NX-300 vs XE-1 (not a troll, some people here seem to own both)

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Because no one camera will do it all for you. For those of us who are able to shoot with a variety of models, this point is a moot one. But for somebody wanting to make a decision on having just one system (model), then that requires a little decisiveness. Yes, the X-E1 is still very competitive and many of us X-E1 users don't feel the need to update to an X-E2.

What I strongly recommend here (provided stores in your area have them) is to actually get involved with a little manual foreplay with an X-E1 (if you can find one). Picking up the X-E2 (same body) will do just fine to get a feel for the camera. Unfortunately, lots of places don't have Fuji or even Samsung products in store (save, perhaps for Best Buy, which has the Samsung units in stock).

Now, putting myself into your situation, knowing what I know now, if I had to make a choice (not having either model in my possession at the time of decision), I'd go for the X-E1 and 18.55 f2,8-4 IS combo. But that's just me.

I think it bears noting that the NX300 with excellent 18-55 OIS III retails for as little as $420-450 from USA retailers on ebay if you keep watching for it, $529 on Amazon (black). The X-E1 is currently selling for $799 on Amazon.

Compared to what I paid for my brown NX300 18-55 kit, that's a difference of about $350, with which I was able to buy a $200 30mm f2.0 lens and a nice Samsung leather half case w/ strap with money left over for vintage lenses and adapters.

The X-E2 is another $600 on top of the X-E1, an $800 premium over an NX300 kit. For that money you could buy several Samsung lenses or pick up a new NX30 with EVF and still have money left over for an extra lens.

I'll grant you that Fuji has by far the best look and feel with their bodies, but that's a huge premium for a 16MP camera lacking swivel screen, WiFi, touch UI, etc.

The brands with the capabilities of putting out some of the finest, richly colored JPG's are Olympus and Fuji. In fact, with the X-E1, there's absolutely no need (for most) to shoot in RAW mode.

I think even Fuji fans would disagree with you, there. I know my X100 turned out great JPEGs but in the end, RAW gives you much more flexibility over range, noise and detail.

JPEG colors can be easily bumped in camera settings to achieve the same basic 'popping' effect. There's no magic to it, or inherently vastly superior image processing going on.

The JPG's are that good. From my observations, the X-E1's JPG's are vastly superior (read "less artifacts, compression effects, etc." here) to those of the NX-300.

Better at high ISO, but not across the spectrum. The NX300 has more detail and can easily be made to be as saturated/contrasty.

Look at the detail difference between the E1 and the previous gen NX200 sensor:

That's why I shoot in RAW only with my NX-300. But the X-E1 is one that I can easily shoot in JPG with, when needed, without worrying about IQ.

Fuji JPEGs can be good, but at high ISO they destroy detail via NR like any other camera. Better? Maybe. 'Vastly amazingly superb fantastic superior' JPEGs? Eh, not so much.

I see no advantage to the X-E1 at base ISO. NX300 on the left. The colors and tones on the right are greenish, muted, a bit flat and dark. The detail of the 20MP sensor here easily outperforms the 16MP, even from thumbnail view. No pixel peeping necessary.

NX300 (L) - X-E1 (R) - Base ISO

Now at higher ISO, the JPEG of the Fuji engine looks better. Vastly better? Not so sure about that, but it retains more detail. One question you have to ask when comparing JPEG is, what are the camera settings? Default NX300 JPEG NR is pretty high. Reducing it to Low or Off helps that detail smoothing a lot, and doesn't IMO result in a huge noise issue.

But then, what are we talking about JPEGs for when dealing with minutiae of image quality? If you want the best image from your camera, you shoot RAW. Especially if you have mastery of Lightroom...