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

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
Chanthis
Regular MemberPosts: 182
Like?
Painterly jpegs.
In reply to djezraj, 7 months ago

i think it was the jpegs he had an issue with. He said they were painterly.

djezraj wrote:

I think it's safe to say Steve Huff loves his EM-1 and to be fair with good reason. What i don't quite understand is his refusal to even try other Raw developers to judge the IQ. Would this not be more "no BS" and more "real world"?

However supposing if Adobe for whatever reason lagged behind development for Olympus files and Picture code picked up the slack he might jump in a finally try out Photoninja to get the most out of the files.

At the end of the day its just a childish rant I know but it bug's me somewhat because most of the time I like his one balanced approach. Now more often than not his current reviews seem to be X camera VS EM-1 and this Fuji XT-1 review while more positive than expected is halfway a review for the EM-1 and Adobe Lightroom

Im glad he has found a camera for everyday and has settled somewhat to less systems but for pete's sake try out another converter it won't kill you...and you might just learn something new about X-Trans while you at it..

Whats the worst that could happen?

Rant over.

Roger

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ray Sachs
Senior MemberPosts: 9,174Gear list
Like?
Re: Steve Huff reviews X-T1, loves it (mostly)
In reply to nplanet, 7 months ago

nplanet wrote:

When was the last time he did not like a camera?

He's never been very big on Fuji's ILC models. Really didn't think much if the X-Pro, XE1, or XE2. Not sure about the XM1 or XA1.

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

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
aroundomaha
Senior MemberPosts: 2,270Gear list
Like?
Disinterested
In reply to Tapper123, 7 months ago

I'm not too interested in Steve's site. I've read it from time to time but at some point, to me, it crossed over to being less about photography and more about product. Maybe that's not entirely fair but its my opinion.

Its actually hard to find artists who also post up reviews. For the most part I put a fair amount of stock in Thom Hogan, Michael Reichman and still regularly read Kirk Tuck's site (though he doesn't really review hardware any more).

-- hide signature --

Aroundomaha
http://f64m.com

 aroundomaha's gear list:aroundomaha's gear list
Nikon D7000 Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fotophool
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,788
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to SaltLakeGuy, 7 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.

Jeez, guy, get a grip and let it go!

Has a day gone by here this year that you haven't made some disparaging remark about the m/4/3 system and noise?

We get it. You switched to Fuji and couldn't be happier. We don't need to be reminded of it on a daily basis.

You switched to PhotoNinja from LR and couldn't be happier. Good for you! But do we have to be reminded of it everyday?

Here's what the Huff review highlights and what so you seem oblivious of:

Different strokes for different folks.

Coupled with the fact that most of today's cameras are probably better than 95% of their users:

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

I assume that you're primarily a landscape photographer, whereas Huff seems to be mainly into street stuff.

Is it any great wonder then that your gear preferences might differ from his and his from yours?

You seem to want some either/or world, when you need look no further than to Ray Sachs here who uses different systems for different situations and doesn't see any need to disparage one over the other.

The fact of the matter is, with gifted photographers like Ray Sachs and Jim Radcliffe currently posting here on a regular basis, this board is particularly blessed.

Take advantage of it and do what they do: Post more pictures and less contentious verbiage re this system or that. Milk them for all their worth re photography and post processing skills while they're here.

For now they're on the Fuji board. Don't let the opportunity go to waste.

As for anyone who wants to call me a troll, I'm Ben Hermann's offspring. I've got one of almost everything and a couple or more of most.

Here's a Ricoh GR pic just for the heckuva it.

fotophool

My Flickr Pics

Old Red

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jkspepper
Regular MemberPosts: 400
Like?
Re: Steve Huff reviews X-T1, loves it (mostly)
In reply to Tapper123, 7 months ago

Tapper123 wrote:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/03/10/the-fuji-x-t1-review-fuji-creates-the-best-x-to-date/

Another (mostly) positive review for Fuji's newest camera.

"I have to hand it to Fuji, they kicked ass with this release and to me, it is the best APS-C camera solution on the market today."

Still, he doesn't intend to buy one for himself since he has a Leica M and Oly EM1 already and is invested in those systems, which is understandable.

he does still have a slight negative slant.  My review that he posted up has emphasis (in bold and in italics) that are not mine.  I do agree he is positive on the device though.

I'm not going to make a fuss.  IMO, Fuji, Oly are the same.  My brother asked me what camera to buy - I recommended to him the Oly E-M5 over the Fuji and Sony devices and he loves it even though he knows I'm invested in Sony and Fuji because at that time (before the X-T1 was released), it represented the best choice.  If he had asked me again now, I would recommend the X-T1 over the Oly choices.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gotompoes
Regular MemberPosts: 421Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to SaltLakeGuy, 7 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.

Agree with your observations. I have both systems (E P5 instead of E M1) and the files coming from the E P5 look always a bit grainy even at low ISO settings. Indeed the results of the X T1 come much closer to FF then M 4/3. For the style of photography of Steve Huff i agree that the E M1 is the better camera. With regard to AF speed it is my observation that the E M1 is a factor 4 as fast and must admit that Fuji has still a long way to go.
Steve never mentioned the shutter shock problem the Olympus systems suffer from.
Nice to have a fantastic IBIS system but the penalty is that from 1/30 till 1/250 you might get shutter shock issues. I had this problem with 3 Olympus camera's, that's one of the reasons i moved over to the Fuji X T1.
From the optics point of view i think that Fuji is a clear winner. The 17 mm 1.8 Olympus is not a stellar performer and the Fuji 23 mm beats easily the 17 mm. The same applies for the Olympus 12 mm versus the Fuji 14mm. The Panasonic Leica 25 mm is however a top performer and the same applies to the Olympus 75mm.
The 35 mm (FF) is my preferred focal length and the 17 mm Olympus is not very good.
I much prefer the Fuji systems but need to keep some of my M 4/3 system intact for those situations where i need fast AF.
Steve Huff has been critical about the Fuji systems and i understand his reasons, built quality X E series, poor AF etc. but i think he is now missing some important points such as quality of optics and shutter shock problems with the m 4/3 systems.

 gotompoes's gear list:gotompoes's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Olympus PEN E-P5 Nikon Df Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ianbrown
Senior MemberPosts: 1,920
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to gotompoes, 7 months ago

I don't understand why we should always listen to Steve Huff's opinions, he knows no more than many people on DP Review.

Yes he may be useful for those who know little about the technicalities but most of us can come to our own conclusions, nothing personal against Steve but he's no wiser than most of us

It's just people's opinions

Ian

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
baobob
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,952Gear list
Like?
Re: Steve Huff reviews X-T1, loves it (mostly)
In reply to Tapper123, 7 months ago

Thx for the link very interesting review well balanced!

-- 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
chuck12
Forum MemberPosts: 90
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to SaltLakeGuy, 7 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.

You really are the king of fanboys.

Steve isn't comparing IQ of the Fuji, for the reason that it's trivial to compare when he has a full frame camera the kicks both their asses. So why suggest he is?

I do not have the X-T1 but I have the X-E2 and have an E-M1 here this week for evaluation.  Similar to Steve, I would agree m43 in general has better highlight retention, I have read this many times and also with previous m43 I would also say that was the case. The sensor lends itself well to this. It isn't "flat out Nuts!"

As for the focus, the Fuji is still stupidly slow in low light. In bright light I find them inseparable, but low light E-M1 flat out wins.

The X-E2 / X-T1 is definitely a notch better in high ISO, which is why I personally use that over m43, but to say you can shoot at ISO 6400 on the X-T1  "without any loss of detail or smudging" is total fanboy BS.

It sounds like you made a rather expensive purchase, and are now in denial about it's limitations.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,544Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to chuck12, 7 months ago

chuck12 wrote:

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.

You really are the king of fanboys.

Steve isn't comparing IQ of the Fuji, for the reason that it's trivial to compare when he has a full frame camera the kicks both their asses. So why suggest he is?

I do not have the X-T1 but I have the X-E2 and have an E-M1 here this week for evaluation. Similar to Steve, I would agree m43 in general has better highlight retention, I have read this many times and also with previous m43 I would also say that was the case. The sensor lends itself well to this. It isn't "flat out Nuts!"

As for the focus, the Fuji is still stupidly slow in low light. In bright light I find them inseparable, but low light E-M1 flat out wins.

The X-E2 / X-T1 is definitely a notch better in high ISO, which is why I personally use that over m43, but to say you can shoot at ISO 6400 on the X-T1 "without any loss of detail or smudging" is total fanboy BS.

It sounds like you made a rather expensive purchase, and are now in denial about it's limitations.

Chuck, it is so nice when others save me time by posting for me. Thank you.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gotompoes
Regular MemberPosts: 421Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to chuck12, 7 months ago

chuck12 wrote:

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.

You really are the king of fanboys.

Steve isn't comparing IQ of the Fuji, for the reason that it's trivial to compare when he has a full frame camera the kicks both their asses. So why suggest he is?

I do not have the X-T1 but I have the X-E2 and have an E-M1 here this week for evaluation. Similar to Steve, I would agree m43 in general has better highlight retention, I have read this many times and also with previous m43 I would also say that was the case. The sensor lends itself well to this. It isn't "flat out Nuts!"

As for the focus, the Fuji is still stupidly slow in low light. In bright light I find them inseparable, but low light E-M1 flat out wins.

The X-E2 / X-T1 is definitely a notch better in high ISO, which is why I personally use that over m43, but to say you can shoot at ISO 6400 on the X-T1 "without any loss of detail or smudging" is total fanboy BS.

It sounds like you made a rather expensive purchase, and are now in denial about it's limitations.

I am not a fanboy and run both systems in parallel. My preference is the X T1 but for some applications i need a m 4/3 camera. Fuji is nearly there but need to work on the AF system.
At least for my type of photography.

 gotompoes's gear list:gotompoes's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Olympus PEN E-P5 Nikon Df Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tom Ames
Contributing MemberPosts: 696Gear list
Like?
Re: Steve Huff reviews X-T1, loves it (mostly)
In reply to Tapper123, 7 months ago

Very good review.

I like both cameras and own both.

EM1 has better build quality, better layout and faster AF, but otherwise they are quite similar. Sensor is on par as well in my opinion.

 Tom Ames's gear list:Tom Ames's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SirPalomid
Regular MemberPosts: 105Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to chuck12, 7 months ago

chuck12 wrote:

You really are the king of fanboys.

Steve isn't comparing IQ of the Fuji, for the reason that it's trivial to compare when he has a full frame camera the kicks both their asses. So why suggest he is?

I do not have the X-T1 but I have the X-E2 and have an E-M1 here this week for evaluation. Similar to Steve, I would agree m43 in general has better highlight retention, I have read this many times and also with previous m43 I would also say that was the case. The sensor lends itself well to this. It isn't "flat out Nuts!"

As for the focus, the Fuji is still stupidly slow in low light. In bright light I find them inseparable, but low light E-M1 flat out wins.

The X-E2 / X-T1 is definitely a notch better in high ISO, which is why I personally use that over m43, but to say you can shoot at ISO 6400 on the X-T1 "without any loss of detail or smudging" is total fanboy BS.

It sounds like you made a rather expensive purchase, and are now in denial about it's limitations.

+1 on that

I have Canon 6D and Fuji X-E1, and Fuji no near in IQ, especially when ISO starts to rise, Fuji tends to "cook" RAWs by applying some NR, and we have fine-details smeared.

Compared to Fuji, Panasonic GX7 and Olympus EM1 are noisier, but retains more details and have slightly better highlight retention. AF-speed on both are way faster in any conditions, in low light Fuji is useless in terms of AF (speaking of X-E1 and X-E2 I tried). But Canon 6D rules out both Fuji and m4/3 system in terms of low-light performance both in terms of AF, and in terms of IQ.

In real world Fuji and m4/3 are much closer in terms of output, than Canon 6D and Fuji.

One thing, although, I like with Fuji more than with the others - colors. Also Fuji has very good optics, and ergonomics.

Fuji just need to catch up in terms of camera/AF performance, throw away X-trans sensor and stick with Bayer layout.

 SirPalomid's gear list:SirPalomid's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
D200_4me
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,407Gear list
Like?
I wouldn't fret over it too much
In reply to Tapper123, 7 months ago

Some seem to be pretty upset about his comments in the review, but everyone has their own opinion, so that's ok.   It's pretty clear to me though (as an owner of both the E-M1 and X-T1), the X-T1 has better image quality overall.  From a pure pixel peeping standpoint, the Fuji has cleaner images and are very sharp, even with the 18-55 zoom.  I see a little 'grain' even in my ISO 200 shots on the E-M1 sometimes, but let's be honest...nobody would ever see that, viewing photos at normal sizes. Even up to ISO 3200 or so, I seriously doubt anyone viewing the photos normally would ever notice grain in the photos from the E-M1.  But like I said, overall the X-T1 has better image quality and it's very impressive to me.  I looked closely at my own samples from the E-M1 and X-T1 (though I haven't been able to convert any raws from the X-T1 yet since I use Lightroom) and the X-T1 is the clear winner for pixel peeping.  And for 'real world' normal viewing, I guess it just depends on the scene and the individual photo, but I generally find myself more impressed with my Fuji files (X100S and X-T1).

Ultimately, any person's review is not something to get all worked up about...unless they're just totally uninformed or biased and telling a bunch of lies on purpose.   I think Steve's review is simply his own personal experience and opinion speaking.  And yes, indeed he does need to make a living so he does reviews and posts lots of stuff on his site and has plenty of advertising.  Gotta make a living, you know.  Nothing wrong with that.  Me on the other hand...my day job pays for my photography site and I usually don't make any money from photography.  I don't put much effort into it though.  It's just a hobby/fun, first and foremost.  I don't want to ruin my fun by having to pander to anyone or beg people to buy something from me.

-- hide signature --
 D200_4me's gear list:D200_4me's gear list
Fujifilm X20 Olympus E-M1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nick101
Contributing MemberPosts: 673Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to Robert Garcia NYC, 7 months ago

Robert Garcia NYC wrote:

interesting, my theory was that he tried the camera out and then realized it wasn't for him.

What an odd notion. Consiparcy theorists won't like that

 nick101's gear list:nick101's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 7D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ilsiu
Regular MemberPosts: 249
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to SaltLakeGuy, 7 months ago

SaltLakeGuy wrote:

...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...

In your experience with the EM1, what are the low light conditions at which AF becomes a complete failure?  e.g. what combination of ISO/aperture/shutter speed?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
burnymeister
Senior MemberPosts: 1,504Gear list
Like?
Re: Disinterested
In reply to aroundomaha, 7 months ago

I agree. When bloggers get enough traffic to quit their real jobs they lose objectivity. If they're too negative on a "review" they won't get free gear anymore and advertising revenue drops. Then they have to get real jobs again!

-
Vern Dewit
Calgary, Alberta Canada
http://www.explor8ion.com
http://verndewit.com/

 burnymeister's gear list:burnymeister's gear list
Sony RX1R Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Sony Alpha 7S Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SaltLakeGuy
Forum ProPosts: 10,625Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to fotophool, 7 months ago

First of all young man, I know you're dad. He and I have conversed on a number of occasions and I happen to have the utmost respect for him. It has always, I might add been a pleasant conversation. Regarding your particular sensitivity to my laying things on the line from time to time, it would always require placing things in context (which I can plainly see you've taken them OUT of). My discussions here (since 1999 by the way) have always centered around careful observations regarding applications of various equipment in a number of different ways. I know all too well not every single camera is for everyone's particular use or application. I try to state that as often as criticism rears it's ugly head. My findings are NOT unfounded, but as my dear associate here Ray has said succinctly, we all have our priorities.

That having been said, I also am a "definitive" kind of guy. I don't mix words and I frankly tend to NOT make light of a given weakness in a product I feel diminishes it's ability to do it's job. In as much as many who have the Micro 4/3rd system would love to ignore or want to go away, as yet nobody has been able to wish or design away the laws of physics that are STILL at play here, meaning that sensor size WILL in the end have the single largest impact on light gathering capabilities. So if all you wish to do is argue that there is "very little difference" or "they are so close as that it doesn't matter" go right ahead. I'm sure that 4 cylinder Kia will go just as fast as the 6 cylinder Porsche all day long. No worries. I haven't failed to notice as well, you have this penchant for following my posts and making sure to (in your mind) correct me. I guess if you've got the time (and the money as you obviously must owning every camera made today) go right ahead. I've been at this too many years to give up trying to steer people in the right direction. As for my suggestion to you....it would be grow up! P.S. try a little perspective edit on that photo, buildings don't lean that much if they plan on staying erect

Jeez, guy, get a grip and let it go!

Has a day gone by here this year that you haven't made some disparaging remark about the m/4/3 system and noise?

We get it. You switched to Fuji and couldn't be happier. We don't need to be reminded of it on a daily basis.

You switched to PhotoNinja from LR and couldn't be happier. Good for you! But do we have to be reminded of it everyday?

Here's what the Huff review highlights and what so you seem oblivious of:

Different strokes for different folks.

Coupled with the fact that most of today's cameras are probably better than 95% of their users:

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

I assume that you're primarily a landscape photographer, whereas Huff seems to be mainly into street stuff.

Is it any great wonder then that your gear preferences might differ from his and his from yours?

You seem to want some either/or world, when you need look no further than to Ray Sachs here who uses different systems for different situations and doesn't see any need to disparage one over the other.

The fact of the matter is, with gifted photographers like Ray Sachs and Jim Radcliffe currently posting here on a regular basis, this board is particularly blessed.

Take advantage of it and do what they do: Post more pictures and less contentious verbiage re this system or that. Milk them for all their worth re photography and post processing skills while they're here.

For now they're on the Fuji board. Don't let the opportunity go to waste.

As for anyone who wants to call me a troll, I'm Ben Hermann's offspring. I've got one of almost everything and a couple or more of most.

Here's a Ricoh GR pic just for the heckuva it.

fotophool

My Flickr Pics

Old Red

 SaltLakeGuy's gear list:SaltLakeGuy's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Epson Stylus Pro 3880
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SaltLakeGuy
Forum ProPosts: 10,625Gear list
Like?
So suddenly when someone gives a glowing report
In reply to chuck12, 7 months ago

they are automatically a "fanboy"? Nice. I think enthusiasm is being confused for bias here sadly. But you seem inflamed in the wrong direction. Sorry YOUR results and mine with the mft is a different deal. No friggen way the mft stuff will retain highlights in the same manner as the X-T1 does, and don't think for one minute I didn't try this extensively before sending the EM1 to a new owner.

You guys act as if I just make these statements without having any tests behind these decisions. I realize after all this is the internet, but sheesh. Yeah in fact the shots I took in lower room natural light at ISO6400 showed significant differences between the EM1 and X-T1 to say the least. The amount of noise generated by the EM1 was to the point where fine detail was greatly effected. This is born out in too many reviews to quote. I just had to prove it for myself. As for the sky noise tune I've been singing (much to the chagrin of a few posters here) it's THERE like it or not. It may not bother everyone if they are viewing 50% on screen or in smaller prints. But that's not my thing and I"ve stated that up front.

If you don't like me or my opinions, that is totally cool. There are a number of folks that have followed me or have known about me for probably more years than you've been around this forum. I'm a straight shooter and that just doesn't sit well with many....I get that. This is just ONE of many examples of shots I took that the EM1 would NOT duplicate (taken at ISO6400 on the X-T1 regarding the color fidelity while retaining detail and NO noise.

 SaltLakeGuy's gear list:SaltLakeGuy's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Epson Stylus Pro 3880
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SaltLakeGuy
Forum ProPosts: 10,625Gear list
Like?
Re: Some of his results
In reply to ilsiu, 7 months ago

In my kitchen at night when there is barely any light from the living room entering that room, the EM1 would NOT focus PERIOD. The X-T1 under the exact same conditions focused in less than 1 second. Needless to say the Canon 6D barely hesitated, but that thing is a low light focus monster.

 SaltLakeGuy's gear list:SaltLakeGuy's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Epson Stylus Pro 3880
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads