Some (lots of) first shots from my X20

[Jon Schick]

Late to the party with this one but as the prices have gone down I took the plunge recently. Very enjoyable little camera to use, although JPEG files aren't too pretty at pixel peeping levels (frankly, my Pentax MX-1 with a smaller sensor does better). I can squeeze more from raw, even at base ISO, but there are occasions when things like film simulations and the pro low light mode (which seems to be the best way of dealing with low light unless you have a moving subject) will make JPEG a nice option. A few early images, mostly taken around London this weekend, processed with a combination of Lightroom and OnOne Perfect Effects:




Early shot from the morning dog walk around Brockwell Park (Herne Hill)






Looking through the kitchen window of a restaurant near Tower Bridge






I remember when the NatWest Tower and Swiss RE (Gherkin) were pretty much the only tall buildings around here...






Busy Borough Market with the Shard in the background






Taken this view or something similar many times - but can't walk past without trying again






Under the Millenium (aka wobbly) Bridge






The Millenium Bridge and two new additions to our rapidly changing skyline






A quick candid from the banks of the River Thames






Lovely Bank Holiday weekend weather - we're not used to this!






I was impressed at how quickly the X20 focused - a big improvement on earlier generations of compacts






Delicious smells from a Malaysian food festival on the South Bank






National Theatre and The Shed - taken whilst waiting for the 68 Bus home






A crop of an image already taken with intelligent digital zoom - I really wished I had an articulated LCD for this one as I'd probably have managed to get closer.

Cheers,

Jon

--

jonschick

From setting up a school darkroom to spending more time than I should in Photoshop, photography has been an important part of my life for (ahem) longer than I care to admit. I'm stricly an amateur but occasionally get the odd shot right amidst many others where I think "if only...". These...

jonschick.smugmug.com

 

[DavidMillier]

Nice collection! I particularly like the shot looking up from under the bridge - very arty. Won't be able to steal that idea now ;-)

 

[VaLeX]

Thanks for your pics and input. I'd like to know more about how Fuji compares against Pentax Mx1 - not only in image quality, but in ergonomics & responsiveness as well, if you can spare the time.

 

[KJaay]

Great tour and enjoyable, beautiful colors!

 

[Jon Schick]

Thanks for your pics and input. I'd like to know more about how Fuji compares against Pentax Mx1 - not only in image quality, but in ergonomics & responsiveness as well, if you can spare the time.

--
Comments, criticism, suggestions: it goes without saying!

Hi,

Leaving image quality until last, my thoughts are:

Both cameras feel nicely put-together although with some differences. The body of the Pentax feels like it will survive just about anything, but the dials and controls feel slightly cheap in comparison. The X20 feels slightly less substantial but the dials are nicer (especially the two metal dials on top of the camera). Overall I'd edge this to the X20 (just).

I prefer slightly larger cameras, so both of them suit me quite well. The rubbery grip of the Pentax is great, but the handling of the Fuji is really good if you add a thumb grip (and even more so if you pair that with a soft shutter release). The inclusion of a few more buttons and dials on the Fuji works for me - the Pentax being slightly more menu-driven (although logical and easy to learn). Again a close call but the Fuji edges it.

The Pentax rear LCD is much better than the Fuji, and I really like the fact that it is articulated too. However, it has no viewfinder, and no optional EVF. The X20 viewfinder is good enough that it really is useful - certainly when compared to the tunnels you get with cameras like the PowerShot G series. The Fuji LCD is good enough so in terms of overall flexibility I think it beats the Pentax here. However, if you were into macro shots, the Pentax would be better - not only because of the articulated screen but also because it has a much better macro focus capability than the Fuji - the MX-1 really excels in this area.

I love the manual zoom of the Fuji - those with toggle switches never seem to quite frame things the way you want. And I also like the ability to use an external flash. The EF-20 is a handy little unit even though it is irritating to pay quite a premium for a rebadged Sunpak that talks to the camera. So again, advantage to the Fuji.

Responsiveness is an interesting one. Both cameras are pretty speedy compared to previous generations of compact cameras and both focus quickly. When the Fuji is able to find focus it is a little faster than the Pentax (which is itself no slouch) and on a par with some system cameras. But I also find the MX-1 is a little more determined and more likely to find focus when the Fuji has given up trying. I've never had issues with the focus of the Pentax; occasionally I find the Fuji gives up or gets it wrong. So, advantage Pentax.

Which brings us to image quality.... and here I think there is a very clear winner. The Pentax nails this brilliantly and I have to admit to being a little disappointed with the Fuji. Or at least I would be if I printed large or spent my life pixel-peeping. The thing is that there is more to life than sharpness and noise performance, and the Fuji does nice things with colour. Both do fine with dynamic range. But when you get down to noise and detail, there is a big difference. Even at low ISOs (I have done some comparison shots at ISO200) the Pentax is notably crisper with less noise. And the ISO1600 shots from the MX-1 are at least as good if not better than ISO800 from the Fuji. Some of this will be down to a better sensor in the Pentax (the identical combination of lens and sensor also works well for Olympus) but I'm not entirely convinced that the lens of the X10/20 is any better either. And the Pentax lens covers the same range but starts a little faster (f1.8). So if IQ is the most important determinant, then I'd highly recommend the Pentax.

I don't know if this has helped at all. The odd thing is, even though I know I can get better IQ from the Pentax, I find myself reaching for the X20 first - it's just a little more enjoyable to use if you can accept its limitations. That said, the Pentax is a great camera, ships with a battery that actually lasts a while :-D, and is an absolute steal for the close out prices they are going for now.

Some example shots from tonight - I took them in deliberately muted indoor lighting. The Pentax focused faster, and I think has turned out the better results - but the Fuji colours may be slightly more accurate. These were shot raw and I have done nothing to them other than export them as JPEGs from Lightroom so they can be loaded on to the gallery here:


MX-1 ISO1600


X20 ISO1600


MX-1 ISO800


X20 ISO800


MX-1 ISO200


X20 ISO200

Cheers,

Jon

--
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/

 

[Jon Schick]

And one more thing....the Pentax has an ND filter built in. The Fuji really needs one. If the X30 can rival the MX-1 for IQ, has an ND filter, larger battery and better LCD, it'd be a hard act to follow.

 

[VaLeX]

Thanks for the detailed comparison. Really informative and I guess others will be interested in it as well.

I tend to privilege ergonomics, responsiveness and manual controls over image quality too, if IQ is decent.

As I'd use such a camera, I wouldn't go above ISO 800, and I don't have the time to play with RAW, so I want good jpegs. How does dynamic range compares between the two cameras? I don't print big, but occasionally I watch photos on a big(-ish) screen (20 inch 1920*1080).

Your comparison is really interesting. It seems to be that although similar exposures (ISO800, F2.8, 1/40) - the Fuji's image gets more light, is brighter than Pentax's. At ISO 200 there's even a difference in exposure (1/8 in Pentax vs 1/10 in Fuji), but still Fuji seems to get more light. Anyway, I'm on a poor monitor right now, have to take a closer look at home.

P.S.

The build-in ND filter in pentax is really to be taken seriously ...

--
Comments, criticism, suggestions: it goes without saying!

 

[jimr]

Thank you for your review.

I cannot pinpoint why, but from all of the samples that you posted, I repeatedly found the Fuji rendering much more appealing....

The muted light is clearly reflected in the muted dull rendering from the Pentax while the Fuji rendering has 'life' even in this muted light environment and therefore appeals to me much much more than the Pentax. I find this in all of the comparative samples that you graciously provided.

Once again, thank you...

 

[Lisetta]

Nice photos! Thanks for comparing the two. I see the X20 is $200+ more ($249 v. $449). That + the better image quality might give the MX! the edge for some (inc. me) in spite of the areas you highlight where the X20 is better.

 

[jimr]

Thanks for the detailed comparison. Really informative and I guess others will be interested in it as well.

I tend to privilege ergonomics, responsiveness and manual controls over image quality too, if IQ is decent.

As I'd use such a camera, I wouldn't go above ISO 800, and I don't have the time to play with RAW, so I want good jpegs. How does dynamic range compares between the two cameras? I don't print big, but occasionally I watch photos on a big(-ish) screen (20 inch 1920*1080).

Your comparison is really interesting. It seems to be that although similar exposures (ISO800, F2.8, 1/40) - the Fuji's image gets more light, is brighter than Pentax's. At ISO 200 there's even a difference in exposure (1/8 in Pentax vs 1/10 in Fuji), but still Fuji seems to get more light. Anyway, I'm on a poor monitor right now, have to take a closer look at home.

Your astute observation might very well be an indication that Pentax is inflating/overstating the real ISO sensitivity of the MX1....

In other words a MX1 setting of ISO 800 might really be an ISO significantly lower.

That would make a comparison of the MX1 to the X20 truer if the Fuji was set at ISO 200 while the MX1 was set at ISO 400 or even higher....meaning the Pentax is actually even noisier at equivalent true ISOs to the X20....

P.S.

The build-in ND filter in pentax is really to be taken seriously ...

--
Comments, criticism, suggestions: it goes without saying!

 

[jonha4711]

Hey Jon, I add my thanks for that interesting review... I've just scrapped my X10 and am now looking for a decent replacement. So far, I was tending towards the RX100, but I certainly will check out the MX-1. The MX-1 body is slightly wider than the X10 but less high so portability-wise I think it'll be fine. IQ is the big unknown and here your pics do help.

Jon

 

[jimr]

Coming to any real accurate conclusions about how the IQ of the cameras compare.

We do not know if Pentax has 'cheated' by a stop or even more in its ISO ratings of the MX1...so the comparative images as posted do not give us an accurate way of comparing the output of the two cameras...

 

[Jon Schick]

Coming to any real accurate conclusions about how the IQ of the cameras compare.

We do not know if Pentax has 'cheated' by a stop or even more in its ISO ratings of the MX1...so the comparative images as posted do not give us an accurate way of comparing the output of the two cameras...

I'd be careful of the conclusions here. Part of the difference in the images above is due to different white balance, with the Pentax being notoriously warm under tungsten light when using AWB. It's an irritating issue and much better to use the tungsten preset. The Fuji does a much better job with AWB in tungsten light.

Even at base ISO I have no hesitation in saying the MX-1 provides sharper, crisper images with less noise than the X20. I prefer just about everything about the X20 aside fom its output. Look at the widget here or at Imaging Resource. They both point to the same conclusion. Even if the Pentax overstates its ISO ratings (and I'm not convinced it does), it gives more detailed and less noisy results in the same lighting conditions when using the same shutter speed, aperture and reported ISO.

 

[jimr]

With all due respect, I do not share your conclusion about the relative IQ based upon the comparative images that you posted. Quite the opposite.

 

[Jon Schick]

With all due respect, I do not share your conclusion about the relative IQ based upon the comparative images that you posted. Quite the opposite.

I was careful not to talk about IQ as that brings with it issues of colour, dynamic range, bokeh, rendering, etc. I talked only about crispness, detail and noise.

And, with all due respect, I think most people who've looked at the images or used both cameras would agree with me on those counts. I am 200 miles away from home tonight but tomorrow will repost a couple of images adjusted to equalise the white balance.

 

[jimr]

I await those sample images...

 

[Jon Schick]

As promised, I have run through the images again and equalised the white balance in LR. A link to the gallery where I have placed them (feel free to download and play) is here:

SmugMug gallery link

Even after manually setting the white balance there is a notable difference between the images. After quite a lot more pixel peeping than I would normally go for, my thoughts are:

(1) the Fuji colours look more appealing, especially at low ISO, but the Pentax has actually depicted the scene more accurately and is better at retaining colour as you go up the ISO range - the Fuji images at ISO1600 take on a slightly monochromatic look, and lose saturation. Even at ISO200, the Fever Tree label on the tonic water, which should be blue as shown on the Pentax image, is almost black with the X20. The MX-1 has still got that colour right even at ISO1600.

(2) there is definitely a difference in exposure with the Fuji images being a little brighter and more appealing. However I would caution against accusing Pentax of cheating. When I thought about it more today, I think it's likely to have more to do with me setting the X20 to Auto DR, but not enabling the equivalent corrections in the Pentax. A silly error and shows how careful I need to be when comparing images properly. A look at the histograms shows they both look pretty similar at the left but the Fuji extends a little more across the curve - at a guess we're talking about 1/3EV difference. I will need to do some more experimenting over the weekend and be more scientific in my approach, to see if there is a difference in the images once I have turned off the DR expansion.

(3) I stand by my earlier comments that the Pentax controls noise much better than the Fuji, and if you were, for example, to look at the Cotes du Rhone label for the ISO1600 images, the X20 looks both noisy and positively washed out in comparison.

Hope the images in the link are of interest. To be honest, both cameras perform pretty well for what they are, and much better than compacts of a generation or two back. I think the Fuji has much nicer handling and I prefer its interface, but I wish it had the screen, ND filter and battery life from the Pentax. The Fuji images are also more appealing but not necessarily more accurate (colour-wise). But I think you can squeeze a bit more detail out of the Pentax and it is the more capable camera when the going gets tough - both in terms of high ISO noise/detail and focus ability....the MX-1 will determinedly lock on when the X20 has given up on that front.

Cheers,

Jon

 

[Jon Schick]

Tried some more comparison shots tonight in manual mode with same settings on both cameras, with all DR enhancements switched off. JimR is right. The Pentax is consistently under exposing by one stop compared to the Fuji. It still handles colour at high ISOs better, but taking the difference in exposures into consideration, the noise comparison between the two indicates that they are not far apart. Certainly not at normal viewing sizes.

 

[Sactojim]

Excellent series! The standout image for me the one with people on the pier and the background.

 

[wymjym]

you go ahead and eat, I'm not going to join you!

I find the MX1, using the auto nd + dr enhancement gives me consistent high quality output, especially in high dr situations. The af in low light is better than most cameras, period.

If one would consider the original price of 400usd it was a good buy, if one bought them on sale for 190usd a few months back, well...

wj