Don't shoot Pixel Shift images outdoors. Artifacting from movement in clouds, trees, grass etc makes it not worth the effort. Pixel Shift is ideal for Architectural interiors, Still Life & Artwork reproduction.
Great points. Thanks for your insight!
I made several photos outdoor. Without wind no problem.
If you shoot architecture outdoors there is no problem with HighRes, because the buildings are not mooving! I also used HighRes with cityscapes at night, water is no problem and the dynamic range is much better then with a single shoot
What size prints can be made with these images before they “pixalate” just bought the Alpha One and I’d love to know how far others have pushed this??? Also, can transparencies be made that can be projected??? 🤔
I used pixel shift years ago on a Pentax K1. It was nice but I never shoot anything where their is no movement so it wasn’t much use. Wonder how a pixel shift and focus stacked image would look?
Yeah, the movement issue limits the applications of pixel shift. That's an interesting idea. I added it to our list.
Awesome video, thanks a lot😊
Each camera has its place, function and application. There are no bad cameras anymore, but as far as pure imagine quality and practical usability are concentrated (and all other matters and price aside) the GFX100 stands alone because Multishots with other cameras can’t get done with rapid motion subjects or without the use of a tripod.. all of which the Fujifilm can do directly handheld and in one click.
And as far as comparing Multishots quality, once (if) the GFX100 in the future gets to do 400MP, it will once again stand alone and demolish all competition.
Keep up the good work guys, your channel rocks⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Very good points. The GFX 100 is amazing. It is just not practical for everyone. Thanks for your comment!
Great vid! Interesting. Thanks.
Glad you liked it! Appreciate your support!
Wow at last someone that has actually demonstrated the advantages that the 4 shot and 16 shot capabilities can offer. Thank you very much for this 👍. By the way, I have been shooting 'digital only' since 1994, I definitely have the need for this quality for a few "very important " clients while using down to 16M pixel chips for others.
So glad you found it worthwhile!
Wondering what lens was used on the Olympus, and at what aperture? Also not sure whats going on with the 4 image hi-res, pretty sure that doesn't exist. should have used tripod 8 image hi-res with a pro lens at f4 or f5.6.
We used the pixel shift mode. The Olympus image is 10368 px x 7776 px. That is 80.62 megapixels. We also used a tripod. Here are the lenses we used: Fuji GF 50mm f/3.5, Fuji XF 23mm f/1.4 , Olympus 17mm f/1.2, Sigma 35mm f/1.2, Canon 50mm f/1.2
@@TheSlantedLens Olympus uses 8 images for "classic" hi-res (I think it uses less, maybe 4, for "hand-held" hi-res, but those files should be smaller [Edit: no, hand-held uses up to 16 images, but resolution is smaller in the end]; could've been interesting to compare this mode to the other cameras, but better not with the GFX 100, rather with a 50 MP model). The image quality you show is worse than what I myself experienced under good conditions, but it depends heavily on the lens and aperture used (I've got bad results too). And no, I would never compare a m43 camera to a "medium format" digital camera (price, size and weight are incomparable ;-)). Having pixel-shift hi-res mode is just nice for some applications (I'm using it for digitizing film negatives and slides with the relatively cheap 30 mm macro, and it works very well), and are available in "lesser" Olympus models too (like the old E-M5II and Pen F digital).
The Olympus files we processed were indeed 80MP; so we apparently did use Tripod High-Res mode, but we mistakenly said that it was stacking 4 shots, not 8. Thank you for the correction!
@@kennethcmerrill I wonder how much better my 8x10 will look with the gfx 100 rather than the Olympus?
The Olympus f 1.2 lens are for blurring the background
Not Olympuses sharpest lenses
Great review
I´m a bit confused - the results i get from the High Res Tripod Mode from the EM1MK3 are much sharper and more Detailed...did you set the High Res Mode to Tripod or was the setting maybe Handheld on the Tripod?
It was tripod mode on the tripod. The final image was 80 mb.
Totally agree something very off with those Oly shots in the take or the processing. I see in my shots an amazing level of detail and no noise when processed from 80mpx raw. My guess is they left image stabilisation on, which of course should be off on a tripod.
I think that picture they used is simply not perfectly in focus.
hi , i'm using sony A7riii when i try to shoot the pixel shift technique with flash the shutter automatically turned to 1/13, do you know why
I am not sure why. I have not seen that problem before.
Nice. it would be interesting to compare the processed images with the texture parameter, or with the sharpness filter, applied consistently
That would be a great test. Let us know what you find out.
I really like how you went above and beyond to give the lower-res camera it's best chance. This matches what I've seen on other channels. Pixel shift can add a BIT more detail, but not a lot. One of your recent videos showed that 30MP and 60MP images look very similar, so wasn't surprised at the Sony performance here. From what I've seen, the best way to get more resolution than what the sensor provides is stitching together a panorama from images taken of each subsection of the whole. Of course, this can be done with any camera, even the GFX100.
Great point about stitching images together. Thanks for your comment!
Having owned an E-M5iii this reflects my experience. I was super excited for HR mode, but was never really that impressed with the results. I only used it for landscapes, including a lot of long exposure shots. While it reduced the noise and added a bit of DR, the images never really came out that much sharper. One of the major downsides is that the hot pixels were multiplied and it took even more work to eliminate them from the final image. There was also some odd texturing that occasionally popped up in certain areas, and I’m not sure if that was due to the long exposures or something else, but it was a regular pattern and made the images unusable.
You mentioned shooting with the Hasselblad, and it endedup being better resolution. Which Hasselblad were you shooting with?
It was probably the X1D II 50C: th-cam.com/video/HaEZ1THAMVw/w-d-xo.html
Good job guys, this is a great informative series. Any chance you can post the actual images on your website? That way people can evaluate image quality at the viewing size that best works for them? Just to add around 9:15 I haven't actually seen many M43 owners state that M43 IQ equals Medium format/Large format. The vast majority of M43 owners accept the trade-offs in image quality for weight savings. However, what I see more often is people putting down the M43 systems with the "if your standards are poor, then M43 cameras are OK and you may as well use Smartphones" argument.
Yeah, that's a lame argument. Thanks for your comment.
Well executed effort, and interesting to see the results.
Thank you very much! Appreciate your comment!
Olympus doesn't have any 4 image stack mode. only Tripod mode (8 image stack) or Handheld hi-res (16 image stack).
Yes, that was misspoken. Thanks for you comment!
I like the comment about getting the camera that meets your need. I am an amateur photographer. I use primarily my camera to take scenery shots on ridiculously long hikes and also for action photography in football games. I use an Olympus EM1mii because:
1) I can't afford to spend $10,000 on a camera
2) I don't want to carry a 6 lbs machine up the steep and long hikes. My Em1mii weighs 1 1/2lbs with the lens on. When I go for very long, I carry an Em10 that weighs even less.
3) The resolution of the Oly is more than enough for my needs.
4) I get 15 FPS from my Oly for the action photography, even FF is not there (yet), yet alone medium.
But I know that I am giving up on IQ and resolution, but to me, it is doesn't matter.
You make an incredible point that is the point. The reason all these cameras exist is because there are different needs for photographers. Which in the end means there is no perfect camera. Just the camera that is perfect for what you do.
Doesn't the GFX also have pixel shift? I either heared rumours a long time ago or it kinda got forgotten about. It shouldn't really have much to compare it to (except things like the PhaseOne 400MP in that case), but just out of curiosity it would be fun to see - even if it in fact was just a rumor.
This should also lead to a multiple exposure enhanced image process in Photoshop (like you likely did the the Olympus) It basically is stacking multiple handhold images to enhance detail and reduce noise. This can be done with any camera and would be really interesting to see how it holds up with the manufacturers solutions.
Also: The S series of Panasonic features this tech and does it amazingly well. Especially because the new S5 can even do it in camera and RAW.
The pixel shift in the GFX is in the works. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
I like micro 43. Photographers pixel peep, most people buying photos don't. The larger the print, the further you stand away from it to look at it. If I need higher resolution, I find stitching a few photos together works well.
Great point. Thanks for your comment!
I totally agree with your theory, but my threshold would be FF sensors. When I need higher res, I stich pictures too so I wouldn't consider medium format. But M43 sensors are a bit limited in terms of pixel count/High ISO performance in my option.
@@matrixlee6392 I have no problems up to 800 ISO. 20MP is fine and I can add more with stitching. I do have a full frame camera but only use it when the lights bad.
I hope you don't shoot low light.
@@yeetiesandwheaties 800 ISO at F1.8 is fine. I rarely need more than that.
brilliant, btw, try out the same thing with brenizer technic, making the ff and micro format photos cover the same wide and high of the thing, shot with the medium format
That sounds interesting. I have added your idea to our list.
I was just going to suggest the same thing. I shoot artwork with APS-C and when I need extra high resolution I use a longer lens, and create a matrix of shots which ACR then stitches together seamlessly.
Question: Are you actually comparing sensors here or isn't it that you are comparing the lenses?
Next, a 16-image stack of a GFX 100 shot ;-]
That would be a crazy big file.
Crazy enough Fuji just updated the GFX 100 with 16Image pixel shift for 400MP shots
I’d be curious to see how pixel shift compares with Topaz Gigapixel on a single image if the end goal is just to have a hi res file for large prints.
That would be a good comparison. I have added your idea to our list. Thanks!
+1
Gigapixel AI introduces some REALLY funky artifacts.
Gigapixel ai isn't reliable for most applications, lots of weird artifacts
In my testing of Topaz Gigapixel versus the Olympus high res modes on an EM1-iii I prefer the Topaz results for the sort of landscape work I do. Inevitably there is some movement of vegetation that causes trouble for the multiple exposures. Olympus claims that it can swap in areas of motion with 1x pixels, but I never came across this in my testing. Perhaps there are some cases that work, but not enough to be reliable. My comparisons were done in bright sunlight and high res shot modes may help reduce noise on fully static scenes. Now I don’t bother with pixel shifting with its associated time penalty and uncertain results. When I want to print big from an EM1-iii file I use Topaz.
can you maybe tell me how to remove constant quality shifting while my phone is compltely still ?
i have a brand new 649 euro phone and everything around my face is constantly shaking and shifting while i record in 1080p 60fps and even though the lighting condition is very good.
even on ''ultra stable'' it's still there.
I don't have experience with the Euro phone. A good question for someone who has reviewed the phone, or the manufacturer.
When we divide the medium format sensor area by the MicroFourThirds area, we obtain (33*44)/(13*17.3) = 6.46. Compared to this huge ratio, the difference between the pictures discussed seems astonishingly small in my opinion.
That is a great point. Thanks for watching!
I believe Fuji are giving the GFX100 pixel shift with a future firmware update. Imagine that!
Pixel shift is an absolute game changer when used for its intended purpose... Interiors, product photography, architecture, food, cars etc.
I photograph a lot of products made from fabric, and pixel shift completely eliminates moire under bright lights which is a big deal for me.
I would never own a camera without it.
I had an A7RIII, haven’t tried the A7RIV yet...
By FAR the best implementation of pixel shift I’ve personally used is Panasonic Lumix. The S1R is phenomenal and, unlike Sony cameras, resolves the image in-camera with no external software.
Anyway, when they work out how to capture moving subjects and put it into smartphones things will really get interesting...
Very great points. Like your comment about how it helps with the moire in fabric. It is definitely a great thing for certain applications!
Will pixel shift work for doing 360 tour work. Resolution is really important for these jobs so it would be great to have the extra resolution.
The only way you can get a 360 pixel shift image is to shoot each section of the image as a pixel shift image and then process them and stitch them together in photoshop. But it will be a very, very large image.
Olympus Hi Res files are meant to be aggressively sharpened in post. Not saying this would change much in terms of the comparison as you probably could sharpen the other files as well, but it does make the OMD files much sharper. Then running some powerful noise reduction like Topaz or DXO prime makes the files look extremely good and usable. Yes more steps and post processing, but for a kit half the weight....
Great points. Thanks for sharing!
Pixel Shift when applied to changing light situations (sun rise, sunset, etc.) demonstrates the same problems as with motion. Also, PS with Sony is a pain in terms of file handling. Pentax's Pixel Shift image handling approach is superior - fast and easy.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge on the Pentax!
How is it a burden with the Sony for files? could you go in detail?
a small addition - Pentax's PS is much more sharp, eye catching and noize free compared to ANY OTHER pixels shifts, including Sony's
I've used image stacking on a 16 megapixel camera to create high resolution images but it took a lot of frames, time to cull the imperfect ones, and a lot of effort to stack and average the remaining pictures into one single image. It even works on low res video frame grabs! SO much is lens, diffraction, and technique dependent but this was a fair comparison, just not exhaustive. Great gear makes these images much simpler.
Great points. Thanks for sharing your experience!
Wheres the Panasonic S1R?
That is another good option!
In the spirit of openness and transparency, could you please share the raw files?
Working on that. Thanks for watching!
@@TheSlantedLens like a Google Drive link, would only take a minute.
How come you did not compare it to a Lumix G9?
We can only do so much. That would be a good one through.
how about editing file
video tutorial please
thanks
I have added that idea to our list. Thanks for the suggestion!
I have pixel shift on my Pentax K70 I need to use it more
Something great to experiment with!
Cant they make a software which can oversample same picture multiple time to generate a single file having much higher sharpness and bit depth.
Adobe announced something similar to that for iPhone images so I would guess that will be available soon.
Is the Olympus shooting with 80mp? Which is not 4 frame stack
Yeah, we misspoke and the editor followed the video. It wasn't 4 frame and the final image is 80mp.
@@TheSlantedLens
Anyway, nice review
You did High-Res testing on Olympus wrong. Olympus Em1Mark3 has 2 native modes of doing high res shots: Handheld High-Res mode (50MP) and Tripod High-Res mode (80MP). Tripod High-Res mode takes 8 images (not 4!) and compiles them into one image in the camera. I have no idea what's that 4-shifted images technique you used for Olympus but it's definitely not the intended one.
We used the pixel shift mode. The Olympus image is 10368 px x 7776 px. That is 80.62 megapixels.
The Olympus files we processed were indeed 80MP; so we apparently did use Tripod High-Res mode, but we mistakenly said that it was stacking 4 shots, not 8. Thank you for the correction!
In the end, the customer doesn't care what camera, lens, lighting you use. They just want a good photo for print or digital. Very few are going to pixel peep and if they do, they are not looking for fine detail but more likely for an object.
The longer I work in this industry, the less I care about cameras from an image stand point because they are all good, after post. What I find effects an image much more is the lenses and whilst I have lenses like the Nikkor 105mm and Zeiss 85mm Milvus, the more I start looking at older lenses, which optically are not as clinical and corrected but have a certain character in their flaws and it is something much harder to replicate in post production. This goes doubly for cinematography, where you have Cooke's, which look completely different to Zeiss.
So if I was going to suggest reviews, I would go with newer vs older, which generally are very interesting comparisons.
Also the Nikkor 58mm f/0.95 Noct would be a very interesting lens to review, particularly compared to the Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 Noct and even the Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 Nokton.
Very true, lenses are huge. Cool idea on the lens comparison. Thanks for sharing your expertise!
You did a pixel shift comparison without pixel shifting the GFX?
The idea was to show if pixel shifting on a micro four thirds could match the quality of a medium format sensor. Obviously a pixel shift micro four thirds is never going to look as good as a pixel shift medium format.
4 images on the Olympus, that‘s the hand-held highres Mode, right? It has a tripod mode with 8 images, too.
I have no idea what they did with Olympus, but it is all wrong. Handheld mode takes 16 images, Tripod mode takes 8 images.
What is 4 images in their test? yet to figure out.
We used the pixel shift mode. And we used a tripod.
The Slanted Lens Which pixel shift mode? The camera has two different modes. The mode for hand-held highres shot is designed to reduce motion blur but may not be ideal for architecture. If the Olympus engineers did it well, it should not make much of a difference for static shots, but who knows... However: interesting comparison!
@@hauke3644 most probably they used Tripod mode, the resulted Olympus image was an 80MP file according to their reply on my comment. IDK why they call it pixel shift mode, it is called High-Res mode in Olympus.
The Olympus files we processed were indeed 80MP; so we apparently did use Tripod High-Res mode, but we mistakenly said that it was stacking 4 shots, not 8. Thank you for the correction!
Just to put this into context, I think it would be interesting to have a smartphone in the comparison - 12MP smartphone vs 20MP m4/3, APS-C, FF, and MF.
That would be an interesting comparison.
Loving the facial hair Jay p.
Thanks Daniel! And thanks for your support!
A few things I noted. One: it is a nice review. Two: you cannot compare a 80 MP vs a 60 MP file without resizing. Well you can, but it is not like for like to my mind. Oly highres at 60 MP is great because it has much more leverage than the 80 MP tends to have. I would never use any of those very fast lenses wide open, but go for the sharpest image at a given F-stop. F1.2 won't be the sharpest although in mFT lenses I noted they tend to be pretty good already. But not as good as F2.0. And we wanted to know how good high res mode was, not how good lenses are wide-open. That is another topic.
Also: the Sony does not (as far as I know) do everything in camera (or does it now)? But that is of course fantastic output for sure.
I personally love the Panasonic Hires in both mFTs and FF because they are very good at eliminating very serious movement (say cars moving).
If money is not a problem than GFX-100 is the best choice for high resolution shooting (like landscapes). But I can get a Oly Em1.2 for 1000 dollar or a Panasonic G9 for the same amount or even less. So even if it is worse, the difference in price is huge.
A final note: what becomes a lot better with pixelshifting is noise. It is easily 3 stops, may be 4. So all in all: if you want to get 50 MP Medium Format at very low prices these mFT cams are worth looking into it. With the G9, you have two modes one of which allows for movement the other mode too but this one does correct for movement.
Very good points. It all depends on what type of photography you are doing. Thanks for sharing!
The Sony 16 stack, had a bit of purple chromatic aberrations however
Good eyes. Thanks for sharing your observation!
Can you please do a photo group with Pixel Shift? Which camera are the best for it? I have been using photo stacking more than 1000 photo with Redmi Note 7 + PMGC_7.0.009_HDR_Version_V13.apk with HDR+ Enchanced. It really look astronomical vs stock or any super speed other gcam. Thanks.
That is an interesting idea. We'll consider it. Thanks for watching!
Hey Hok? Can you do focus stacking on a android phone using that PMG app? IS that the latest version?
@@JJ-vp3bd what is PMG? If it mean Google Camera most Gcam mod does not have manual focus. Some have but you have to merge manually using other program to get focus stacking.
@@hokgiartosaliem4777 which camera app has the best manual focus option or auto focus at different points?
I have software to stack after just looking to take pics in an effective manner
4 shot pixel shift is capturing RGB values directly for each pixel rather than interpolating (actually RGGB). The resolution is the same, but the image is clearer as colour isn't smeared across pixels. 16 shot is true quadrupling of the resolution as well as capturing the RGB values.
Great comment. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
Great Discussion...
Thank you and thanks for watching!
With the Olympus camera you can shoot in high res mode, handheld (50 Mpix). You don't need a tripod. I think the comparison is not complete if you don't comment what lenses are used for this test! the resolution is not only a question of Mpixels! For me, the modest Olympus OMD EM1 III, is a great camera that squeezes the capabilities of the tiny m4/3 sensor to a high level.
We have the lenses listed in the description of the video. Here you go: Here are the lenses we used: Fuji GF 50mm f/3.5, Fuji XF 23mm f/1.4 , Olympus 17mm f/1.2, Sigma 35mm f/1.2, Canon 50mm f/1.2
@@TheSlantedLens I'm so sorry! Need to read the complete text! Thank you for a so fantastic video!
I believe the Fuji GFX is supposed to get pixel shift, hopefully in the somewhat near future.. I actually was a bit disappointed that they didn't introduce it on this latest recent firmware update.
I'd like to see what you could get out of the 100MP electronic "MF" camera with pixel shifting...that would be fun.
That would be amazing and crazy file sizes!
@@TheSlantedLens You got that right.
Heck, I"m ALREADY having to look into larger working external drives and enlarging my NAS backup systems.
That might be an interesting show for ya'll...setting up work storage for these new larger file size cameras and how to best work with them and back them up?
Just a thought...great show, please keep up the great content!!
CC
For what use case?
@@chadaztig07 I'm playing with it with macro shots for one thing.
I don't try to suggest that my MFT cameras can outperform full frame or medium format. That said, I am happy with the results I get. I'm not shooting billboards or commercial work that requires huge print sizes. The largest I print is 20 x 30 and MFT looks perfectly fine for that or smaller sizes. Shoot whatever you want and improve your technique. That will get you better results than chasing gear.
Great words of wisdom. Thanks for your comment!
Take the pictures with Olympus EM-1 III or II in 80 Megapixels (an tripod), ISO 100, reduce it to 50 Megapixel in Photoshop, sharpen it with Topaz Denoise AI (Yes!!!), and you get fantastic results!
Thanks for the great tips! And thanks for watching!
Can you do this with the sony with just the same results? First time I heard of Topaz
I think Pentax has the best approach to Pixel Shift, matching or besting MF
We will have to test one out one of these days.
I don't think you did hi-res mode correctly on the Olympus. The camera stacks 16 images itself and produces a single raw file that doesn't require any further software stacking afterwards.
Should be 8 images (read this in the description for the older E-M5II), but you're right that we get 80MP raw files that can be directly processed with ACR, and I see no degradation; even the DNG converter can handle the files just fine and create DNGs out of Olympus' own format. The JPEG generated by the camera is worse, it uses only the "optical" resolution (around 60 MP, as far as I remember).
I agree, i don't understand the way the OMD EM1MK3 was used. 4 images combined doesnt exist and no special software is needed to process the 80 or 50 mp raw file.
Pretty sure he misspoke and then the editor put the graphics up from the dialogue. We ended up with an 80MP image. Overall the Olympus did quite well for it's size.
I believe it was 8 and we misspoke and then labeled it with what the dialogue said. The final image is 80MP.
The Olympus files we processed were indeed 80MP; so we did use Tripod High-Res mode, but we mistakenly said that it was stacking 4 shots, not 8. Thank you for the correction!
Fair comparison it would have been a problem if a less expensive camera had been equally good. There is a pretty big price difference between all 3. I shoot m43 and like it a lot. I would love to have a medium format camera. But I do not have that kind of money, and for travelling I wouldn’t want to carry a medium format.
Yes, they are pricey and quite heavy for travel photography. Thanks for sharing your experience.
Very interesting comparison. The Sony is a real beast in front of the lovely Fuji. As a Olympus shooter i was a bit confused by the way you compared it without context. A micro 4/3 20mp sensor can't resist in front of 61mp full frame and 100mp medium format. Even the prices of the 3 camera can't compare. The 2 high res modes of olympus need specific conditions to get a best result (aperture, focal, speed). The way you explain it sounds strange, 4 images combined doesn't exist, its 8 or 16. And no special software is needed. In the raw file the stacked images are already combined. Olympus is not suited for a pixel peeping with the best sensor on the market. The advantage of the olympus is its versatility. The hand held high res of 50mp is very often usable on the field to get better images. The high res 80mp gives me better scans than my nikon D850. And foremore the advantage of this camera is having all this in a lightweight clever camera really confortable for adventure. As you said at the beginning of the review the important is to make nice and creative pictures, and a less powerful and huge camera can also give you some flexibility :-)
The Olympus files we processed were indeed 80MP; so we did use Tripod High-Res mode, but we mistakenly said that it was stacking 4 shots, not 8. Thank you for the correction!
I agree, the Olympus is very versatile and great for so many things. When we spoke of processing that was processing the raw file. And we misspoke about the 4 image shift. We ended up with an 80MP final file with the Olympus.
Thanks Kenneth! 👍👍
that feature is perfect for landscape shooting
Yeah, a great way to get larger image sizes!
JP, we know . NBD, ultimately, given your wild persona on The Gong Show, but still.
Afraid that was a woman named "Jaye P Morgan". No relation. Thanks for watching.
Doesn't surprise me! The SONY is a BEAST! MFT's isn't in the same league! I would love to see the comparison with the new S5 to see if it's close for a camera that's 1/2 the price!
That is a great idea. We will think on it.
It would also be very intersting to see the S1R with 47MP native and 187MP HighRes, The Sony HighRes is very special because it uses extrem memory, more than 2GB per picture. The Lumix creates one Raw inside the camera with 350 MB. Even with big memory cards that is a huge difference!
A normal lens on the Fujifilm GFX100 is 65mm and the normal lens for a micro 4 thirds is a 25mm .. I suggest that people compare those next to each other so that they see the different images those two lens make rather then just looking at sharpness. I noticed the Sony had a huge amount of chromatic aberrations on some of the edges in bright areas of the images shown here.
Good points. Thanks for watching!
Strange. In the comparison the GFX image clearly shows more detail than the pixelshifted Sony. Did you switch labels by mistake in the video? The reflections in the granite, the dirt in the recesses, texture in the top shadows. The one labeled GFX looks much more clear.
No we didn't switch the images. Thanks for watching!
Actually, have you considered the resolution of the lens on the Olympus? Maybe the lens is just not sharp enough.
We tried to find the best lenses possible for each of these cameras. And yes, lenses make a huge difference.
I really like the beard!
Thanks! I think it is a keeper for now.
Fujifilm will update GFX 100's firmware to have Pixel Shift function in the near future, imagine if Fujifilm to offer 4x and 16x....the night is still young.
That will be truly amazing!
You touch on it... I like to see you bring back the Hasselblad in your comparison test please. Also, can you explain/do a video on pixel shift vs. HDR? I am a little confuse. Thank you much
With pixel shift the sensor shifts up, right, down and left to give you more information in the image. With HDR the camera takes 3 different exposures and blends them together to get more information in the highlights and the shadows.
Who is blowing up images to 100% ? Nerds only ! If your image is on the web ? Maybe no one can tell. All the camera's look good ! We did look at Resizing and Software ? So many layers of conditions Lens, sensor , settings, the list goes on forever ! Good Review !
Thank you. Glad you enjoyed the review!
And now the GFX100 has 400mpx
Maybe a new round?
Yes. A new round in 2021 would be good.
The GFX also does pixel shift. It doesn’t just improve detail but colour accuracy
Good to hear. Thanks for sharing!
Longtime Olympus shooter here. There certainly is no argument to be made that the medium format is going to blow away MFT even with pixel shifting, it is almost a silly comparison, but there is something wrong with the HR results you got on the Olympus. As others have pointed out the tripod hi-res mode shifts the sensor 8 times (half pixels?) not 4, to result in a 80mp image. Hand held hi-res mode does "up to" 16 sensor shifts making use of stabilization and blending algorithms to get a 50mp image that allows for handheld movement (in fact it relies on some movement to work) and even a little bit of image movement can be ok. If you were in HHHR mode on a tripod it could result in a softer image with a static subject. You also mention early on in the video something about needing to do a 1 second exposure for Olympus hi-res - is that what you did here? That is not correct, you can shoot any shutter speed for the desired exposure in hi-res, up to 1/8000. I'm not suggesting you repeat any tests, just adding some points about how the system works. We all agree, right tools for the right job!
They state that their files are 80 MP, so this is the "classic", tripod-based pixel-shift mode. Still, their example does not look right to me, more like when I used it with an adapted old lens. Especially the halo on the edges looks somewhat wrong to me (the lack of detail less so).
We ended up with an 80MP image so I believe he misspoke in saying 4 times and the graphics reflect what he said. Overall the Olympus did quite well.
We are blowing it up huge and comparing to the Fuji GFX 100. Considering that is some heavy competition we thought the Olympus did pretty well for its size.
I have the Em1 m iii, the GH6, and the Sony a7r iii; the GH6’s pixel shift is significantly better than the Olympus pixel shift; and rivals the a7r iii’s dynamic range. Only thing that makes me want to go for the GFX or high res Sony is the shots that need to be made in a single shot. Wind or any other changes in the environment renders the pixel shift much less effective…however the GH6 pixel shift is impressive.
Pixel shifting, when it works is really amazing. But in a world with where so many things are moving it doesn't work well very often.
I have nikon z9 and this camera need pixel shift upgrade.
The Z9 gives you a beautiful image!
@@TheSlantedLensда, но, мужик посуди сам. Когда выйдет на него обновление, чтобы и он большой формат снимал
Pentax pixelshift is amazin!
Great to hear. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
This is the photo they are looking at when they say *ENHANCE* in spy movies.
That is an interesting comparison. Thanks for your comment!
if you use the pancake on the GFX, the cheapest native lens, you should also on the Sony. not a fair comparison.
Here are the lenses we used: Fuji GF 50mm f/3.5, Olympus 17mm f/1.2, Sigma 35mm f/1.2
@@TheSlantedLens why do you keep always using the 50mm on the GFX? it's the cheapest lens, why not the 63mm f/2.8? you did the same thing on the hasselblad comparison, $500 lens on the GFX and $3000 on the hassle.
@@rodfeher 50mm f/3.5 is just as sharp as other GFX lenses. Also note that Olympus 75mm and Sony 135 GM are the sharpest lenses for those systems but they didn't use them
@@ahmonon4352 63mm f/2.8 is sharper
When you use pixel shift (on any of the cameras you tested), you increases the effective sensor resolution to the point where performance is mostly limited by your choice of optics. This was a fun test guys, but it's not really a camera comparison anymore, is it? It's a lens comparison. What you seem to have show us, at the end of the day, is that *whatever lens you picked for the Olympus (missed which one?) isn't as sharp as the other 2 lenses.* Which isn't such a bad lesson really: if you use pixel-shift on the Olympus, make sure you use it with the 75mm f1.8 or something equally sharp. Otherwise, those 50/80 megapixels just aren't doing anything.
Good point. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
why doesn't canon have any of this ? do they just love to cripple there cameras?
That is a good question. Not sure why Canon doesn't have it.
Thanks for this video - you just saved me $6K
Nice! Glad I could help! Have a great week!
Why didn't you show pixel shifting with the Fujifilm GFX 100 and compare with the other camera bodies? Haha!
The pixel shift for the Fuji GFX 100 is in the works. That will be cool to see when it comes out.
Nice test but you forget to add the Pentax K1 or KP to the mix. They doing pixel shift for years on almost all the models. All processed inside the camera, no gimmicks, no external software. The quality is amazing, even in low light situations the noise performance improves a lot.
Great tip. We had to make choices and that's where we ended up. Thanks for watching!
I have the K1ii, the color fidelity and increased dynamic range blows all FF and even beats MF
So my takeaway was...just buy a Hasselblad X1D II 50C ;-)
That's what I would do!
LOL. That does sound like a good takeaway. Thanks for watching!
Very strange choice of object to photograph, would have been better if the object had more details and structure. It was mostly smooth surfaces and corners with very few small details
The Broad building has so many details it's crazy. The point you are seeing in the image comparisons is the very top corner of a multistory building.
The Olympus stacks 8 shots in tripod, 16 hand held.
Yep. Thanks for your comment and thanks for watching!
Hasselblad only
Yeah, once you use a Hasselblad you love it!
You haven’t test the high resolution mode of the Olympus 🙄
Nope. Another time. Thanks for watching!
Pixel Shift is a feature that gets way too much talk for how limiting it is to use in the world. I did believe in it at first, then when I get my hands on a camera that could do it... I couldn't use it. Too many things move, and too many things shake the camera.
That is the thing. The subject can't move. It's better for architecture or product photography.
I did not "believe" in it, I just thought of it as a nice gimmick for some applications like architecture and still life (too much movement in landscape and nature). Tried it some times with good results (and sometimes with bad ones) but found that I just don't need it for "everyday" shooting. On the other hand it is now a must-have for me - for "scanning" (no FF or APS-C camera in a comparable price range can give me even nearly the same resolution at the moment). I think there's too much talk for applications it's not suitable for, and that's indeed unfortunate.
The 4 image highres on Olympus doesn’t exist. Why do a homemade thing! It’s 8 or 16 and its done in camera. I don’t expect the Oly being as good as the GFX but this test don’t show nothing. Learn different camera systems before you try to show us something, or is there money involved from Sony?
The Olympus files we processed were indeed 80MP; so we did use Tripod High-Res mode, but we mistakenly said that it was stacking 4 shots, not 8. Thank you for the correction! Frankly because we're not being paid by anyone to do these kinds of videos we're not able to spend a whole lot of time figuring out the intricacies of the menus and features. It's not ideal, but we try to deliver the best info we can in the time we have. In this case, we did everything right except we mistook the number of frames that were being captured. Thanks for the understanding.
Yeah, we didn't do a homemade thing. He misspoke. The final image is 80MP and it was done in camera. And no, Sony is not our sponsor. We don't have any camera company sponsors. Thanks for watching!
@@TheSlantedLens All good then, thanks for answering 👍🏼
Aren't Pixel shifting and pixel stacking two different things!!
"With a Pixel Shift exposure, the camera sensor shifts slightly after each shot is taken. Thus, every single pixel has a chance to accurately record red, green, and blue. Generally, this is accomplished in four exposures and then those exposures are stacked and merged together using some type of software." So you shift them in 4 exposures and then they are stacked.
The sky makes a huge difference it’s real blue Olympus
Thanks for watching and keep on clickin!
Quel plaisir avez vous à massacrer systématiquement le micro 4/3 dans vos vidéos ? How much pleasure do you have in systematically killing the 4/3 in your videos?
None whatsoever. My feeling about micro four thirds is people are making a decision about size and portability. So if it works for you that is awesome.
@@TheSlantedLens Changer de métier ou alors parler de photographie et arrêter du faire du marketing pour des sponsors ! Change profession or talk about photography and stop doing marketing for sponsors!
Yay I am the first one to comment
Yay! Thanks for your comment and your support!
There's a widespread myth that just won't die: sensor resolution will outstrip the resolution limit of the lens. Pixel shifting demonstrates this is nonsense. Moreover oversampling can produce more detail, even for the weaker parts of your lens (corners).
Good points. Thanks for sharing you knowledge!
whats a resolution limit on the new sony 20mm 1.8? :
Gonna say nope. But let's see.
Hope you enjoyed the video and learned a thing or two.
@@TheSlantedLens Not watched the whole video yet. Was on the tablet this morning and with my ageing eyes I figure it would be best viewed on the main computer :) Thank you for the videos.
Stitching is the way.
Not pixel shifting.
That is a good approach as well.
@@TheSlantedLens A much better one :)
Serious art photography doesn’t require any particular format. Whether or not you’re Edward Burtynsky (Hasselblad) Jay Maisel (Nikon) or Dan Burkholder (Olympus and iPhone) and a plethora of other photographers shooting all formats, it really doesn’t matter. Most exhibitions, with the exception of s few such as Burtynsky, are printed at sizes that you “will not “ see a difference with or without pixel shift. I’m not really sure where you’re going with all of these these comparisons. MFT Crusaders? It appears that the only crusaders here are the two if you, showing these useless and irrelevant comparisons, with subject matter that is, well, pathetically dull.
Thanks for sharing your point of view.
Every single photographer you named have made a purposeful decision about what format they will shoot with and they have their reasons. Those reasons become part of what becomes their style. So it is not a boring and useless conversation.
Thanks for your reply, fair enough!
IMHO this is comparing apples to pears.
Yes it is. And that is the idea. The cameras are all very different. We wanted to see how the image quality compared.
Pixel shift? Whatever... an ever more convoluted way to try to justify smaller formats. If you *actually need* more resolution, then get it and pass that cost on to your customers, otherwise, don’t, and be happy with it. Trying to save a buck by getting a lower resolution camera then”getting more resolution” with pixel shift is inane. Talk about adding convolution to getting a shot.
It's all in the wallet. Thanks for you viewpoint!
And often it is the compact size.
@@TheSlantedLens I realize that I probably don't share a popular viewpoint, but nothing drives me batty more than someone who blindly thinks and propagates that pixel shift on a smaller format is just as good as simply shooting on a larger format. Smaller formats and pixel shift can have uses, however, I pretty regularly shoot 120 and sheet film and know what a considerably larger format looks like and there just isn't a comparison, even in digital land.
I am not convinced hassleblad fans really get those cameras for quality, more bragging rights and snobbish tendancies to feel they are better photographers than non-hassleblad owners.
Show me a side by side to prove otherwise.
You have to shoot one to know one. The images are amazing!
@@TheSlantedLens I will take your word for it), I was amazed at the difference from APS-C to FF, so will reserve my judgement. Not sure if the Hassy would really be better than the Fuji Medium Format however, more sceptical on that one.
As an Olympus shooter, I think this was done fairly and realistic. Thanks for doing this.
It is good to hear from an Olympus shooter. Thanks for sharing your opinion!
There is no 4-image high-res shot mode in Olympus camera, how come you find it done fairly?
There is Tripod High-Res mode which takes 8 images and compose an 80MP photo and there is Handheld High-Res mode which takes 16 images and compose a 50MP photo. Both modes combine the images in-camera no software needed.
What is this technique of combining 4 Olympus images into one photo with the software remains to be found.
@@didgeriond8047 I think they just read the wrong description and went with it. The test itself was fair, I still think that something wasn't optimal on the Olympus (but that's always a problem with the pixel-shift hi-res mode; I use it only for "scanning" film negatives and slides, and there it's just brilliant for the price I've paid for the camera).
@@c.augustin yes, looks like something went wrong with the Olympus high-res test, I'm quite sure the camera can deliver better high-res result than shown in the video. IMO everything is done fairly except the high-res part for Olympus.
Funny you've mentioned film scanning, I was just looking the other day on how I could scan my old films with my Olympus camera. Do you have any good articles on the film scanning process with the Olympus cameras?
I took a picture with my crappy phone and print it on canvas 20x30 and someone bought it for 600 dollar from my dad.
That's awesome! Hope you continue to sell more and more!