Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm X-M1 real-world samples gallery

By dpreview staff on Sep 11, 2013 at 07:00 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $566.966 deals

The X-M1 is the cheapest model in Fujifilm's X-mount lineup, yet it retains the same 16 megapixel X-Trans CMOS sensor as its more expensive siblings. We were impressed with the image quality from the X-Pro1 and X-E1. If you want to see how the X-M1 fared, click the link below to view our 37-shot real world photo gallery.

115
I own it
46
I want it
19
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 101
Neodp
By Neodp (7 months ago)

m43; for that digital look. LOL.

0 upvotes
zos xavius
By zos xavius (7 months ago)

Is it just me, or are these real world samples lacking in fine detail? Look at the trees against the water shot (nice blown highlights in the foreground too). All the leaves look like watercolors with very little detail. I'm not talking about sharpness either.

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

The DPRreview boys are great photographers, but there's one last lesson they must learn: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER (ever) shoot a woman in full sun, it is an ungentlemanly act because it does not do justice to her beauty. Stand her under an awning, a tree, have her sit in a car, anywhere but direct mid-day sun. Carry a white Westcott double-fold umbrella for her to stand under if you have to, but please, no more shots like the poor woman in the brown dress. It will be a miracle if she ever speaks to you again.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 55 seconds after posting
1 upvote
calking
By calking (7 months ago)

Can't wait to hear what all the x-trans sensor haters have to say if/when the BAYER sensor XA-1 comes out at an even lower price than the XM-1.

Oh wait...never mind.

"no VF ... Waaah!!!"
"Has plastic parts ... Waaah!!!"
"Should be cheaper ... Waaah!!!"
"Made in ... [not Japan] ... Waaah!!!"
"It's not full frame ... Waaah!!!"
"no good for shooting sports ... Waaah!!!"
"It's not a ... [Sony, Oly, Nikon, Canon, Pany, Leica, etc] ... Waaah!!!"
"no way to convert RAW files (total horsesh*t) ... Waaah!!!"
"I don't like the colors ... Waaah!!!"
"Fuji is REALLY going out of business NOW ... Waaah!!!"
"It's not a FF Sony Nex ... Waaah!!!"
"I see artifacts at 400x magnification on my electron microscope ... Waaah!!!"
"It's too big. Too small. Too complex for the blind... Waaah!!!"
"No in-camera stabilization ... Waaah!!!"
"Video isn't as good as ..... Waaah!!!"
"Image quality not as good as full frame Canon 5DM3 / Nikon D800 with prime lenses ... Waaah!!!"
"just wait for the XMA2s model..."

13 upvotes
peckinpah
By peckinpah (7 months ago)

Yep that's funny. And true :-)

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

You forgot the white orbs.

0 upvotes
andikamkaruna
By andikamkaruna (7 months ago)

This is seriously funny hahahaha :D

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (7 months ago)

Yeah, photography. Let's lower the standard. That will work.... not. A Barbie cam is, "good enough", for anybody... not.

This way, camera makers can clean-up, on extremely cheap, witty-bitty sensors. As long, as you keep believing that, that’s what you will receive. The problem kids, is manufactures make less profit, on well made cameras. Until you REQUIRE, well made cameras, you are going to get only cameras that suck.

Plus, these do ***NOT*** have to cost us much more. That means, its a lie; that "full frame", systems, can't be very affordable. APS systems, even less expensive than that.

They just don't want you to think this way. It's not, all about the price; that you can find on the Internet right now. Its far, far lower, than that. Meaning far lower, that you think, for world wide, mass produced cameras.

Go buy an, already, historically, obsolete system, if you must; but you are not helping yourself.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (7 months ago)

We are sending the wrong message. We are buying cameras, and only admitting their imbalanced, photographic benefits; after the deed is already done. That has to stop, or it will get worse.

1 upvote
Duncan Dimanche
By Duncan Dimanche (7 months ago)

You know the fuji sensors are nice in low light but they are never sharp. Even the RAWs are being stripped off noise in order to create an illusion of amazing high ISO performance... it does remind me of Sony's JPGs

It would be nice if those samples shot would be in RAW...
But I know that there is little difference in Fuji's raw and JPGs...

I'm trying to like Fuji but I really can't...just look at that girl's portrait... there seems to be not much details....

Cheers and thanks for posting those

0 upvotes
marco1974
By marco1974 (7 months ago)

Not sure what you mean there - the JPEGs from my X-E1 and XF 14/2.8 and 60/2.4 are VERY sharp indeed.
(No fanboy here, just my first-hand experience).
Besides, sharpness is overrated anyway. A good photo is first and foremost about composition and tone (colour / b&w gradations).

2 upvotes
calking
By calking (7 months ago)

Most here don't understand or know the difference between "sharpness" and "acuity". The two are not the same. In any case, for those who can't help but obsess about their interpretation of sharpness, any camera offers the option of increasing sharpness in-camera. Some people complain about color saturation in default settings too. Stop whining like little girls and just bump it up in the menu.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

> You know the fuji sensors are nice in low light but they are never sharp.

Nonsense. Go look at the E-M1 RAWs in DPR's new test scene and change the GX7 to X-Pro1 (see link).

Per pixel sharpness between the X-Pro1 and E-M1 is virtually identical. Both are softer than the D7100, but there is almost no difference in acutance between the E-M1 and X-Pro1 in the RAW studio scene.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/9

1 upvote
peckinpah
By peckinpah (7 months ago)

Have you used, for instance, a X-Pro1 yourself? How are Fuji sensors never sharp?

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (7 months ago)

If you use Adobe Raw converters, they won't do sharp Xtrans shots (yet). If you use Capture One or in particular Iridient, different story.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

> If you use Adobe Raw converters, they won't do sharp Xtrans shots (yet)

That is just not true. Look at the DPR Studio Test RAWs in the link just above and change one of the cameras to X-Pro1. ACR has made huge improvements to where the Fuji RAWs have as good or better per-pixel sharpness than the two OM series cameras with bayer sensors.

1 upvote
andikamkaruna
By andikamkaruna (7 months ago)

You are kidding right? My Fuji X-E1 with 35mm or 60mm is very sharp...

0 upvotes
stanic042
By stanic042 (7 months ago)

very nice gallery, like the lightning shot most

1 upvote
makofoto
By makofoto (7 months ago)

My first X-M1 shots. Yes, to much Velvia and in camera sharpening. Last few shots are from my iPhone, but are clearly labeled:

http://public.fotki.com/makofoto/family__friends/fujifilm-x-m1-first/

0 upvotes
makofoto
By makofoto (7 months ago)

Just added three more shots from Disneyland ... shot with the 18 mm F2 lens ... the previous shots where with the 18/55 2.8/4.0 zoom

0 upvotes
makofoto
By makofoto (7 months ago)

After you click on a photo ... to the upper right is a Down Arrow that will allow you to see a larger file ... which you can click on again to see even larger

0 upvotes
makofoto
By makofoto (7 months ago)

added 2 more close ups with the 18 mm wide open at F2

0 upvotes
Robert Morris
By Robert Morris (7 months ago)

Hey, Jeff can you run the X-M1 down to SF and get some of you usual shots. I always enjoyed those.

1 upvote
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (7 months ago)

I'll talk to the boss and see if I can expense it.

3 upvotes
Manfred Bachmann
By Manfred Bachmann (7 months ago)

Picture DSCF6179
The crane in the background looks very strange!!

0 upvotes
Rmano
By Rmano (7 months ago)

Could it be because it's behind the hot smoke from the boat chimney? (I'm guessing --- I'm neither a Fujifan nor the contrary).

0 upvotes
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (7 months ago)

Yes, it's the heat rising from the ship's smokestack.

2 upvotes
HelloToe
By HelloToe (7 months ago)

Falls into the same trap as the Olympus E-P5: at this price point, it really should have a viewfinder.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ageha
By ageha (7 months ago)

At $799?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HelloToe
By HelloToe (7 months ago)

When you can get a NEX-6 for about $50 more? Yes, absolutely.

1 upvote
Sessility
By Sessility (7 months ago)

Once you've done some high ISO shots, you won't want the NEX even if it would be cheaper.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

The XM-1 is $699 body only. Clearly it's the X-Trans sensor, 920 K LCD and magnesium body are difficult to offer at a significantly lower price point and still make a profit.

2 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (7 months ago)

I rather take the Fuji, much better firmware and the NEX 5R/6 sensor isn't great.

0 upvotes
makofoto
By makofoto (7 months ago)

Hold down the Q button and the screen gets super bright. No problem shooting in full sun.

0 upvotes
HelloToe
By HelloToe (7 months ago)

Sessility: You mean "Once you've used a camera that forces you to use its built-in noise reduction even on RAWs instead of being able to use your own preferred NR, and over-rates its ISOs"?

Don't get me wrong, its quality is still good, but you have to those Fujifilm pics on DPR's comparison tool with a HUGE grain of salt.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
KCook
By KCook (7 months ago)

They have mixed Canon sky color with Sony skin tones. I'm so confused!

0 upvotes
NCB
By NCB (7 months ago)

One of the most attractive batches of sample pics I've seen for some time. I wonder if Fuji has tweaked the color for "consumer" tastes. Or maybe the default "film" is set to something different from the X-Pro1 and X-E1.

4 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (7 months ago)

If you look at the review of the X100S, the default shadow curve is a little harsher to give a bit more "pop" than the X-E1 and X-Pro1. Perhaps they did something similar to that here as well.

0 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (7 months ago)

Saturation is higher than the x-e1/pro1, but that only exacerbates Fuji color problems: red tend to be the color of fresh blood; greens look poisonous; blues tend to turn cyan. You can get good color from Fuji only by accident.

0 upvotes
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (7 months ago)

Thanks!

2 upvotes
kansasphotog
By kansasphotog (7 months ago)

I actually, find Fuji colors to be wonderful and much better than say a Nikon. If you use the default settings the colors render, in my eye, perfectly. If you're shooting in Velvia mode then of course things will look askew.

0 upvotes
NCB
By NCB (7 months ago)

For most purposes Fuji color looks fine to me. I think Ken Rockwell hit the nail on the head; for landscapes, Nikon and Canon do better color (I use Nikon, spot on, superb), otherwise Fuji gives very good results, particularly people color.

But, coming back to my early remark, the colors in the E-M1 sample pics look a world away from the more muted colors in the X-Pro1 and X-E1 reviews. A lot more impact. But would they be over the top in various landscape shots?

0 upvotes
Dimit
By Dimit (7 months ago)

Well I can definately say that the kit lens 16-50 is NOTbad at all..and for sure better than the Sony16-50..but at the end of the story,for similar price,nex 6 is way better..and not just only for the vf.

3 upvotes
rxbot
By rxbot (7 months ago)

I agree $800 is too much for the package. Plastic lens made in China and plastic camera body made in Taiwon. Should be closer to Sony A3000 price say $500 because it does have decent screen on back.

1 upvote
HelloToe
By HelloToe (7 months ago)

Yeah, not bad, but at this price I really can't see any reason to take it over a NEX-6.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Sessility
By Sessility (7 months ago)

High ISO image quality would be one reason to take the Fuji, better lens lineup another.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
1 upvote
makofoto
By makofoto (7 months ago)

The more expensive 18/55 2.8/4.0 lens us much better!

0 upvotes
Vladik
By Vladik (7 months ago)

Seems bland and lifeless

2 upvotes
NikonGeff
By NikonGeff (7 months ago)

Really????

Look again!!!

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

Not at all. The lightning image is one of the best samples ever on DPR, and the others have rich, beautiful colors, and excellent sharpness.

5 upvotes
flektogon
By flektogon (7 months ago)

Actually the X-M1 sensor should deliver higher IQ than X100s as it doesn't waste a single pixel for the PD AF.

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (7 months ago)

Seems about the same as most modern high-pixel-density CMOS-based cameras. Honest. The "always on" noise reduction / lens corrections that all modern cameras seem to apply these days at all ISO is not my cup of tea, because they do seem to give a slightly smudged, processed, and flat look when viewed at 100%, but I really wouldn't say that the E-M1 is particularly bad.

0 upvotes
cassano
By cassano (7 months ago)

seems to have more green smudge than x-pro1. (see the lawn house picture).

1 upvote
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (7 months ago)

Nice to have a slightly wider wide-end on the typical kit zoom.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

Not sure about the lack of a VF, but if they kit the XM-1 with the new 27 f/2.8, thereby reducing the price of the that lens, I'd buy it for sure.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (7 months ago)

Just buy the X100s.

1 upvote
dual12
By dual12 (7 months ago)

Still way overpriced.

12 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (7 months ago)

So? Wait three months.

0 upvotes
108
By 108 (7 months ago)

Nice samples. Looks like a quality camera. Too bad no viewfinder

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (7 months ago)

The other two models have a VF. Choice is not a bad thing.

3 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (7 months ago)

Very nice image quality. This is where other manufacturers need to learn. They provide cameras with a nice sensor, yet include a crappy kit lens. Look at the last Pentax review. Great sensor, crappy lens.

5 upvotes
ralphdaily
By ralphdaily (7 months ago)

I liked the cat picture a lot!

2 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (7 months ago)

Yep, dpreview has covered 70% of real world usage with that one.

2 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (7 months ago)

Yep, dpreview has covered 70% of real world usage with that one.

0 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (7 months ago)

Hmm, there's an echo in here

1 upvote
Alexander Barus
By Alexander Barus (7 months ago)

LOL

0 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (7 months ago)

Good jobs. Keep making good products Fuji.
and also release good compact with good low light photos.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

These look nicer than the EM-1 samples from yesterday which were slightly underwhelming for such a pricey flagship camera.

11 upvotes
kewlguy
By kewlguy (7 months ago)

I agree, the new kit lens looks like a nice performer too.

5 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (7 months ago)

Can this Fuji track moving objects any better than the others?

0 upvotes
ZhanMInG12
By ZhanMInG12 (7 months ago)

Worse, by most metrics. I can't shoot moving items with my X-E1 with either X or legacy lenses.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (7 months ago)

Nope. That's a fuji x system Achilles heel though not sure the system had that in mind. If you need that stu clear though the x100s may track as it has phase detection too.

1 upvote
reginalddwight
By reginalddwight (7 months ago)

Bold colors and good skin tones. I would have preferred to have seen more high ISO shots.

Nonetheless, Fujifilm's X-Trans sensor strikes again in a more "consumer-friendly" body.

Nicely done.

6 upvotes
rxbot
By rxbot (7 months ago)

$800 is too much for a plastic lens made in China with a plastic body made in Taiwan, should be $500-$600.

3 upvotes
ZhanMInG12
By ZhanMInG12 (7 months ago)

LOL are you expecting made in Germany at this price? The Fuji 16-50 is perfectly fine for a kit lens, and most cheap lenses have plastic elements these days anyways.

2 upvotes
AndreaV
By AndreaV (7 months ago)

I think for 800$ they give you also a camera... if not, I agree, for that lens is definitely too expensive! :)

9 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (7 months ago)

Consider fuji is giving you the image quality of their top pro camera at $800 with a kit lens that does not s*ck. what is wrong with you ;-)

8 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (7 months ago)

$800 is the MSRP for most crop DSLR kits and they are also generally plastic bodies with plastic lenses.

2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

Plastic from China is the new metal from Japan. We might as well get used to it, at least until the Vietnamese catch up.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (7 months ago)

name the last camera + lens combo that sold for $800 MSRP and was made of metal. There never was an old metal from Japan at these prices.

0 upvotes
lem12
By lem12 (7 months ago)

Must say that the skin colors are proper, better than by any other camera I've seen. And greens are just right.

8 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (7 months ago)

Quite amazing image quality a this price point. And that's JPEGS not even Capture One RAWs which can give you even more detail.

That those are kit lens shots is quite something.

10 upvotes
Hugo808
By Hugo808 (7 months ago)

Very nice pics, bright, sharp and colourful. M1 would make a nice compact camera upgrade I'm sure.

But then, I've just checked the price and £600 body only is a bit steep! Ah well....

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (7 months ago)

Excellent results, especially considering that this is a entry-level model with a relatively humble kit lens. Well done DPR.

4 upvotes
mumintroll
By mumintroll (7 months ago)

Very nice. Well done.

3 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (7 months ago)

Disappointing. The kit lens is poor, noise is high, discoloration, artifacts. They should drop their X, maybe they'll get better results with Bayer sensor.

6 upvotes
AndreaV
By AndreaV (7 months ago)

Are you joking, right...?

18 upvotes
JakeB
By JakeB (7 months ago)

He's a joke, if that's what you mean.

14 upvotes
photo perzon
By photo perzon (7 months ago)

I got the X-M1 on eBay for $ 799 with kit and the 27mm for $ 100 more from Shuisidio (sp)

4 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (7 months ago)

Excellent!!! Even with kit lens...

5 upvotes
ijustloveshooting
By ijustloveshooting (7 months ago)

Fuji X series use 16.2mp sony nex5N-5R-6 sensor right?

3 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (7 months ago)

No.

6 upvotes
TruePoindexter
By TruePoindexter (7 months ago)

No - the X-Trans sensor is unique to Fuji.

4 upvotes
limlh
By limlh (7 months ago)

I think the base sensor comes from Sony. The X-Trans is just a color filter array.

5 upvotes
nspur
By nspur (7 months ago)

It's thought that the sensor in the X-Pro1 and X-E1 is made by Toshiba who acquired Fuji's sensor fabrication business.

2 upvotes
neo_nights
By neo_nights (7 months ago)

It's a Sony made sensor, yes. But it has Fuji's "toppings" and electronics.

6 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (7 months ago)

There's the possibility that the base sensor may come from Sony but Fuji has a different color filter array along with potentially other changes. But it may not come from Sony at all.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (7 months ago)

Toshiba may be basically using their facilities to produce Sony sensors. They get to utilise the capacity and Sony gets to increase production with major capital investment.. win, win for everyone. All of the similar APSc CMOS chips are Sony sensors.

1 upvote
Rooru S
By Rooru S (7 months ago)

I remember Sony and Toshiba partnering some years ago to boost sensor production together...

0 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (7 months ago)

It's a Fushony sensor.

2 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (7 months ago)

The sensor is made by Sony who subcontract to Toshiba, who buy in the specialist colour filter array from IBM under license from Polaroid.

Actually I made that up, but since all the other nerdie posts were getting lots of likes I thought I'd join in.

7 upvotes
Total comments: 101