Camera
Adobe Camera Raw vs. Capture One Express Fujifilm: A worthy free contender
Introduction
Over the past few months, I’ve been comparing the editing tools provided for free with your digital camera purchase with the 800-pound, subscription-ware gorilla in the room, Adobe Camera Raw, to see if it’s really necessary to pay for software when you’re on a tight budget. So far I’ve looked at Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Sony, and in this article it’s time to turn my attention to Fujifilm.
| Capture One 21 Express Fujifilm build 14.1’s user interface. |
Fujifilm’s customers have several different choices of software available with the purchase of their camera. There’s the in-house developed Fujifilm X Raw Studio, the Silkypix-based Raw File Converter EX 3.0 and Capture One Express Fujifilm. (Note that there’s also a similarly named and also Fuji-specific version called Capture One for Fujifilm, but since that’s payware it’s beyond the scope of this piece.)
Right now, X Raw Studio supports just 17 cameras, as compared to 42 interchangeable-lens cameras for Raw File Converter EX, and 48 ILCs for Capture One Express Fujifilm. Since Capture One supports the most ILCs, that’s the application we’ll look at in this article. So how does Capture One Express Fujifilm compare with Adobe Camera Raw? Let’s roll up our sleeves and find out.
The ground rules
This article is based upon the most recent versions of each application at the time of writing. For Adobe, that’s Camera Raw 13.2 and Bridge 11.0. For Fujifilm, it’s Capture One 21 Express Fujifilm build 14.1. My computer is a 2018 Dell XPS 15 9570 laptop running Windows 10 version 1909.
 |
| Adobe Camera Raw version 13.2’s user interface. |
I’ve chosen to use images from the Fujifilm X-T3. It’s been available long enough for processing to be optimized, and its launch price and resolution are broadly similar to those of the cameras used in my previous manufacturer software comparisons.
To ensure neither Adobe nor Fujifilm had any advantage out of the gate, I’ve aimed to reproduce, as closely as possible, the look of already-processed images from our gallery, without any prior knowledge as to the recipes behind them.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dale Baskin
Sharpness and noise reduction were left at their default settings to avoid overcomplicating things, while lens corrections were enabled for both applications. Images processed in ACR were saved at JPEG quality 11, which we use for galleries on DPReview. For Capture One, I used quality level 96 which yielded approximately the same file sizes.
The main differences
The most significant difference between Capture One and Adobe’s offerings are in their pricing and camera support.
Capture One Express Fujifilm is completely free of charge, but it only supports Fuji-branded cameras. Although it can import photos from other cameras, it won’t let you edit or export them.
While it’s offered free, you do need to supply an email address and can only get a single-install license for each email address you give. So if, say, you want to edit both on a desktop and laptop, you’ll need to supply multiple email addresses.
Capture One Express Fujifilm is a pared-down version of the full Capture One that’s only compatible with Fujifilm’s own cameras
It also has a pared-down feature set, lacking many more pro-oriented editing, capture, organization and export tools that are available in the full version of Capture One. But it still includes the basic tools most photographers are likely to need.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
With Adobe, by contrast, you have to pay an ongoing subscription fee of at least $10 per month for the Creative Cloud Photography Plan, which includes Camera Raw, Lightroom and Photoshop, and that price could increase in the future.
But Adobe’s apps will support Raw files from close to 1000 different cameras, smartphones, drones and more, and you’ll also get the combined feature-set of Lightroom, Lightroom Classic and Photoshop, which together can do far more than even the full version of Capture One.
Capture One straddles the line between first- and third-party software
Another advantage typical of manufacturer software is quicker and more in-depth support for new camera models, as well as a closer match for the look of images processed in-camera. But with Capture One actually being developed by a third party, that’s not necessarily as true as it is for most manufacturer software.
It’s worth noting, for example, that Fujifilm has a long relationship with the developer of Silkypix. And yet as of March 2021, the Silkypix-derived Raw File Converter EX has yet to add support for either the X-E4 or GFX 100S, both of which are already shipping.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
Support for those cameras in Capture One arrived on the same day both models shipped, however. So perhaps the link with Capture One is closer, or the Capture One team is just quicker (bearing in mind that neither the X-E4 nor GFX 100S uses a new sensor, which theoretically makes adding support a relatively trivial matter).
As for the look of images, Fujifilm promises it will deliver “unmatched straight-from-camera color accuracy”. Adobe, meanwhile, has color matching profiles for all of Fujifilm’s ILCs, but lacks them for many FinePix compacts. But as we’ll see in a bit, that doesn’t tell the whole story.
A clean and logical – but not very customizable – user interface
Capture One Express Fujifilm has a clean, modern-looking non-modal interface with a fixed toolbar at the top of the screen, as well as panels for both thumbnail browsing and all other tools. The tool panel can be place on the left or the right, and the thumbnail panel either at the bottom of the screen or on whichever side remains unoccupied by the tool panel.
 |
| Capture One Express Fujifilm allows only quite limited UI customization. You can only reposition the tool panel and thumbnail browser, pin individual tools, and rearrange the top toolbar. |
Atop the tool panel are buttons to access tabs grouping controls related to library control, filtering, metadata and keywording, and various groups of editing controls. There’s also a “Q” button that groups together duplicates of the controls you’re likely to need most often.
While you can’t add or remove tabs or individual controls in the Express version, you can still pin your favorites to the top of their particular tab for quicker access. You can also add more tools to the topmost toolbar, or rearrange its order.
I found the various controls on offer to be quite logically grouped and named, and easy to use. Windows UI paradigms are followed well, and you can either adjust sliders or type in values directly.
One very slight bug, though, is that the sliders seem to be stored internally with a higher level of precision than numeric entry, with the result that two images with the same numeric value can nevertheless show slightly different positions for the same slider.
Database storage and sidecars
Your editing data is stored in an overall catalog file encompassing all of your imported images, and can also be written to XMP sidecar files in the same directories as the images themselves. This lets you choose which approach you prefer, while avoiding the riskier method of writing edits into the metadata of your original Raw files.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dale Baskin
One slight oddity if you also use Photoshop in your workflow is that Capture One also embeds editing metadata into its exported JPEG files, with the result that by default Photoshop opens them in Camera Raw, not directly into the main Photoshop workspace. You can get around this by disabling Camera Raw for the JPEG file type.
Multiple monitors aren’t supported in the Express version of Capture One, but high DPI screens are supported, as are both pen and touch-screen inputs. Setups with mixed-resolution displays can cause scaling issues, however.
The best performance I’ve seen yet from a free app
Compared to most free, bundled software, Capture One Express turns in a very creditable result when it comes to performance. It still doesn’t manage to match Adobe Camera Raw in this respect – and Adobe has made another step forward in the time I’ve been writing this review – but it comes closer than has any other app I’ve yet tested.
Capture One Express Fujifilm comes closer to Adobe’s performance than any free, manufacturer-supplied app I’ve tested yet
In terms of its user interface, I found Capture One to be faster at browsing full images, while Adobe Camera Raw is a bit quicker when it came to 1:1 viewing and previewing of edits. But the advantage for Adobe was only very slight here, and Capture One’s edit previews remain very close to real-time.
Really, I only had one minor concern when it came to Capture One Express Fujifilm’s performance. The first time it’s started – and again when updated – it pops up a dialog stating that it’s “setting up hardware acceleration”. Your computer remains responsive during this process, but until completed, it more than doubles rendering times.
It takes a surprisingly long time — around 8-10 minutes — to complete this process, during which time CPU utilization never breaks around 20%, nor did my GPU pass 2-3% utilization. And even leaving the computer entirely idle doesn’t persuade Capture One to speed up.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dale Baskin
It’s a minor issue, and one you thankfully don’t see too often, but it’s nevertheless a bit annoying if you’re in a rush when you do. I suggest disallowing upgrades if you’re on a deadline, for that reason.
Adobe’s subscription-ware is still the fastest, though
When it comes to final processing, Adobe has a bit more of an edge. On my machine, Capture One Express Fujifilm requires roughly 20 seconds to process the six images used in this review, as compared to around 15 seconds to process the same images in Adobe Camera Raw.
That doesn’t quite tell the whole story, though, as Adobe’s performance improved noticeably between version 13.2 (as used throughout this review), and version 13.1 (which was current when I first started work). With the earlier ACR version, Adobe required around 17 seconds, putting Capture One just 18% behind Adobe.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
And even after Adobe’s update, Capture One trails by just 33%. By way of contrast, most manufacturer software I’ve tested takes at least twice as long as Adobe, and sometimes much longer.
Default rendering is very similar, but not auto adjustments
In terms of their color rendering, both Capture One Express Fujifilm and Adobe Camera Raw are basically indistinguishable from each other or out-of-camera JPEGs, prior to making any adjustments to your image. At least, for the Astia, Provia and Velvia film simulations.
Adobe’s skin tones made subjects look slightly sickly, whereas Capture One’s skin tones were more lifelike
With that said, results differ quite a bit if you let either application automatically adjust your images. Adobe gives you a single-button auto control, and tends to make bigger adjustments to exposure. It holds onto shadows and highlights significantly better, but also tends to oversaturate for a more consumer-friendly look.
Capture One, meanwhile, lets you choose whether or not to automatically adjust white balance, exposure, contrast/brightness, HDR, levels and rotation individually. Its auto white balance tends to do a better job, and its other auto algorithms also tended to yield more realistic colors in general than did Adobe.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Jeff Keller
I found that last point especially true for skin tones, foliage and blue skies. As you can see in my examples, Adobe’s skin tones has tended to make subjects look just slightly sickly, whereas Capture One’s skin tones are more lifelike. And there was a similar advantage in foliage and skies, which also look more natural with Capture One.
Defaults that differ: Adobe sharpens more while Capture One favors NR
Adobe’s algorithms also apply more sharpening by default, but can introduce slight but noticeable haloing. Capture One doesn’t halo by default, but its results appear less crisp.
With no fuss beyond letting the automatic algorithms do their thing, Capture One gave me significantly cleaner images
Capture One’s default noise reduction levels are also a good bit higher than those of Adobe Camera Raw. The good news, though, is that I couldn’t see any noticeable loss of detail as a result.
With absolutely no fuss beyond letting the automatic algorithms do their thing, Capture One consistently gave me significantly cleaner images. Given the smaller APS-C sensors still used by Fuji’s X-mount cameras in an increasingly full-frame world, that’s definitely great news!
Of course, both applications also allow noise reduction to be dialed back significantly from their defaults. At minimums, though, Adobe still applies a touch more chroma NR than does Capture One.
Adobe’s lens corrections are closer to the camera than Capture One
As for lens corrections, neither application’s results was quite identical to those of in-camera JPEGs, but Adobe seems significantly closer than Capture One. Results from the latter were mostly still fairly close, but occasionally differed quite noticeably. That was also true of vignetting correction, where Capture One sometimes made rather larger exposure corrections near the corners than did either Adobe or in-camera JPEGs.
Capture One also has an occasional tendency to crop images if distortion correction was enabled, even when its “hide distorted areas” setting was unchecked. The degree of cropping varied with lens and focal length, anywhere from none at all, to as much as almost 5% of the image width and height.
With all of that said, both Adobe Camera Raw and Capture One offer a lot of scope for correction, and provide a good set of controls. I’ve found Capture One to be a pretty good match for its Adobe rival, and it’s far more pleasing to use than any other free, manufacturer-provided software to date, making it quite easy to get the look I wanted with relatively little work.
Conclusion
I have to admit, the results of my testing were a bit of a surprise. Given the relationship between Capture One and Fujifilm, and the fact that the latter actually offers the software for its own users, I expected its results to more closely mirror those of in-camera processing. But in truth, it was generally Adobe that got closer to the in-camera results.
Capture One Express Fujifilm could save you hundreds over the life of your camera, yet its image quality and capabilities rival ACR well
Capture One suppresses noise much more so than Adobe does by default, but without losing any apparent detail. Colors from Adobe were generally good and matched the out-of-camera JPEGs better, but occasionally inn my testing I found that skin tones could make people look a bit ill. When it comes to the selection of controls on offer and their ease of use, both ACR and Capture One are pretty close.
Some other differences are in their distortion correction and auto adjustments. For distortion I think Adobe has a slight edge, but for auto adjustments I definitely ended up preferring Capture One over ACR’s more punchy, consumer-friendly look.
I was also impressed with Capture One’s performance. Sure, Adobe still rules the roost in this respect – and its most recent update looks to have taken another step forward – but it’s also payware software being pitted against a completely free alternative. And Capture One gets far, far closer in terms of raw speed than any other bundled software I’ve yet tried.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
If cost is a primary concern for you and you don’t need to work with multiple camera brands, then I think it’s a no-brainer. Using Capture One Express Fujifilm could save you enough over the lifetime of your camera to buy a lens or accessory while still providing good speed, good image quality and a healthy selection of controls.
If you want the maximum possible performance, support for multiple camera brands or the extended features offered by Lightroom or Photoshop, though, then I think an Adobe Creative Cloud subscription remains your best bet.
Capture One Express Fujifilm
| Pros | Cons |
|
|
Adobe Camera Raw
| Pros | Cons |
|
|
Wildlife Photographer of the Year winners
The 11th annual International Landscape Photographer of the Year competition has announced the winners of its 2024 awards, showcasing stunning imagery from around the world. Photographers competed in various categories, including the coveted Landscape Photographer of the Year, requiring a portfolio of at least four images, and Landscape Photograph of the Year, recognizing the power of a single captivating shot.
This year’s competition saw Canadian photographer Andrew Mielzynski, an amateur with a deep connection to the natural environment, claim the top prize for his portfolio of stark images with simple color palettes. Ryohei Irie from Japan captured the Landscape Photograph of the Year award with a mesmerizing image of fireflies illuminating a forest.
Beyond the overall winners, the competition presented awards in specific categories, including Black and White, Aerial, Snow and Ice, and Forest, along with at-large winners. In addition to the overall and category winners, we’ve included several of our favorite photos from the 202 photographs recognized this year. You can visit the competition’s website to see all the winning images or to download its 2024 eBook.
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Andrew Mielzynski, Canada
Subject and location: Cono de Arita in the Salar de Arizaro, Atacama Desert in Argentina
Description: The Cono is a perfectly cone-shaped volcano at 3,690 meters above sea level. It’s very graphic due to the contrast between the dark, perfectly formed cone and the bed of white salt that is found at its base.
Copyright Andrew Mielzynski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Andrew Mielzynski, Canada
Subject and location: Winter Cottonwoods, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Description: During the pandemic, I went out for a walk at a local park during a fierce winter storm. I ran across this scene. It seemed very chaotic, with many layers of trees. I loved how the snow, driven by high winds, was embedded into the bark of the trunks. The snow on the bark created a textural contrast that adds detail and interest to the trees. I took a few frames, trying to simplify the scene in front of me and settled on this one, loving the tones, the depth, the order and the minimalism. Even in a chaotic scene, there seems to be a sense of balance that feels orderly and pleasing.
Copyright Andrew Mielzynski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Andrew Mielzynski, Canada
Subject and location: Found in a roadside ditch near Heathcote, Ontario, Canada
Description: After a melt, we had a flash freeze with extremely cold temperatures and a clear blue sky. I was driving by a ditch on the side of a road that had been filled with water and had to stop and look (as we photographers do, can’t pass a ditch without investigating). This is what I found. Great textures and patterns, tones and flow, with lovely graphic lines creating a dynamic, abstract designs. I love this type of work – it’s so much fun, yet challenging to find just the right composition.
Copyright Andrew Mielzynski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Ignacio Palacios, Australia
Subject and location: Pumice Field, La Puna, Argentina
Copyright Ignacio Palacios / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Ignacio Palacios, Australia
Subject and location: Seven Colors Mountain, Siloli Desert, Bolivian Altiplano
Copyright Ignacio Palacios / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Ignacio Palacios, Australia
Subject and location: Arita Cone, La Puna, Argentina
Copyright Ignacio Palacios / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Gheorghe Popa, Romania
Subject and location: Early Autumn, Vânători Neamț Natural Park, Romania
Copyright Gheorghe Popa / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Gheorghe Popa, Romania
Subject and location: Poisoned Beauty, Geamăna, Apuseni Mountains, Romania
Copyright Gheorghe Popa / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Gheorghe Popa, Romania
Subject and location: Whispers of the Sunken Trees Cuejdel Lake, Romania
Copyright Gheorghe Popa / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photograph of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Ryohei Irie, Japan
Subject and location: Traces of Light, Ichinomata, Yamaguchi Prefecture, Japan
Description: The Landscape Photograph of the Year Award went to Ryohei Irie of Japan. He likes the mysterious atmosphere created by the standing dead trees and firefly light. “I have been visiting this Subject and location for several years during the firefly season, and it is an interesting place because the intensity and length of the firefly light and the Subject and location where the fireflies fly vary greatly, depending on the year and time of day, resulting in completely different works, even when photographed in the same way.”
Copyright Ryohei Irie / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photograph of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Justinus Sukotjo, Indonesia
Subject and location: Mother Care Framing, Walakiri Beach, Sumba Island, Indonesia
Copyright Justinus Sukotjo / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photograph of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Himadri Bhuyan, India
Subject and location: The Flow, Sohra, Meghalaya, India
Copyright Himadri Bhuyan / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Black and White Award
 |
Photographer: J. Fritz Rumpf, United States
Award: The Black and White Award 2024
Subject and location: White Tie Affair. Death Valley National Park, California, USA
Copyright J. Fritz Rumpf / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Aerial Award
 |
Photographer: Benjamin Barakat, Switzerland
Award: The Aerial Award 2024
Subject and location: The Final Dune, Namibia
Copyright Benjamin Barakat / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Snow and Ice Award
 |
Photographer: Jeroen van Nieuwenhove, Iceland
Award: The Snow and Ice Award 2024
Subject and location: Isþyrlu – Ice Swirl, Scoresbysund, Greenland
Copyright Jeroen van Nieuwenhove / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Forest Award
 |
Photographer: Shirley Wung, Taiwan
Award: The Forest Award 2024
Subject and location: Fireflies flying in the Misty Mountains, Wufeng Township, Hsinchu, Taiwan
Copyright Shirley Wung / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Exciting Sky Award
 |
Photographer: Federico Delucchi, Italy
Award: The Exciting Sky Award 2024
Subject and location: Aurora, meteor shower and other cool stuff, Rocca la Meja, Italy
Copyright Federico Delucchi / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Laura Bennet, United States
Subject and location: Sumba Island, Indonesia
Copyright Laura Bennet / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: William Preite, Italy
Subject and location: Pale di San Martino, Falcade, Dolomites, Italy
Copyright William Preite / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Siegfried Makedanz, Germany
Subject and location: Sandfellsjökull Glacier Lagoon, Southern Iceland
Copyright Siegfried Makedanz / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Sabine Weise, Germany
Subject and location: Moonscape Overlook, Utah Badlands, USA
Copyright Sabine Weise / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Yuriy Vantowski, United States
Subject and location: Mount Bromo, East Java, Indonesia
Copyright Yuriy Vantowski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Tanay Das, India
Subject and location: Kistwa, Himalaya, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Copyright Tanay Das / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Rajesh Jyothiswaran, United States
Subject and location: Texas, United States
Copyright Rajesh Jyothiswaran / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
| Images: Canon, Nikon |
It wasn’t long ago that many of our reviews of APS-C cameras had to come with a warning: no matter how good the body was, you were almost certainly going to be limited by lens selection. This was especially true with Nikon and Canon’s mirrorless cameras. Sony has followed its longstanding tradition of letting third parties build out a healthy selection of lenses, and the selection for Fujifilm’s APS-C-only X-mount is second to none, but Nikon’s Z mount and Canon’s RF mount appeared to be almost completely locked down. As a result, you could count the number of APS-C lens options available on your fingers.
But things are changing. Over the past year, we’ve seen several APS-C lenses announced and released for Canon and Nikon cameras, filling notable gaps in the first-party lens lineups. But while the situation is improving, it’s clear that the two companies are still in control.
This week, Sigma released four APS-C primes for Canon’s RF mount, making good on its promise to release six licensed lenses for the system – earlier this year, it released the 10-18mm F2.8 and 18-50mm F2.8. Meanwhile, Nikon has allowed Sigma to release select primes for Z-mount – a trio of F1.4 primes at 16, 30, and 56mm. It’s worth noting the company’s 23mm F1.4 is the only one of its APS-C primes that it hasn’t brought to Z-mount; it likely isn’t a coincidence that Nikon’s only first-party APS-C prime lens is a 24mm F1.7.
 |
|
Sigma’s APS-C prime lens lineup is quite good, and now most of them are available for almost any mirrorless APS-C camera.
Image: Sigma |
However, Nikon hasn’t stopped companies like Viltrox and Sirui from releasing a slew of Z-mount APS-C prime lenses, complete with autofocus. If you pick up a Nikon Zfc or Z50II, you can get anywhere from a 13mm F1.4 (20mm equiv.) to a 75mm F1.2 (113mm equiv.) to go with it, as well as most of the classic focal lengths in between.
Your choices are no longer limited to a few first-party options, manual-focus only lenses, or glass meant for full-frame bodies
This is an important change for APS-C shooters. Even going back to the DSLR days, it’s felt like many manufacturers have viewed the format as a stepping stone to full-frame rather than something enthusiasts and pros might consciously choose. Neither Canon nor Nikon have been particularly prolific when releasing new APS-C glass. But with the gates being slightly opened, you’re no longer limited to a few first-party options, manual-focus-only lenses from third parties, or heavier, more expensive full-frame lenses. Now, there’s at least some selection of third-party lenses with autofocus to choose from, alongside Canon and Nikon’s offerings.
This isn’t to say that you can now buy any APS-C camera you want and be assured that all the lenses you want will be available – you are still at the mercy of what Canon and Nikon wish to allow. While plenty of primes are available for Z-mount APS-C cameras, no fast zoom lenses are available; Nikon’s all start at F3.5 and end at F5.6 or F6.3.
In fact, there are currently no third-party APS-C zooms available for Nikon Z-mount at all, despite the fact that two have made the jump from E and X-mount to RF – it also goes without saying that there are many others more available on Fujifilm and Sony’s systems. That’s a bummer for anyone looking to step up from the kit lens or wanting to shoot sports or birds in anything but ideal lighting without having to shell out for and lug around a full-frame 70-200mm.
 |
|
Tamron has promised to bring its 11-20mm F2.8 APS-C lens to Canon RF mount this year as well – no word on Z-mount, despite Tamron bringing some of its full-frame lenses to Nikon.
Image: Tamron |
RF mount at least has the two constant F2.8 zooms thanks to Sigma, with one more on the way from Tamron, though those are all at the wide end. However, there are far fewer autofocus primes available for Canon, as manufacturers like Sirui and Viltrox aren’t producing them. That’s not surprising; a representative for the latter once said that Canon had told it to stop producing products for RF mount. The 85mm F1.4 lens that Samyang announced for the system in 2020 also disappeared from the market not long after.
In a perfect world, these problems wouldn’t exist. Canon and Nikon would make the lenses that their APS-C cameras needed to stand on their own feet as a real alternative to full-frame options, and there would be robust competition from third parties, which would be allowed to make whatever lenses they want.
None of that seems particularly likely. However, at least those who choose to shoot with a smaller sensor in a Canon or Nikon body have gotten a wider choice of lenses, even if they’re still bound by the companies’ rules.
At the end of the day, that’s better for everyone interested in APS-C, because it means that cameras like the EOS R7 and Z50II are competitive with the Sony a6700 and Fujifilm X-T5 in a way that they wouldn’t have been with an extremely limited lens selection. With any luck, this trend will continue, and the APS-C landscape will become more competitive – even if Canon and Nikon aren’t giving it their full attention.
|
The FE 28-70mm F2.8 GM, attached to the newly-announced a1 II.
Photo: Mitchell Clark |
Sony has announced the FE 28-70mm F2 GM, a zoom lens that trades 4mm at the wide end for an aperture that’s a stop brighter than the one found on a classic 24-70mm F2.8. It’s the company’s first constant F2 zoom lens for its E-mount cameras.
The lens’s optical formula consists of 20 elements in 14 groups, with three aspherical lenses, three super ED elements, and one ED element. It uses an 11-blade aperture. The front element has an oil and water-resistant flourine coating, and the lens is moisture and dust resistant.
It’s far from a compact lens, though it’s not as monstrously large as you might expect – it weighs in at 918g (32 oz) and is around 140mm (5.5″) long. It has an 86mm filter thread.
Sony makes it obvious what lens it’s competing with; highlighting that it’s 36% lighter and 11% smaller in diameter than Canon’s RF 28-70mm F2 L lens while claiming better corner-to-corner sharpness. The company also says the lens’s four linear motors can focus even when shooting at 120fps, and emphasized that they’re quieter than the older ring-type ultrasonic style motor in the Canon F2. In fairness, that lens was one of the original RF-mount releases, announced in 2018.
“Sony makes it obvious which lens it’s competing with”
The quieter operation should help when shooting video. Other pluses for video: it has an internal focusing mechanism which should make it easier to use the lens on a gimbal, the ability to switch the aperture ring into clickless mode and supports the focus breathing compensation mode included on some Sony bodies. You can also set the manual focus ring to have a linear response, which should make focus pulls easier.
The lens has a variety of switches and buttons. There are two customizable focus hold buttons, an Iris lock switch, the aperture click switch and a zoom smoothness switch that lets you adjust between “smooth” and “tight” torque settings.
It’s not the fastest zoom lens available for E-mount: at the time of writing, that prize goes to Sigma’s 28-45mm F1.8, though that model has substantially less reach on the tele end and only a 1/3EV increase in light-gathering ability.
The FE 28-70mm F2 GM will be available in mid-December and has an MSRP of $2,899.
Sony Electronics Announces Its First Constant F2 Aperture Zoom Lens: The Full-Frame 28-70mm F2 G Master™
The Unique Combination of a Versatile Focal Range, Large F2 Aperture, and Compact Form Factor
SAN DIEGO, Nov. 19, 2024 – Sony Electronics Inc. introduces the 28-70mm F2 G Master, the first1 Sony zoom lens with a constant F2 aperture and 77th lens in the Sony E-Mount lineup. This full-frame lens offers a versatile focal range from 28mm to 70mm while delivering prime-like2 bokeh with its constant F2 aperture. Despite its wide aperture and zoom range, the 28-70mm F2 G Master remains compact, lightweight, and well-balanced, making it ideal for both photography and video applications. This combination of zoom range, large aperture, and compact design makes this an innovative and versatile lens for portrait, sports, wedding, event, and video professionals.
“Our goal with the 28-70mm F2 G Master was to create a high-performing zoom lens that could be a strong single lens alternative to multiple primes,” said Yang Cheng, Vice President of Imaging Solutions, Sony Electronics Inc. “We prioritized a lightweight design during the engineering process as we knew that was a critical factor for real-life, practical use. And in a manner that only Sony can do, we were able to deliver a small, standard F2 zoom lens that does not sacrifice image quality. We’re proud to add this to our G Master series and believe it is one of the most innovative lenses ever offered to professionals.”
Sharp Imagery and Beautiful Bokeh
The 28-70mm F2 G Master produces extremely sharp corner-to-corner results throughout the entire zoom range, even while shooting wide open at F2. The high-resolution output is made possible by the three XA (extreme aspherical) elements and three aspherical elements built within the lens that minimize aberrations. The lens also features a floating focusing system that helps maintain internal stability. This focusing mechanism enables an impressive minimum focusing distance of up to 14.8 inches (0.38m) throughout the entire zoom range.
Staying true to the G Master lens lineage, the lens’ aperture up to F2 produces extraordinary bokeh, ideal for creating images that showcase a shallow depth of field. The 28-70mm F2 amplifies the G Master bokeh standards through a newly designed 11-blade circular aperture unit. Chromatic aberrations, which cause color fringing within photos, are effectively minimized with three Super ED (extra-low dispersion) elements and one ED element built within the lens. Additionally, Sony’s Nano AR Coating II reduces flare and internal reflections, ensuring clear images, even when strong light sources are present in the frame.
Compact, Lightweight Design Without Compromising Quality
The 28-70mm F2 G Master is one of the most advanced mirrorless camera lenses manufactured with a total 20 different lens elements arranged within 14 internal groups. Despite the advanced optical design, the lens remains compact at 3.6 x 5.5 inches (92.9 x 139.8mm) and lightweight at approximately 32.3 ounces (918g). The combination of imaging performance and a compact form factor offers an innovative solution that meets the demands of industry professionals.
Precise Autofocus Tracking with Instant Response
Reliable and responsive autofocus is delivered through the lens’ four XD (extreme dynamic) linear motors powered by advanced control algorithms. This smooth performance system provides accurate and quick focus tracking, often essential in many professional use cases like weddings and sports. This lens is fully compatible with Sony’s Alpha 9 III‘s high-speed continuous shooting capabilities of up to 120 frames per second3 with AF/AE (autofocus/autoexposure) tracking, even while zooming.
Designed for High-Performance Video Shooting
Along with its F2 aperture, the zoom range of the 28-70mm G Master provides a versatile video option that can cover standard field-of-view shots and tighter compositions up to 70mm. This lens minimizes focus breathing through its build and compatibility with the Breathing Compensation feature on various Alpha bodies4. Its high autofocus performance ensures reliable focus even when recording in high frame rates up to 4K 120p / FHD 240p5. Additionally, the XD linear motors and newly developed aperture unit operates silently, preventing any lens noise from being captured during filming.
The lens is ideal for gimbal use with a minimal zoom extension of approximately .68 inches. The compact form factor and short external zoom helps maintain gimbal balance, even at varying focal lengths.
Operability and Reliability for Versatile Control
Key control features include Linear Response MF for intuitive manual focusing, adjustable zoom ring torque, and an aperture ring with a click ON/OFF switch. The lens also offers two customizable focus hold buttons, an iris lock switch, and an AF/MF switch. The 28-70mm F2 G Master has an 86mm filter diameter and a convenient window on the lens hood for variable filter adjustments.
For durability, all buttons and switches are sealed with silicone gaskets, and critical areas are designed to resist dust and moisture6. This ensures reliability, even while using in challenging outdoor environments. Additionally, a fluorine coating on the front element repels contaminants for easy cleaning.
Pricing and Availability
The 28-70mm F2 G Master will be available in December 2024 for approximately $2,899.99 USD and $3,999.99 CAD. It will be sold at a variety of Sony’s authorized dealers throughout North America.
A product video on the new 28-70mm F2 G Master can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/7Y_O5YYQIl0
For detailed product information about the 28-70mm F2 G Master, please visit: https://electronics.sony.com/imaging/lenses/full-frame-e-mount/p/sel2870gm
Exclusive stories and exciting new content shot with the new 28-70mm F2 G Master and Sony’s other imaging products can be found at www.alphauniverse.com, a site created to inform, educate, and inspire content creators.
Sony FE 28-70mm F2 GM Specifications
| Principal specifications | |
|---|---|
| Lens type | Zoom lens |
| Max Format size | 35mm FF |
| Focal length | 28–70 mm |
| Image stabilization | No |
| Lens mount | Sony E, Sony FE |
| Aperture | |
| Maximum aperture | F2–20 |
| Minimum aperture | F2–20 |
| Aperture ring | Yes |
| Number of diaphragm blades | 11 |
| Optics | |
| Elements | 20 |
| Groups | 14 |
| Special elements / coatings | 3 aspherical, 3 super ED, 1 ED |
| Focus | |
| Minimum focus | 0.38 m (14.96″) |
| Maximum magnification | 0.23× |
| Autofocus | Yes |
| Motor type | Linear Motor |
| Focus method | Internal |
| Distance scale | No |
| DoF scale | No |
| Physical | |
| Weight | 918 g (2.02 lb) |
| Diameter | 93 mm (3.66″) |
| Length | 140 mm (5.51″) |
| Sealing | Yes |
| Colour | Black |
| Filter thread | 86 mm |
| Hood supplied | Yes |
-
Solar Energy3 years agoDLR testing the use of molten salt in a solar power plant in Portugal
-
world news1 year ago
Gulf, France aid Gaza, Russia evacuates citizens
-
Camera1 year agoDJI Air 3 vs. Mini 4 Pro: which compact drone is best?
-
world news1 year ago
Strong majority of Americans support Israel-Hamas hostage deal
-
Camera4 years agoCharles ‘Chuck’ Geschke, co-founder of Adobe and inventor of the PDF, dies at 81
-
Camera1 year agoSony a9 III: what you need to know
-
Solar Energy12 months agoGlencore eyes options on battery recycling project
-
TOP SCEINCE7 months agoCan animals count?
