Simple Question: 16MP X-E1/X-Pro1 X-Trans vs. 24MP D600 - IQ ONLY

Started Nov 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
wy2lam Veteran Member • Posts: 3,118
Re: Simple Question: 16MP X-E1/X-Pro1 X-Trans vs. 24MP D600 - IQ ONLY

Scott McL wrote:

Base ISO, high ISO, noise, detail, acuity, macro and micro contrast, lens at close/far focus, DR, etc.

Irrelevant: Size, cost, sensor size, lens size, battery longevity, handling, rear screen, camera "features", sync speed and on and on and on - all irrelevant.

If size, cost, sensor size, lens size, handling are all irrelevant, my suggestion is that both bodies are irrelevant.  Get a 645D, the 75mm standard lens, a very good tripod, and be happy.

Irrelevant: OOC JPEG is completely irrelevant (read Ming Thein on the irrelevance of this "feature"). Loving attention to raw processing only using whatever software performs "best" (NOT most "convenient" or popular software) for each camera.

Not sure why you highlighted "NOT most convenient/popular" and the irrelevance of OOC JPEG, as it seems most of us here (i.e. not just you) care about the highest quality conversion.  Also, a good quality piece of software does not consist only of the conversion engine.  Things like touch up tools, batch conversion, etc. are very relevant to the quality of not only each but collections of photos as a whole - better retouching tools and conversion speed allows you to spend more time on each photo, resulting in higher quality.

So, without telling us what you shoot and what kind of retouching you perform on your photos, it's almost impossible to expect us to tell you what the "best" software is.  I can only say that I doubt the relative quality of the "raw material" between the X-Pro1 and the D600 is more relevant.

By the way, OOC JPEG is excellent.  I know you think it is irrelevant, I'm just saying it is excellent.  Feel free to ignore it and consider it a bonus.

Relevant: Lens quality IS relevant. Duh. Real world IQ is an equation of lenses + sensor. Use best primes only as basis for comparison.

Are you talking about optical quality or build quality, longivity?  I know of some lenses that are built like fisher price toys but are optically amazing.  Do they count?  Definitely needs more elaboration than just "relevant, Duh".

How does the IQ under different common test scenarios and test criteria compare between these two camera system options? Not just "better or worse." I'm looking for studious, detailed, carefully controlled and measured comparisons.

Any pointers out there to serious folks out there who have spent the time to make a serious comparison?

The way your question is asked (placing various restrictions on responses while withholding your shooting habits) seems to be treating fellow posters as your search engines, at best you're going to get useless answers and at worst it makes you sound pompous.  Just saying.

Finally, to answer your question, detailed, carefully controlled, shot-in-studio with standard prime lens comparisons seems to be available from this very site.  Just go to the D600 review and compare their base and high ISO outputs on the noise/DR/comparison page.

 wy2lam's gear list:wy2lam's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow