LaFonte

This is not a good choice for consumers, this is a confusion. Most people will be not able to choose based on type of sensor. It is like if they sell iPad with two different processors that have...

There is no superiority of either sensor. that is a BS. To claim the bayer is superior to the x-trans is same BS as saying the opposite. They both have advantages and disadvantages, but those are...

Tony my own experience with fuji X cameras is that it is unfriendly as a PS replacement. Any time I gave the X100 to someone to snap a picture of me or group of people, I got either no image...

100% agree but I would also add that their JPG processing with the film simulation produces one of the best looking images. So far fuji had been releasing one great lens after another without much...

I can assure you x-a1 HAS AA filter. Its processing is consistent with the AA filter. I will describe this later in my xpro1 vs xa1 thread when I will show which is which and demonstrate on samples...

However one of the biggest question is why they released x-a1 so incredibly close after the x-m1 launch for much cheaper price? This is like a machine gun release, I barely found first x-m1 in...

Just a little suggestion (in a good spirit) for a framing technique. It is a great scene but the framing of the image gives an unsure feeling because you cut out any vanishing points (the fence on...

Yeah, for all Canadians, Henrys almost all locations have one or two right in the store. This time around Fuji really supplied a good chunk.

I would personally reduce the x-a1 sharpening and leave the x-m1 as it is.

I have also one detail comparison that will pretty much tell you the observable difference between bayer and x-trans and I will post this later as it is a dead giveaway. Yes there is difference and...

The last image is from very edge using the 35mm f1.4 lens. This would fail with many lenses. This is one of the $599 lenses that gives you the very best quality and in fact the price can be called...

Here is a quick comparison between the x-A1 and x-Pro1 using the camera engine Settings: Vivid, 1/250. 5.6 ISO 200, DR100, 35mm lens I purposely removed exif and I am not going to tell you which...

The 16-50 OIS is well worth that $250 for sure. And where I am sitting the x-m1 without lens cost $699 and the X-A1 WITH lens cost $599. Taking $200 off for the lens the x-a1 is then 50% less for...

Look, fuji can very easy put back bayer and call it x-trans 2 or x-trans EXR. It is like Super CCD story where they dropped the idea of 45 degrees pixels and now the sensors are only called EXR but...

Well I am just looking at the posted comparison images and on that x-a1 processing seems better but that is very relative. I simply have opinion that the x-m1 processing on that comparison image...

Sony tested the water with RX1 and grabbed a lot of money from early adopters, now it is time to make improved system and 50% cheaper version for the rest of us. I primary use fuji and sony now...

Not necessary true for many advanced modern cameras. While you can see the softening and then re-sharpening in many small sensor PS, the modern APSC are far from that.

In my case I have really hard way to spot any meaningful difference between the images from xpro1 and x-a1 especially in color department if using the same lens. Maybe when I stretch things to very...

On the same lens it is the same thing when you use display for focus, but I have the older 2.x fimware on xpro1. It is pretty much the typical fuji x speed that is still behind the current tops...

It very likely has AA as there would be no reason to remove it for entry level camera, but XPRO1 does not have AA filter and I don't see difference in pixel peeping. I think the AA or not AA is...