Some People Shots (X10)

Started Oct 31, 2011 | Discussions
CM WORKS
Regular MemberPosts: 183Gear list
Like?
Some People Shots (X10)
Oct 31, 2011
 CM WORKS's gear list:CM WORKS's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Nikon D610
barjohn
Senior MemberPosts: 1,092Gear list
Like?
Re: Some People Shots (X10)
In reply to CM WORKS, Oct 31, 2011

I wish I was more impressed. I really wanted to like this camera as a compliment to my X100 instead of the OLY XZ-1 but the IQ just isn't there. Even ISO 100 shows grainy noise and 200 does too. The good news is the ISO 360 and ISO400 appear to be about as good ad ISO 200 but it just isn't a super clean image and it appears to have quite a bit of NR processing as the details are all soft. Maybe it is the PP done on these so I will hold off judgment until I see some RAW conversations done as well as possible but these JPGs sure don't make it for a $600 camera.
--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.

 barjohn's gear list:barjohn's gear list
Olympus XZ-1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ASR45
Forum ProPosts: 32,263Gear list
Like?
Excellent many thanks.
In reply to barjohn, Oct 31, 2011

for showing them viA link
--
Alan.

 ASR45's gear list:ASR45's gear list
Canon PowerShot G16 Canon PowerShot G12 Pentax K-5 Pentax K-30 Pentax K-5 II +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Oelph
Contributing MemberPosts: 621
Like?
Re: Excellent many thanks.
In reply to ASR45, Oct 31, 2011

Great shots, thank you.

This camera is more than just IQ. I don't think it was ever going to blow away the competition - I was hoping it would be comparable or slightly better. This camera needs to be considered in combination with its styling, controls and OVF.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Photohobbyfun
Senior MemberPosts: 1,362
Like?
Re: Some People Shots (X10)
In reply to barjohn, Oct 31, 2011

barjohn wrote:

I wish I was more impressed. I really wanted to like this camera as a compliment to my X100 instead of the OLY XZ-1 but the IQ just isn't there. Even ISO 100 shows grainy noise and 200 does too. The good news is the ISO 360 and ISO400 appear to be about as good ad ISO 200 but it just isn't a super clean image and it appears to have quite a bit of NR processing as the details are all soft. Maybe it is the PP done on these so I will hold off judgment until I see some RAW conversations done as well as possible but these JPGs sure don't make it for a $600 camera.
--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.

You know I thought the same thing until I paid a little closer attention. I have an XZ-1 too and I use raw most of the time because the noise reduction on the JPEG's is a bit excessive at times with the XZ-1. The X10 is definitely better in this regard but even the X10 may benefit from a little less noise reduction.

The X10 appears to have the better JPEG engine as well. The Olympus tends to make people a bit too reddish at times while the Fuji seems to give people a much more natural look.

There was a Russian review site that did tests with the X10. They've also done tests with the XZ-1 so you can actually compare the two cameras.

The X10 definitely has a better signal to noise ratio, even at base ISO. The XZ-1 lens may be a bit sharper though, hard to tell still. This Russian site did ISO tests with a doll, strings, etc. but all shot with the same aperture. The XZ-1 lens was sharper but this may be about the XZ-1 lens being sharper at one focal length and aperture and the X10 winning in others.

There was also a series of test shots. These were shot at different apertures at 28mm and at 112mm. The X10 seemed sharper at the wide end while the XZ-1 seemed sharper at the tele end. The thing is though, the XZ-1 has automatic distortion correction which will affect the edge performance a bit. The X10 does not have automatic distortion correction and it has very noticeable distortion at the wide end. Once that distortion gets fixed, it will lose a bit of sharpness at the edges and may be equal to the XZ-1 in sharpness.

Overall, image quality is going to be very similar. My only concern is giving up the VF-2 on my XZ-1 to the OVF on the X10. I have an X10 on order and will have it in about 2 weeks. The workflow with the X10's OVF compared to the workflow with the VF-2 on my XZ-1 will be a major deciding factor on which camera I keep and which I sell.

There was a Russian site

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CM WORKS
Regular MemberPosts: 183Gear list
Like?
Re: Some People Shots (X10)
In reply to barjohn, Oct 31, 2011

it could be the settings of NR. I will have mine soon to judge it.

barjohn wrote:

I wish I was more impressed. I really wanted to like this camera as a compliment to my X100 instead of the OLY XZ-1 but the IQ just isn't there. Even ISO 100 shows grainy noise and 200 does too. The good news is the ISO 360 and ISO400 appear to be about as good ad ISO 200 but it just isn't a super clean image and it appears to have quite a bit of NR processing as the details are all soft. Maybe it is the PP done on these so I will hold off judgment until I see some RAW conversations done as well as possible but these JPGs sure don't make it for a $600 camera.
--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.

 CM WORKS's gear list:CM WORKS's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Nikon D610
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimr
Forum ProPosts: 11,134
Like?
If This Is What The X10 Can Do..See All Below..I'll Be Thrilled!...Very Impressive!
In reply to barjohn, Oct 31, 2011
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Brooks Lester
Senior MemberPosts: 1,865Gear list
Like?
Skin tones look great - and I don't see any major problems in other areas
In reply to barjohn, Oct 31, 2011

As a D700/X100 user, if the X10 has X100 color response with a few compromises for having a smaller sensor, it will still be a great camera. There's nothing in the compact enthusiast market with Fuji color - until now.

I'm just fine with a sub-X100 with fast zoom lens and little less d range and resolution. In fact, more than fine, ecstatic.

 Brooks Lester's gear list:Brooks Lester's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Fujifilm X10 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Skipper
Contributing MemberPosts: 872
Like?
Re: Skin tones look great - and I don't see any major problems in other areas
In reply to Brooks Lester, Oct 31, 2011

Brooks Lester wrote:

There's nothing in the compact enthusiast market with Fuji color - until now.

Looking at the X10 photos posted thus far, the one thing that stands out is many of them (most?) have a 1970s film look to them. Is this the Fuji color that everyone speaks of?

Given a choice between today's digital smooth look, and yesterday's film look, I will take the former. I am in the process reviewing my 35mm slides from that period on a slide projector, and it is a very distinctive look, and frankly I don't like it as much.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Brooks Lester
Senior MemberPosts: 1,865Gear list
Like?
Re: Skin tones look great - and I don't see any major problems in other areas
In reply to The Skipper, Oct 31, 2011

Skipper, you might be more specific when you say "yesterday's film look". I'm sure you remember there were (and still are) many different types of color films, both negative and positive, that rendered a variety of looks.

What most of those films did (and still do) so well that is still celebrated (and what many people who take pictures of people desire) is render skin tones in a pleasing manner. This usually refers to a sense of warmth in the skin, sometimes referred to as "peaches and cream" with lighter skinned subjects.

You speak of today's "digital smooth look" - that has nothing to do with color and skin tone. Smoothness is more a function of noise and resolution, not color. I don't know what format you shot your old slides in, nor how well they were developed. Perhaps they are not the best examples for comparison.

I will say that the 35mm digital cameras have surpassed 35mm film stocks in terms of realized resolution, and especially as ISO rises, but that is a different topic. However, medium format film scanned in at high resolution still equals or out resolves 35mm and smaller digital resolution.

I don't know how much you know about Fujifilm's DSLRs and the X100, but Fuji is known for how well its high end digital cameras render skin tones. The Fuji S5 is still celebrated as the one of the best wedding cameras for skin tones that has been produced to date, and some pro photographers still shoot the S5 even though it's technically obsolete.

The X10 pictures don't seem to be lacking in "digital smooth"-ness to me. However, the model shots posted in this thread have lighting, color temperature values, and perhaps an aesthetic that I suppose might look somewhat "1970's" to you.

To get a better idea of "Fuji color" you might explore flickr and search tags for Fuji S5 and X100 portraits. You should see some fine examples of Fuji color. Remember, Fuji is the only major camera manufacturer that also makes film now that Kodak is functionally out of the high end camera body business. Fuji really understands color for high end digital cameras.

 Brooks Lester's gear list:Brooks Lester's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Fujifilm X10 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimr
Forum ProPosts: 11,134
Like?
Great Posting Brooks!
In reply to Brooks Lester, Oct 31, 2011

Brooks Lester wrote:

Skipper, you might be more specific when you say "yesterday's film look". I'm sure you remember there were (and still are) many different types of color films, both negative and positive, that rendered a variety of looks.

What most of those films did (and still do) so well that is still celebrated (and what many people who take pictures of people desire) is render skin tones in a pleasing manner. This usually refers to a sense of warmth in the skin, sometimes referred to as "peaches and cream" with lighter skinned subjects.

You speak of today's "digital smooth look" - that has nothing to do with color and skin tone. Smoothness is more a function of noise and resolution, not color. I don't know what format you shot your old slides in, nor how well they were developed. Perhaps they are not the best examples for comparison.

I will say that the 35mm digital cameras have surpassed 35mm film stocks in terms of realized resolution, and especially as ISO rises, but that is a different topic. However, medium format film scanned in at high resolution still equals or out resolves 35mm and smaller digital resolution.

I don't know how much you know about Fujifilm's DSLRs and the X100, but Fuji is known for how well its high end digital cameras render skin tones. The Fuji S5 is still celebrated as the one of the best wedding cameras for skin tones that has been produced to date, and some pro photographers still shoot the S5 even though it's technically obsolete.

The X10 pictures don't seem to be lacking in "digital smooth"-ness to me. However, the model shots posted in this thread have lighting, color temperature values, and perhaps an aesthetic that I suppose might look somewhat "1970's" to you.

To get a better idea of "Fuji color" you might explore flickr and search tags for Fuji S5 and X100 portraits. You should see some fine examples of Fuji color. Remember, Fuji is the only major camera manufacturer that also makes film now that Kodak is functionally out of the high end camera body business. Fuji really understands color for high end digital cameras.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jolly Oly
Contributing MemberPosts: 978Gear list
Like?
Re: Some People Shots (X10)
In reply to barjohn, Nov 1, 2011

barjohn wrote:

I wish I was more impressed. I really wanted to like this camera as a compliment to my X100 instead of the OLY XZ-1 but the IQ just isn't there. Even ISO 100 shows grainy noise and 200 does too. The good news is the ISO 360 and ISO400 appear to be about as good ad ISO 200 but it just isn't a super clean image and it appears to have quite a bit of NR processing as the details are all soft. Maybe it is the PP done on these so I will hold off judgment until I see some RAW conversations done as well as possible but these JPGs sure don't make it for a $600 camera.

I dont understand what you expected from 2/3" sensor. As far as I can see it the output is great, even at iso 800. Shooting raw things could only get better, not worse.

-- hide signature --

John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.

-- hide signature --
 Jolly Oly's gear list:Jolly Oly's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
barjohn
Senior MemberPosts: 1,092Gear list
Like?
Re: Some People Shots (X10)
In reply to Jolly Oly, Nov 1, 2011

I expected a cleaner image with more detail at low ISOs In good light at low ISO, even a small sensor can produce pretty clean and detailed images. I have images I have printed at 13 x 19 from a small sensor Canon G7 that had less noise and more detail. I expected a camera that is quite a few generations removed from the G7 to do better. With its slightly larger sensor and EXR capability I expected to see it blow away the Oly XZ1 and the only improvement I see is better skin color. It is as large as some 4/3's cameras but not matching them in IQ and in many cases actually more expensive.

I love the X100 and I really wanted this camera to be really good, not as good as an APS-C but just a notch below. From what I have seen it is more than a notch below, more like a canyon. To me, if you are going to give up IQ you should get more than a zooming viewfinder, you should get a much more compact camera but it isn't that either. Don't get me wrong, I was initially wowed by the design and had one on order. Maybe it will improve with another firmware revision and I will wind up ordering one but it isn't there yet from what I have seen, cute model(s) and all.
--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.

 barjohn's gear list:barjohn's gear list
Olympus XZ-1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jolly Oly
Contributing MemberPosts: 978Gear list
Like?
Re: Some People Shots (X10)
In reply to barjohn, Nov 1, 2011

barjohn wrote:

I expected a cleaner image with more detail at low ISOs In good light at low ISO, even a small sensor can produce pretty clean and detailed images. I have images I have printed at 13 x 19 from a small sensor Canon G7 that had less noise and more detail. I expected a camera that is quite a few generations removed from the G7 to do better. With its slightly larger sensor and EXR capability I expected to see it blow away the Oly XZ1 and the only improvement I see is better skin color. It is as large as some 4/3's cameras but not matching them in IQ and in many cases actually more expensive.

I love the X100 and I really wanted this camera to be really good, not as good as an APS-C but just a notch below. From what I have seen it is more than a notch below, more like a canyon. To me, if you are going to give up IQ you should get more than a zooming viewfinder, you should get a much more compact camera but it isn't that either. Don't get me wrong, I was initially wowed by the design and had one on order. Maybe it will improve with another firmware revision and I will wind up ordering one but it isn't there yet from what I have seen, cute model(s) and all.
--

To be honest I'm a dslr user and I'm not so familiar with this serious compact cameras. But what I can see between X10/XZ-1/LX-5 this X10 looks darn good.

I'ts hard to believe that it has worse IQ than some older compact cam, but I guess we are just different and for me other things matters more (in a compact) than super detailed and clean low iso.. for that I have a dslr.

-- hide signature --
 Jolly Oly's gear list:Jolly Oly's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads