X10 vs X20 Studio Comparison

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ralfs-foto-bude/

Just stumbled upon this link on the X system forum. Just spent about 40 minutes comparing the X100 and X100S which the latter turned out superior. Some marked improvement in areas of clarity, detail and noise over its predecessor.

As for the X10 and X20, I haven't looked at the images in detail but few quick glimpses revealed the X20 to show slightly better clarity and detail from ISO100 up to ISO800. Differences are quite minor.

The differences will be quite minor - Fuji are claiming a 30% improvement in S/N.

That's like going from ISO1250 (where I regularly shoot people under theatre lighting) to ISO1600.

One advantage will be that the X20 will have L size images available, whereas the EXR sensors seem to work better with M size.

--
Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

The high ISO samples, up to 1600, from the X20 look good enough for me...  I really don't see myself needing anything higher than that.

I agree, I personally try not to past 1600 in any camera anyhow.

I'm not sure if it is worth upgrading.

X10 looks naturally grainy at ISO 3200.  X20 has artifacts at ISO 3200.  Reminds me of F31...

Very sensible remarks, Trevor. Here are right-side 100% crops of X10 and X20 images at ISO 1600, because everybody seems to love that setting! The X20 is less exposed, 1/28 instead of 1/26 second. Although I think it is slightly better, the X20 image bothers me due to unexplained black pixels.

crop from original X10, saved at identical JPEG settings

crop from original X20, saved at identical JPEG settings

Not sure about the black pixels (I couldn't see what you mean), but there are more NR artefacts on the X20 image than on the X10.

I have a purchase on amazon.jp just sitting there while I mull it over before pressing the final "buy it" button.

I'm sure they can fix it if there is a bug...but I did expect better, or less, noise with the X20.  At this stage that is not obvious - in fact the reverse looks to be the case.  Not sure I want to spend $700 to tell everyone else the same thing.

--
Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

The more I see, the more I feel that I will just keep the X10.  I don't see even difference here that would translate into anything meaningful in print.

it looks as if that X20 uses similar noise reduction as F31... "peppering" with areas of smudged details

Thanks for posting!!!  Very happy with what I am seeing again, pretty consistent results with what digitalbear was showing, albeit at 3M.      Results are very clean through ISO800 (at 100%) and clearly useful to me at ISO1600.   And these are JPEGS!!!!   So I expect the RAW rendering even better.

Now I am gonna check out the X100s results.

Mmm... I canselled my pre-order for X20 at B&H.

Instead I desided to 'upgrade' to X-E1 with 18-55 kit lens and keep X10 - thanks to the unexpected selling of one of my archive photographs for $750.

Probably X30 o X20s will make me move from my X10 with recently replaced sensor

--
Moscow VR blog - http://1drey.wordpress.com

I looked at the original images (not the crop reposts here) and there is a slight quality improvement on the originals, especially in regards to fine detail, from the X20.

The noise problem is still noticeable, but since I generally shoot RAW, I'm expecting to get a better result than from my M size X10 images.

We'll know in a week or so, because I pulled the big lever.

Since I still have the X10, and a reasonable S100fs, I'll do a 3 way comparison when I can.

--
Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Thanks Ryder ... yet a couple more reasons to stick with my X10.

--
'Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.' Dali

Just different not better or worse really.

Any benefits of X20 will  come after people have used it and fuji listen to complaints and update the firmware to max-out the thing.

Let the bout begin!,  this will be fun to watch.

Meanwhile my X10 and dosh stay put.

Steve

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/stevestanley
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/steve63636

Conclusion:

If you have an X10, keep it.

If you're buying a nex camera, the X20 is a good choice.
The real upgrade of this camera is the AF speed and video mode.
The image quality was already very high in the X10.

I don't see where the X20 is "slightly better" except for that it shows more structure and reflection points on the background curtain. Furthermore I wouldn't put ​too​ much into these comparison shots, because they are JPG with seemingly different processing and especially because the lighting and shooting angle was ​not​ fully controlled (you can see it in the reflections on the glas, even including some additional shadows on a reflected white door).

Nevertheless, judging by that one comparison the X20's JPG engine used both stronger sharpening and stronger noise-reduction (in that comparison) and thus loses in detail versus the X10. This would explain what you called "unexplained black pixels", the JPG engine of the E-M5 does the same.

Fujifilm even explains how their "new processor" increases resolution and reduces noise, which is just what I just perceived by looking at these JPGs: stronger filtering.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x20/features/page_02.html

Here an emphasized demonstration at ISO 1600:

X10 (upper) vs. X20 (lower)

The interesting thing is that the graph on Fujifilm's website marks that 30% claim somewhere higher than ISO 6400 and at ISO 1600 both sensors are the same. We know that the X10 sensor only features analog gain/ISO up to ISO 1600 and that everything after that is done via digital tone-curves. So this could be where the differences come from. Time to check some ISO 3200-6400 images.

One improvement could be if the X20 offers usable ISO 6400 at 12 or 6 MP, because that's where the X10 falls apart. Else I fear that the 30% claim is useless, because we would go from unusable to 30% better than unusable.

I think you should have a look at the detail, even where smudged with NR, of the louvred panels in the background and the orange? petals of the main flower - I see noticeably more detail in the X20.

I wouldn't be surprised if it comes close to matching the S100fs in detail.

--
Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

And I am not interested in that range.

I admit I read it wrongly.  I'll have to send it back, I guess.

Dos anyone know Japanese for "I would like to return my X20 for a full refund, please?"

Just joking.  I'll shoot the comparisons and then send it back.

--
Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com