X series ISO Inflation

So a chap called Martin Doppelbauer is suggesting its inflated by one stop. What do you think?

http://www.martin-doppelbauer.de/foto/fujixe1/index.html

I think more interesting is the Siemens star, which clearly shows moire artefacts. Well-written, well-shot review, which is rather unique among camera reviews.

--
flickr
O image - audio photography

Our tests on the XE1 have also shown that the ISO values are inflated.

This was one of my major frustrations when I got my x-Pro - it meters one stop slower shutterspeed (for the same Iso/Aperture) than my Nikon.

I have found it difficult to get enough shutterspeed in low light in many situations. e.g. when taking an indoor portrait of more than one person (where I can't get away with very thin DOF from a wider aperture).

I've found the same. I've done some experimenting I low light (nothing formal enough to call testing) with the X-Pro and OMD using the same effective focal length and aperture and found they exposed the same at about the same shutter speed with the X-Pro at 6400 and the OMD at 3200. Which is why I think the X-Pro's low light greatness is overstated by many here - it's great in low light, but not much better than a number of other cameras.

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

I think there is a difference in the metering methods between many cameras - not just the Canon and Fuji. Has been for years ....

There is also a difference in most DSLR metering methods, in comparison to on-sensor readouts of mirrorless cameras. With evaluative metering common on most modern cameras it is difficult to see if the 'correct' exposure accords with the camera's database of lighting conditions.

A number of my cameras record differing exposure results based upon use of spot, average or evaluative metering. The final resulting image will be similarly 'biased' based upon mode used.

Unless the image is screwed or totally off-base, I'd assume slight differences (and one-stop is slight) to be merely a result of differing metering technology or modes therein.

At the end of the day, it is the user - not the camera, or a comparison between cameras - that decides if exposure is correct.

I think there is a difference in metering even between the X-E1 and X100.

As soon as I got the X-E1, I wanted to try an measure the difference in image quality between the two.

I set the X-E1 zoom lens at around 23mm and both cameras at f/5.6 and then went ahead and shot a number of photos for ISO800, 1600, 3200 etc. while manually setting shutter speed.

Well the X-E1's images were under-exposed compared to the X100 at the same shutter speed.

...An already well known fact for the informed ones!

Anyhow, thank you so much for the link for a fair - not biased - review about the camera. It's totally worth the read...

Best regards,
Pedro

Highly likely - the actual path of light through a lens can differ ... even in the same 'family' of lenses.

Zeiss famously uses T-values on it's lens products - a T value of F2.8 for example is the true physical transmitted light value ... not the mathematically 'calculated' f2.8 value of many other lenses.

Metering methods/technologies, light transmission through lens - even the differing values within a scene - can all affect the so-called 'correct' exposure.

Yeah, they look horrible. Wonder what the OOC jpeg looks like...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-pro1/17

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Fujifilm-X100-DxOMark-Review/The-ISO-Sensitivity-Graph-Explained

Pick your poison.

I'm yet to use a RAW processor that deals with moire and chroma fringing as well as the in-camera one. I virtually never encounter them when working with OOC JPEGs, whereas I've had both crop up in SilkyPix, Capture One, and Lightroom. Just look at DPR's indoor test comparisons in the recent news post for examples.

The thing is, even comparing an X series at 3200 to a D7000 at 1600 RAW or JPG - the X series still looks better?

Canon 5d mkiii  $5000

Fuji XE-1.          $1400

If you are replying to me then let me assure you that I love my inflated X-Pro1 and X100 and do not really care as long as I love the output.

Regards

Check out AccuRaw and see what you think.

Can someone do a quick check with their 60D or 7D (if you do have one)? I dont have 7D no more but I have 60D.

Nothing scientific but I did a indoor shot using the 18-135 kit lens at 24mm Av ISO 6400 f/4.0, the shutter speed my 60D selected was 1/25.

I did the same thing with X-E1 with it's kit lens. at the same/close enough focal length, same Shooting distance and same lighting evironment, A mode, ISO 6400 f/4, the shutter speed selected by the camera was 1/25.

I did another shot at ISO 3200 , f/4 and 60D selected shutter speed at 1/8 sec while the X-E1 selected shutter speed at 1/12 sec.

The 60D was in evaluative metering mode and the XE1 was in Multi Metering mode.

So that means 60D's ISO is also inflated? I did not hear much complaints or test reports about ISO inflation from Canon 60D users...

How? All I can find on Google is references to a closed beta and no proper site.

Engineers: This set of measurements gives an ISO value of 145±3. I think we should call it "150"

Team leader: Nah, not enough room in the software to store that many ISO values. Let's round down and call it "100".

Marketing team: The engineers suggest 150? That's about, about, hm, I dunno. Anyway, I don't like how the "5" comes out in the typeset we use in our brochures. I know! Let's just round it up. That would be 200. Let's call it "200". Sounds good, what's for lunch?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=accuraw+beta

Or go directly to: https://sites.google.com/site/accuraw/beta-download