Can the X20 be saved? :-)

Started Mar 28, 2013 | Discussions thread
xeriwthe Regular Member • Posts: 489
Re: Can the X20 be saved? :-)

DS21 wrote:

xeriwthe wrote:

BingoCharlie wrote:

DS21 wrote:

Have you actually looked at the sample images in full size from their review? It does not inspire confidence in their competence if they arrived to the conclusion after shooting these kind of dreadful images.

Hahahaha, wow.  I don't have a dog in this fight, but regardless of how good the X20 is (seems like the jury is still out to me), that is an ATROCIOUS photograph.

He's right: a professional reviewer should be ashamed to have posted it.

You do realize this a 100% crop at the edge of an ISO400 JPG taken at f/9.0?  This should very well look terrible as it would on every compact camera in existence.  DS21 is being disingenuous posting this without context

It would not on F100 and F200, for example. And many others from Fuji's not so distant past. You have an interesting definition of edge, one third of a frame is now edge? It looks terrible, no matter how much you try to sugarcoat it. And it is consistently smeared from edge (real edge) to  the third of the frame (some would call it middle of frame). No amount of diffraction would cause this at only F 9.0 with 2/3 sensor, and ISO 400 this bad for a premium modern $600 point and shoot? And the funny thing is they posted this, and glowing review, hilarious.

Here are a few sample shots of the F200 at ISO400, F9.0 and F11.00

Similar situations, overcast, low contrast detail and branches.

The bottom right or left 1/3 of the images, when viewed at 100%, looks pretty similar to the x20 sample at 100%.  lots of smeared detail.  The F200 looks a little bit more detailed, but reducing the NR on the X20 would probably result in similar results.  For example, take a look at the RAW version of the X20 crop:

Not nearly as smeared across the frame.

The X10 lens starts losing sharpness above f6 or so, F9.0 is not optimal for this camera.  By F8 it has lost a significant level of detail compared to at f5.  This is from my experience with the X10.  Maybe the F200 and other cameras are better in this regard.

Well, I could very well be wrong, and the X20 IQ could be a flop.  I don't really care.  But comparing 100% crops at the edge (1/3 of the frame) between X20 and F200, at ISO400 F9.0, I don't see a huge difference (one could consider that being a failure since the x20 is many generations advanced and so hyped by fuji).  Maybe you can enlighten me with better examples or show why my samples or analysis are wrong.  I'd be happy to be corrected, if it's the truth about the relative IQ of the X20.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow