Reading mode: Light Dark

X100 Norweigan Hands on preview with high ISO samples!!!!

Go to last post
Pretty sure he was referring to mine, where I used photoshop´s shadow/highlight tool to bring the snow down. Myself, unlike Gussie, know that snow is white, so I didn't bring it all the way down to grey, but easily could have, nothing had clipped to white. The problem was the exposure was taken letting the snow get really white, in a perfect world, it would have been 1/3 or 1/2 shorter shutter speed so the snow read a little bit darker rather than pure white, but even in this bright jpeg form, it had all the detail and tonal range needed with nothing clipping.

He's a hater, pure and simple. Anyone who tries to say this isn't excellent image quality, is a troll, plain and simple.
--
http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com
 
Calling names is all you can do when you lack strong arguments.
One thing came out of this: the X100 obviously needs a lot of PP.
btw snow is white in direct sunlight, in diffuse situations it gets bluish.

Regards,
Guussie




poopinmymouth said:
Pretty sure he was referring to mine, where I used photoshop´s shadow/highlight tool to bring the snow down. Myself, unlike Gussie, know that snow is white, so I didn't bring it all the way down to grey, but easily could have, nothing had clipped to white. The problem was the exposure was taken letting the snow get really white, in a perfect world, it would have been 1/3 or 1/2 shorter shutter speed so the snow read a little bit darker rather than pure white, but even in this bright jpeg form, it had all the detail and tonal range needed with nothing clipping.

He's a hater, pure and simple. Anyone who tries to say this isn't excellent image quality, is a troll, plain and simple.
--
http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
 
poopinmymouth said:
Pretty sure he was referring to mine, where I used photoshop´s shadow/highlight tool to bring the snow down. Myself, unlike Gussie, know that snow is white, so I didn't bring it all the way down to grey, but easily could have, nothing had clipped to white. The problem was the exposure was taken letting the snow get really white, in a perfect world, it would have been 1/3 or 1/2 shorter shutter speed so the snow read a little bit darker rather than pure white, but even in this bright jpeg form, it had all the detail and tonal range needed with nothing clipping.

He's a hater, pure and simple. Anyone who tries to say this isn't excellent image quality, is a troll, plain and simple.
--
http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
Below ISO800 it's not bad. The JPEG's actually remind me of my D90 and that's why I have now sold it. I reckon the sensor in the X100 is the same one that's in the D7000.

Paul.
--

 
poopinmymouth said:
...Anyone who tries to say this isn't excellent image quality, is a troll, plain and simple.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't go that far, but the images do look OK to me. They are JPEGs, probably at default settings, from a pre-production camera, so we can expect further refinement. Also, the 3200 and 6400 shots look very good.
--
Jeff

My cat, who likes to sprawl on my keyboard, is responsible for all typos, misspellings, factual errors, and faulty logic in my posts.
 
Guussie said:
...
One thing came out of this: the X100 obviously needs a lot of PP.
Click to expand...
It's too early to know that, don't you think? The images are JPEGs from a pre-production camera. Also, different in-camera settings will produce different looking JPEGs, and we haven't seen any raw files yet.
--
Jeff

My cat, who likes to sprawl on my keyboard, is responsible for all typos, misspellings, factual errors, and faulty logic in my posts.
 
PAUL TILL said:
Aetius said:
PAUL TILL said:
I reckon the sensor in the X100 is the same one that's in the D7000.
Click to expand...
Nope. D7000 has 16 megapixels, whereas the X100 has 12.

--
My blog: http://everythingphoto.net/
Click to expand...
Oh yes, so is it the OLD D90 sensor then?

Paul.
--

Click to expand...
Doesn't look like that. These jpegs look to be in the same territory as the D7000. D7000 IQ is clearly better than D90. (Disclaimer to D90 fans - please look at dxo scores)

Don't know which sensor they used, but it is definitely better than the one in D90. May be SOny made them a custom 12MP version of the new sensor in D7000 and K-5.

--
flickr http://www.flickr.com/abhishekiam
 
Jeff Charles said:
Guussie said:
...
One thing came out of this: the X100 obviously needs a lot of PP.
Click to expand...
It's too early to know that, don't you think? The images are JPEGs from a pre-production camera. Also, different in-camera settings will produce different looking JPEGs, and we haven't seen any raw files yet.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

But even in a production model, I would prefer a cam w/ a sensor like the X100's to need the help of some pp, IOW to provide the option/flexibility to do less in-cam processing and to let me do it, just as when shooting DSLR JPGs. A cam of this spec level should offer flexibility and provide a good base image from which to "develop" final output.

I found this to be true in my attempt to process two scenes, one with the winding trail up the hill among the trees and the other with the sculpture of two kids and the pink mitten shot at f2. The mitten progressed from washed out pink (like the snow shot that's been discussed) and mush detail, to very good detail and a rich though restrained pink. The image popped of 3D once the detail of the mitten was distinguished from elements behind it.
 
To be honest, I know there were a few significant ones, but but can't commit to researching which ones they were right now. Likewise, post-production models have also significantly benefited from firmware updates as well as processing engines in software. My only examples there are from Sigma and green casts, red channels, and noise issues.
 
I realize from another post that this model may have been circulating for some time and therefore not be representative of the development and IQ at this point in time, and that IQ demo is not what the model was sent out for in the first place. Kind of like looking through a telescope to see a point in time in the lifecycle of a distant galaxy, what one sees is a snapshot of the distant past, not the current or final state.
 
Guusie: You have a crap monitor, or bad eyes, or maybe you are just confused. It's not blown out. Look at a histogram, or decrease exposure in post. It really is not blown out.
Guussie said:
Sorry, it is.
Blame the cat.
Click to expand...
 
Guussie said:
Related to the price of the camera (about $1.100,-) and the "limited" range of the lens the strength of the camera was: perfect IQ, much better than an average camera. So we were wondering: how much better will this camera perform than the avarage camera.

The samples shown do not show better performance than avarage at all. I am afraid it will turn out to be a toy for snobs.
Click to expand...
What are you comparing with? An 'average camera' to you is what? The Nikon D7000, which is a huge DLSR, or a crappy compact? The X100 is clearly way better than a micro sensor compact, and it's in the vicinity of the top of the line crop DLSR's. That seems pretty ok to me.
 
Just a three notes after looking on the original preview and reading through many pages of comments on a few pre-release photos.

1. The alpha-pre-release images are pretty decent, even with comparison with two of the best APSC-cameras, Nikon D7000 & D90.

2. There are many P&S photographers as well as some professionals who are interested in this camera.
3. Fuji HS10 photos should never appear in this thread...
 
igorek7 said:
Just a three notes after looking on the original preview and reading through many pages of comments on a few pre-release photos.

1. The alpha-pre-release images are pretty decent, even with comparison with two of the best APSC-cameras, Nikon D7000 & D90.

2. There are many P&S photographers as well as some professionals who are interested in this camera.
3. Fuji HS10 photos should never appear in this thread...
Click to expand...
LOVE point #3!

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/
 
dotbalm
dotbalm said:
dotbalm said:
I may have missed that. Which specifically are you referring to?
Click to expand...
It's in this thread but hard to find:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=37555159

ISO 200 - 12,800 shots in links at bottom. There is a board at the lower left which appears consistently softer than the one in the center. See what you think.

(I gotta get out more)
Click to expand...
darn it! I am always to late to the party ... they have been pulled

most likely a spank from Fujifilm

--
JB
I am not a photographer, I’m just a guy that takes pictures.
http://www.buckshot.BuckshotsPhotos.photoshare.co.nz

http://www.fujimugs.com/mugshots/show_member.php?country=&act=&hasmug=&challenge=&cat=&sortby=&sortdir=&thumb=&srch=&member=1341
 
The IQ of the X100 must be like top line DSLR.
But the X100 is restricted to a fixed lens.
That's when the "retro"comes in to make up for that.
I guess this is their marketing strategy.

Regards,
Guussie
billrey said:
Guussie said:
Related to the price of the camera (about $1.100,-) and the "limited" range of the lens the strength of the camera was: perfect IQ, much better than an average camera. So we were wondering: how much better will this camera perform than the avarage camera.

The samples shown do not show better performance than avarage at all. I am afraid it will turn out to be a toy for snobs.
Click to expand...
What are you comparing with? An 'average camera' to you is what? The Nikon D7000, which is a huge DLSR, or a crappy compact? The X100 is clearly way better than a micro sensor compact, and it's in the vicinity of the top of the line crop DLSR's. That seems pretty ok to me.
Click to expand...
 
I fully understand that one doesn't want to see HS10 photo's in this thread because they look a lot better than the photo's from the preproduction X100.

Regards,
Guussie
igorek7 said:
Just a three notes after looking on the original preview and reading through many pages of comments on a few pre-release photos.

1. The alpha-pre-release images are pretty decent, even with comparison with two of the best APSC-cameras, Nikon D7000 & D90.

2. There are many P&S photographers as well as some professionals who are interested in this camera.
3. Fuji HS10 photos should never appear in this thread...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top