Why the x100s files are lacking

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
DonSantos
Senior MemberPosts: 1,122Gear list
Like?
Re: Why the x100s files are lacking
In reply to samhain, Mar 29, 2013

According to dxomark the x100 iso stops at 1000.  Everything else is just gain.

samhain wrote:

I was just reading the comments in Huff's review of the x100s, and one of them stood out to me in a big way. It goes into why the x100s's files seem to be lacking that certain something. I think it's a fantastic post & very informative,  so I thought i'd share it here. Hopefully he see's this and steps in to expand on it.

Mauro B writes:

Now is that informative or what?

Mauro"

Best regards,

Maybe this new x100s will be better, but if it is anything similar from the x-e1 I believe that for the price of less speed the old x100 is still the better bet.

Over the last two years I owned two x100, one “first batch” and the other “late”, an x-pro1 for a very limited time and an x-e1 for 5 months. After having reviewed respective image quality, I concluded that the x100 delivered the best files by far and large.

The software lift performed on native files has in my view another side effect: Lightroom in my experience is not properly able to “reverse engineer” the x-e1 files, in the sense that sliders movements have subtly different effects compared to what I would get with other cameras’ files (I use LR since version 1 with all the cameras I own and owned).

The side effect of the above is the “digital look”, which is the second issue and you mention that as well. The “underexposure + plus curve lifting + nr” performed by the camera at almost any iso level gave my x-e1 pictures an unpleasant digital look which I fully recognise in the x100s samples you posted within your review, with colors often overall “brownish”, not fully realistic and lacking the separation you can find in other camera’s output.

According to the above, when the camera is set to, say, 3200 iso, it captures an underexposed 1470 iso shot which is then given back brightness by the in-camera electronics. So, at 3200 iso the sensor delivers “1470 iso noise” (or close to that, given the “curve lift” performed in-camera) and at 3200 iso the sensor delivers “1870 iso noise”. It is still a very good result in terms of “final shot noise”, but it is also true that almost any modern camera is able to deliver noise free 1470 iso photos. 6400 iso = 1870 iso measured 3200 iso = 1470 iso measured 1600 iso = 987 iso measured

First: noise. It is easy to see that the X100s (or, better, the x-trans 16 mpix sensor) shows little or no noise at 1600 and 3200 iso. But, according to an Italian magazine which put the x-pro 1 to the bench, the nominal vs measured iso values for the x-trans 16 mpix sensor are as follows:

"I would like to add some comments based on having owned two X100 and lately an X-E1, which I sold when I was delivered the M but used alongside the M9 and MM.

 DonSantos's gear list:DonSantos's gear list
Nikon D600 Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
?New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow