How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
dirkluchtman
Regular MemberPosts: 490
Like?
How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
9 months ago

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

Bernie Ess
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,899Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago
The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality.

You may wait for the X-E2 to be available, it will be faster in operation than the first generation bodies. I had a 5d2 for years and also a Nikon d700, my virtually only used camera in 2013 was the Fuji X-E1 including pics at a babtism, a musical and theatre.

In comparision to the 5d2 you loose a bit resolution and of course the FF look of a bigger sensor. AF of those lower FF bodies (5d/ 6d) is maybe a bit faster, but less precise.

What you gain over Canon is: Dynamic range, colour and the sensational JPEG quality which often is all you will need once you learned how to properly expose the frames.

The X-Trans sensor relies on the Sony 16MP sensor base which has a very solid DR - about 1,5 stops better than the APS-c Canon sensor and still better than all Canon FF sensors.

DR and shadow noise are Canon's Achilles' heels. I once had a EOS650d for a week before I resold it because of constantly blown out highlights.

So yes, Fuji X are a compromise (just like Canon, Nikon, Sony etc.), however one that I really love to shoot with.

Bernie

-- hide signature --

'All the technique in the world doesn’t compensate for the inability to notice.' (Elliot Erwitt)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cailean Gallimore
Senior MemberPosts: 6,082
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

Only ff gives ff results, and to be honest, I think you're barking up the wrong tree

The Fuji X cameras, and the 70D and 6D, are so different and far apart operationally that they're not even in the same galaxy.

You would really need to try them and see the images for yourself.

As far as APS-C cameras go the Fuji cameras are right up there at the top, but to compare them to ff?

I don't think a meaningful comparison could be made.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
autoy
Forum MemberPosts: 58Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

It's different from full frame, you don't get the DOF qualities of a sensor that big, although it's plenty for me. You're also going to be disappointed if you're after a speed demon. You have to take your time with a Fuji, it's more like shooting with a Leica than shooting with DSLR. It forces you to feel the shot, use the controls and be more careful. I don't think Fujis are made for sports although there's nothing stopping you from trying that. I've seen plenty of action shots with an X-Pro 1 and I take pictures of kids myself. That said, it's not easy and for some it may even be frustrating. My only advice would be to go somewhere and give it a try, see if it's fast enough for the kind of shots you enjoy. There is not a recipe that fits everyone regarding photography, but the Fuji X system comes the closest to my very own.

 autoy's gear list:autoy's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cartwheels MD
Regular MemberPosts: 178Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Cailean Gallimore, 9 months ago

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

I don't think a meaningful comparison could be made.

Why? Put both in the hands of a good photographer and look at the results. See if you can pick out the FF vs. APS-C images. In fact, Zack Arias did such a comparison already:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7971694/pixel_peeperz.jpg

And scroll through these posts to check out some test shots.

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-follow-up-review-life-without-dslrs/

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/

 Cartwheels MD's gear list:Cartwheels MD's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Apple Aperture
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cailean Gallimore
Senior MemberPosts: 6,082
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Cartwheels MD, 9 months ago

Cartwheels MD wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

I don't think a meaningful comparison could be made.

Why? Put both in the hands of a good photographer and look at the results. See if you can pick out the FF vs. APS-C images. In fact, Zack Arias did such a comparison already:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7971694/pixel_peeperz.jpg

And scroll through these posts to check out some test shots.

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-follow-up-review-life-without-dslrs/

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/

I'm not saying that ff is better than the Fuji APS-C, or that Fuji APS-C is better than ff. I'm just saying that to compare two things that are so very different, doesn't produce very meaningful results. Think about that a bit before you dismiss it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mistermejia
Senior MemberPosts: 2,710Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

Hi dirkluchtman. I just saw your post in the canon forum. I am very interested in the canon 70D also, and people from the nikon forum have also said to watch out for the canon's image quality also, due to the "not to great" image quality capability as you just expressed.  The video capability is awesome and i am totally in love with it.  But of course the IQ is important to me also.

I am also in the process of buying a new camera and all my nikon lenses have been put up for sale already. I will be following up this thread very closely, since some time ago i was also asking about the X-E1. I actually did buy the X10, but i am starting to need my high ISO capable camera again.

These are exiting times in deed, since the XE2 is coming out soon. I wonder if a X-PRO 2 is coming out as well. I really really have to use my money wisely here, and for sure fuji is another really good option.

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Rokinon 85mm F1.4 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cartwheels MD
Regular MemberPosts: 178Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Cailean Gallimore, 9 months ago

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

Cartwheels MD wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

I don't think a meaningful comparison could be made.

Why? Put both in the hands of a good photographer and look at the results. See if you can pick out the FF vs. APS-C images. In fact, Zack Arias did such a comparison already:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7971694/pixel_peeperz.jpg

And scroll through these posts to check out some test shots.

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-follow-up-review-life-without-dslrs/

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/

I'm not saying that ff is better than the Fuji APS-C, or that Fuji APS-C is better than ff. I'm just saying that to compare two things that are so very different, doesn't produce very meaningful results. Think about that a bit before you dismiss it.

Nor did I say that you said that.  I wasn't even implying it.  What I am saying is that a.) there is no such thing as FF quality and b.) the proof is in the pudding.  It's all relative.  You just have to use different focal lengths and aperture settings to produce the same results on APS-C.  So with that in mind, I am reframing the OP's question as "Does the Fuji X system have excellent image quality?" and answering, "Yes, if you know what you're doing."  The same is true for any camera.

All of this is assuming that he understands how to get the results he wants on an APS-C body since he bought one.

 Cartwheels MD's gear list:Cartwheels MD's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Apple Aperture
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cailean Gallimore
Senior MemberPosts: 6,082
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Cartwheels MD, 9 months ago

Cartwheels MD wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

Cartwheels MD wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

I don't think a meaningful comparison could be made.

Why? Put both in the hands of a good photographer and look at the results. See if you can pick out the FF vs. APS-C images. In fact, Zack Arias did such a comparison already:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7971694/pixel_peeperz.jpg

And scroll through these posts to check out some test shots.

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-follow-up-review-life-without-dslrs/

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/

I'm not saying that ff is better than the Fuji APS-C, or that Fuji APS-C is better than ff. I'm just saying that to compare two things that are so very different, doesn't produce very meaningful results. Think about that a bit before you dismiss it.

Nor did I say that you said that. I wasn't even implying it. What I am saying is that a.) there is no such thing as FF quality and b.) the proof is in the pudding. It's all relative. You just have to use different focal lengths and aperture settings to produce the same results on APS-C. So with that in mind, I am reframing the OP's question as "Does the Fuji X system have excellent image quality?" and answering, "Yes, if you know what you're doing." The same is true for any camera.

All of this is assuming that he understands how to get the results he wants on an APS-C body since he bought one.

I understand what you're saying. Actually, I've gone down the same road as Zack Arias myself, and no longer see any compelling reason to use ff for the kind of work I do. Occasionally I pull out the ff when a particular job might work better with it, but that's becoming less often. When I look at large prints from my Fuji cameras they still surprise me with their quality. The user experience though, is very very different from a a DSLR, and not to everyone's taste.

That's what makes the comparison difficult.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cartwheels MD
Regular MemberPosts: 178Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Cailean Gallimore, 9 months ago

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

Cartwheels MD wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

Cartwheels MD wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

I don't think a meaningful comparison could be made.

Why? Put both in the hands of a good photographer and look at the results. See if you can pick out the FF vs. APS-C images. In fact, Zack Arias did such a comparison already:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7971694/pixel_peeperz.jpg

And scroll through these posts to check out some test shots.

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-follow-up-review-life-without-dslrs/

http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/

I'm not saying that ff is better than the Fuji APS-C, or that Fuji APS-C is better than ff. I'm just saying that to compare two things that are so very different, doesn't produce very meaningful results. Think about that a bit before you dismiss it.

Nor did I say that you said that. I wasn't even implying it. What I am saying is that a.) there is no such thing as FF quality and b.) the proof is in the pudding. It's all relative. You just have to use different focal lengths and aperture settings to produce the same results on APS-C. So with that in mind, I am reframing the OP's question as "Does the Fuji X system have excellent image quality?" and answering, "Yes, if you know what you're doing." The same is true for any camera.

All of this is assuming that he understands how to get the results he wants on an APS-C body since he bought one.

I understand what you're saying. Actually, I've gone down the same road as Zack Arias myself, and no longer see any compelling reason to use ff for the kind of work I do. Occasionally I pull out the ff when a particular job might work better with it, but that's becoming less often. When I look at large prints from my Fuji cameras they still surprise me with their quality. The user experience though, is very very different from a a DSLR, and not to everyone's taste.

That's what makes the comparison difficult.

Ah, I thought you were saying APS-C vs. FF.  Yes I agree that the mirrorless vs. DSLR experience is radically different.  OP, you should definitely rent from borrowlenses.com or something to test out the Fuji first.

 Cartwheels MD's gear list:Cartwheels MD's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Apple Aperture
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Asylum Photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,277Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

I'd say it comes relatively close to previous generation full frame sensors, but not the current generation.
--
http://asylum-photo.com (nsfw)

 Asylum Photo's gear list:Asylum Photo's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Charles2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,003
Like?
Test some raw files
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

You could download a few Fuji raw files (.RAF) that people have posted.

You can also download Fuji Raw File Converter for free. Use it only to adjust exposure, contrast (usually less to avoid clipping), and perhaps white balance, starting from the Super Neutral "taste" setting. Export a TIF file to your favorite post processing program, where you can crank contrast back up for the pop you want, and whatever.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cailean Gallimore
Senior MemberPosts: 6,082
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Asylum Photo, 9 months ago

Asylum Photo wrote:

I'd say it comes relatively close to previous generation full frame sensors, but not the current generation.
--
http://asylum-photo.com (nsfw)

I think it's still very difficult to tell by looking which was shot with what. In many cases it's impossible.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dave Luttmann
Forum ProPosts: 12,211Gear list
Like?
Very well
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

I compared a number of my FF bodies to their aps-c counterparts.  In the end, I saw no real advantage that ever showed in print.  Yes, if you like shooting portraits at f0.95  and 52,000 iso, FF may be for you.

 Dave Luttmann's gear list:Dave Luttmann's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Toccata47
Senior MemberPosts: 2,125
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

dirkluchtman wrote:

Hi,

I just purchased a Canon 70D after much contemplation about my next camera. I had a 5D Mark II, but was looking for the best compromise between fast operation, good video and image quality. The Canon 70D is sensational when it comes to overall operation, but the image quality lets down, with very limited dynamic range. For this reason, I am willing to go back to FF. The 6D is a good alternative (although I would sorely miss the brilliant video autofocus of the 70D), but I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

Thanks

The dynamic range doesn't deviate perceptibly from the 5dmk2 to the 70d. Sensor size does not necessarily confer an advantage in this area. Fuji compares to full frame in a similar manner to any other apsc sized sensor. Many full frame cameras have worse image quality than smaller sensor equipped cameras and vice versa. I believe you may be laboring under a false apprehension vis a vis full frame.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
a l b e r t
Senior MemberPosts: 1,265Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

I heard that the Fuji x trans sensors come close to FF quality. I am attracted to the compact, retro style bodies and manual control. I would be willing to sacrifice good video, if I get great FF like image quality from the Fuji bodies.

Can anyone comment on this please? Especially in terms of highlight and shadow recovery. How well is details at these extremes recovered from RAW files?

The XE-1 comes close to FF bodies of the last generation FF, that means 5D2, not 5D3 or 6D.  But DR is better, because the current SOTA sensor is made by Sony, and Fuji is using it.

If you really want to get FF like quality, you need to invest in high quality glass.  I'd definitely get the XF23 1.4, it is probably the best lens in the entire Fuji lineup.  The kit lens (18-55) is also an excellent lens for general photography.

 a l b e r t's gear list:a l b e r t's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 Nikon D3S Fujifilm X-E1 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BillyInya
Senior MemberPosts: 1,206Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

Q. How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?

A. Why bother with full frame anymore now there is X-Trans ....

Can't wait to hear from people how much better those X-Trans images of Burning Man could have been with a full frame. Yeh right.

The time of lumbering around huge and heavy full frame kits (lenses) is nearly over. Arguably there's just no need any longer now X-Trans has landed.

 BillyInya's gear list:BillyInya's gear list
Nikon D7000 Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to dirkluchtman, 9 months ago

When the X-Pro1 was first released IMO it produced higher quality images than any other APS-C sensor camera, I'd tried the 60D, D7000 and K5, even with it's slow AF it was worth it because of the IQ, light weight and body style, part of what made the X-Pro1 so good were the 3 lenses 18, 35 & 60, the closest I could get to the IQ from the X-Pro1 and 35 was from the K5 and the Pentax 31mm Ltd lens, I even got an adapter and tried out the 31mm lens on the X-Pro1 and it didn't come close to the Fuji 35.

The only other prosumer cameras at the time which would produce better IQ were the D700 and 5DMKII and you had to use pretty good lenses to see the benefits.

Given the options at the time people did quite rightly compare the X-Pro1 IQ to that of prosumer FF cameras and in many counts the X-Pro1 could hold its own.

However since the X-Pro1 was released Nikon (at lest) has caught up and offers APS-C cameras with IQ, DR, high ISO performance above that of the X-Pro1, on the FF sensor side Nikon has the D600 and D800/E and Canon the 5DMKIII which all offer greater IQ, DR, high ISO performance.

we also have the soon to be released Sony A7/R and this new Nikon DF which again will likely offer better IQ, DR and high ISO performance than the X-Pro1.

for me having a FF sensor isn't just about being able to print larger or shallower depth of field its about the consistent look of images I get from a FF sensor and a good lens, FF sensors consistently produce images that have more life to them, they have more depth, a more 3D look to them.

People will try to produce tests showing that the X-Pro1 can produce images as sharp as the current FF cameras, or that a set of photos from their X-Pro1/X-E1 are so awesome that they don't need a FF sensor and can't understand why anyone else would either, what you'll often find with many of these tests and awesome sets of photos is that there often in black & white or very low in color, or the environment has little texture or contrast.

You'll get others that say side by side print from an X-Pro1 and a FF camera like the D800E look the same, well from the many 100's of professional prints I've had made this certainly isn't the case.

If you really want to know if a current FF sensor camera has better image quality than the X-Pro1/X-E1 then my advice would be for you to head over to flickr and look through groups for the D600, D800 and the X-Pro1/X-E1, compare images from both with zooms and prime lenses, when you find images you like then look through the photographers stream and see if the image quality is consistent, that should answer your question.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
baobob
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,661Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to Bernie Ess, 9 months ago

I fully agree!

I have a X100 and a XP1 with many lenses now

I also have a complete 5D2 gear. I'm solding it since overall I get much better results with Fuji in terms of DR contrast colors plus a wide choice of settings for tonal curve that you can save in configs for different typres of situation

More than difference in resolution where the gap betwwen the 2 is very small, I find that mastering DOF is of course better in FF, but the Fuji is a reasonable compromise in that field

Bob

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

 baobob's gear list:baobob's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony RX100 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jeff Charles
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,711Gear list
Like?
Re: How does Fuji compare to Full Frame?
In reply to LWS2013, 9 months ago

LWS2013 wrote:

You'll get others that say side by side print from an X-Pro1 and a FF camera like the D800E look the same, well from the many 100's of professional prints I've had made this certainly isn't the case.

The larger sensor should give more DR, produce better results at high ISOs, and make it easier to limit DOF. If those advantages are not relevant to a particular photo, are you saying that the FF print will still be better? For example, consider this basic setup for both cameras:

  • Same shooting position
  • Lenses with the same FOV
  • Apertures set to produce the same DOF
  • Base ISO

Will the print from the FF camera be clearly better, or would a viewer have a hard time telling which camera took which photo? I suspect the latter, but I've never seen a direct comparison, so I concede that I really do not know.

-- hide signature --

Jeff
"Look it up. It's science." Skinny Pete

 Jeff Charles's gear list:Jeff Charles's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Fujifilm FinePix X100 RX100 III Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads