Sony RX1 vs. Fuji X-E1?

Emacs23 wrote:

Don't use crap lenses ;), don't use crap sony jpegs, don't use crap demosaic algorithms (hello Adobe :D). I'm using Leicas (SE 18, Lux 35 asph fle, Lux 50 asph) with NEX and that's why don't see any Fuji magic I rather see (as an RAW processing software developer) intensive PPing, quite nice color profiles (that are not as good as dedicated color profiling apps like DxO FilmPack though), some nice automatic tonal curve selection. Anyway, your statement only shows you have no idea about image processing.

You see what you see. Properly cooked RAW from bayer sensors shows higher resolution in identical conditions from low to middle ISOs. I just did the best for D800E and NEX-5n, and I used RAW processed with C1 which is better in fine detail than Silky from what I have seen (and Silky is better detail wise than OOC JPEG).

I'm surpised to see so much naive people here. Fuji decided to trade ease of high ISO NR for details at base ISO. Pay attention: ease of high ISO NR, not the high ISO itself, you can get about the same IQ with bayer sensor and modern NR software (best way: only chroma NR in raw processor, then NR via Topaz Denoise or another advanced NR software).

I hope Fuji once will stop this X-Trans nonsense.