The X-Pro1 is more than just stiff competition.

Started May 8, 2012 | Discussions thread
Echodyne Regular Member • Posts: 174
Re: The X-Pro1 is more than just stiff competition.

Very well said - even if it's cooked (what's so bad about it anyways?) I would take the one whihch sports better overall IQ. This is why I prefer the X-Pro 1 over the EM5 and I tested both. I do like DPReview's quite much but all these studio shots are quite useless. I prefer real world examples (just like the much cited Steve Huff) and I have +not yet seen a single+ EM5 picture that comes near to that smooth analogue yet detailed ouptut of the X-Pro1. For my taste, real word examples of the EM5 still look too digital to me. However, just my personal taste and others are free to think different.


TEBnewyork wrote:

Hypothetically if one is cooked and one isn't, would you always pick the uncooked version? What if the cooked version is visibly better? More basic question, what does it matter if a RAW is cooked or not? Isn't the most important fact which one yields the best image.

dpreviewreader wrote:

The X-Pro 1 raw looks obviously cooked. Low noise and also less detail. This coupled with the fact that the Pentax K-01 also cooks its raw at ISO 3200 and above like the K5, according to DxoMark, makes it reasonable to conclude that image quality is no longer the reason to prefer any current APSC DSLR/Mirrorless body over the EM5.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --
 Echodyne's gear list:Echodyne's gear list
Olympus PEN-F
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow