Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
Hello,

I could not find that file, discarded it for sure. Would not have been very fair anyway since different lenses were used and the comparison of 120 Pentax Macro to Apo Rodagon D 1:4 would have probably tilted the comparison more toward the Sony.

However, I do have a pretty good comparison between the Sony a7r iv , 3-pass with 16 shot pixel shift, compared to Fuji GFX-50R, 3-pass stitching. Both were done with the Apo Rodagon D 1:4 at f/5.6. This was made of a 5X7 negative of a scene that has a lot of pretty nice detail, probably shot at f/11 or f/16.

If interested please let me know and I will send you a link to a Dropbox folder with the two files.

I am attaching jpeg crops of an important area of the two files, not sure how much of the detail will actually show. The crop is in the center of the scene, just above the central fountain. My evaluation is that the Sony file is slightly better, but you can evaluate for yourself. The fuzzy area above the crest is probably a pigeon taking flight.

Sandy
Sandy, thank you so, so much! Yes, can you please send me the Dropbox folder?

At first glance, it seems like the Fuji GFX 50r is a little sharper, with greater contrast, no?

Believe it or not, I was very, very close to purchasing a used, yet immaculate GFX 50r and Pentax SMC 120mm f/4 Macro from my local camera store yesterday. I stopped at the last second because someone selling a Sony a7R IV on Craigslist finally messaged me back. I’m meeting with them later today to check it out.

It’s such a tough, borderline agonizing, choice for me. Do I choose the 16-shot pixel shifting a7R IV with the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 ART macro (a lens I already have) with a newer sensor, or the more romantic GFX 50R with a larger sensor and arguably better glass?

Besides the obvious difference in size, does anyone know the difference between the 51mp sensor in the GFX 50r and 61mp sensor in the a7R IV? I’ve read that they have different pixel sizes, with the GFX 50r having the larger pixels. Evidently larger pixels mean sharper image quality?