Steve Huff reviews X-T1, loves it (mostly)

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
Robert Garcia NYC
Contributing MemberPosts: 979Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to SaltLakeGuy, 6 months ago

SaltLakeGuy wrote:

sure don't match up with my experience. I had the Olympus EM1 along with several primes and zooms and honestly there is NO way I would compare the two in ultimate IQ results. The EM1 (as is the case with ALL mft cameras) produce a higher level of ISO noise as well as diminished resolution from ISO800 on up. It's not only in technical tests out there but in real world results I've experienced. The one thing that really raised the hair on the back of my neck is him insinuating that the X-T1 blew highlights earlier than an EM1. That's just flat out NUTS! I'm getting a solid 1 to 1.5 stops better highlight retention in RAW than the EM1 could ever hope to muster. ISO3200 is really pushing it in several regards for an EM1 viewed full screen while I wouldn't hesitate to scrutinize a X-T1 right up to 6400 all day long. Build is a matter of taste, and now I'm used to the X-T1 I frankly wouldn't want to go back to the EM1's ergonomics. Viewfinder aside I feel build wise it is at least as good and better in some areas than the EM1. As for color rendition, Oly has always been a favorite of mine, but having watched the evolution of Fuji's and now experiencing it for myself there is NO way I'd make the comment that the Oly is superior to the Fuji in color rendition.

As for speed, sure, in good light the focus lock on a subject with contrast is a speck faster on the EM1, not much that's for sure. In low light the T1 smokes the EM1 as when I tested it in lower light with items with less contrast it hunted and stopped and gave up, where my T1 locks focus with very little hesitation. I darn sure don't miss the "all ISO noise" in sky's of which I have a lot of here in Utah. That annoyed the crud out of me with ALL Olympus's and the EM1 was as if not more guilty then other's in their line. The X-T1 gives me the results of a FF camera's I've owned and tested (Nikon D700 and Canon 6D) without any artifacts and lack of detail rendering. In fine detail like landscapes when viewed 100% on screen the Oly falls completely apart above ISO1600. I can shoot the X-T1 at ISO6400 with outrageous wonderful results no loss of detail or smudging (which the EM1 was full of on fine details). So I have NO idea why Huff commented as he did. We either used two different cameras or he's just in denial. It's his perogative I guess.

I hear you but it seems we have two camps one that likes texture and grain (a photographic look) and one that likes a more smooth digital look. Fuji has gone for the digital look and hasn't given the other folks the ability to completely turn off the NR so that we get that other look too. I'm of the texture and grain camp, I prefer that look being that I like to shoot people mostly. And no, I see NR being applied to the raws I prefer to do it myself I need to.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow