Reading mode: Light Dark

X-T1 very high ISO pictures - I don't see a problem.

Go to last post
Joachim Gerstl

Joachim Gerstl

Veteran Member
Messages
9,722
Solutions
1
Reaction score
6,856
Location
AT
Hi,

I even have to lift exposures a little bit because I exposed to much for the lights. RAW processed in LR. No noise reduction. I don't know an APS-C sensor camera that gives better results in low light.

Here are some low light samples:

http://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com/?p=5856#more-5856

To me all the negativity in this forum is in contrast to the pictures that are posted here or on pbase or smugmug. Sometimes I think this posts are not real or the posters don't own a Fuji camera.
 
Joachim Gerstl said:
Hi,

I even have to lift exposures a little bit because I exposed to much for the lights. RAW processed in LR. No noise reduction. I don't know an APS-C sensor camera that gives better results in low light.

Here are some low light samples:

http://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com/?p=5856#more-5856

To me all the negativity in this forum is in contrast to the pictures that are posted here or on pbase or smugmug. Sometimes I think this posts are not real or the posters don't own a Fuji camera.
Click to expand...
One complaint about high ISO of the X-E2/X-T1 is related to excessive NR applied to the OOC jpegs (specifically skin tones). As your examples are raw, not jpeg and also not skin tones, they do nothing to counter those complaints.

The other complaint is that higher ISOs are overstated (not as sensitive) compared to other cameras at the same ISO setting. This is only an issue when comparing cameras, so again, your examples aren't really relevant.

Nice photos though.
 
Last edited:
Very nice images. Looking forward to your thoughts on leaving the FF behind. I've always enjoyed your blog.

And yes, there does seem some absurd statements made in these forums. Best to ignore such statements and threads (I regret getting pulled into one) and just focus on photography.
 
Randy Benter said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
Hi,

I even have to lift exposures a little bit because I exposed to much for the lights. RAW processed in LR. No noise reduction. I don't know an APS-C sensor camera that gives better results in low light.

Here are some low light samples:

http://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com/?p=5856#more-5856

To me all the negativity in this forum is in contrast to the pictures that are posted here or on pbase or smugmug. Sometimes I think this posts are not real or the posters don't own a Fuji camera.
Click to expand...
One complaint about high ISO of the X-E2/X-T1 is related to excessive NR applied to the OOC jpegs (specifically skin tones). As your examples are raw, not jpeg and also not skin tones, they do nothing to counter those complaints.
Click to expand...
I know it is about the portraits taken at ISO 6.400 in JPEG. If this really is the main subject/usage the Fuji X-Trans II cameras might not be the best option but I can't think of too many people that take portraits at such an ISO setting and still insist to use JPEG. I have the feeling that some people desperately try to find something that doesn't work.
MrFresno said:
The other complaint is that higher ISOs are overstated (not as sensitive) compared to other cameras at the same ISO setting. This issue is only relevant when comparing cameras, so again, your examples aren't really relevant.

Nice photos though.
Click to expand...
I mentioned that in my comments and I think it is a valid point but there is still no other APS-C camera that takes better images in low light. Thank you!
 
Joachim Gerstl said:
Hi,

I even have to lift exposures a little bit because I exposed to much for the lights. RAW processed in LR. No noise reduction. I don't know an APS-C sensor camera that gives better results in low light.

Here are some low light samples:

http://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com/?p=5856#more-5856

To me all the negativity in this forum is in contrast to the pictures that are posted here or on pbase or smugmug. Sometimes I think this posts are not real or the posters don't own a Fuji camera.

--
Joachim
www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com

Little Big Traveling Camera

a blog dedicated to traveling and small big sensor cameras
www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com
Click to expand...
It may help if you go back and read about exactly what the high ISO problems are. Best Pc -- http://www.pbase.com/meagre_offerings/street_photography `im a simple man, i use simple tools, and i shoot what i see` L S Lowry (but bastardised by me).
 
Joachim Gerstl said:
Randy Benter said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
Hi,

I even have to lift exposures a little bit because I exposed to much for the lights. RAW processed in LR. No noise reduction. I don't know an APS-C sensor camera that gives better results in low light.

Here are some low light samples:

http://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com/?p=5856#more-5856

To me all the negativity in this forum is in contrast to the pictures that are posted here or on pbase or smugmug. Sometimes I think this posts are not real or the posters don't own a Fuji camera.
Click to expand...
One complaint about high ISO of the X-E2/X-T1 is related to excessive NR applied to the OOC jpegs (specifically skin tones). As your examples are raw, not jpeg and also not skin tones, they do nothing to counter those complaints.
Click to expand...
I know it is about the portraits taken at ISO 6.400 in JPEG. If this really is the main subject/usage the Fuji X-Trans II cameras might not be the best option but I can't think of too many people that take portraits at such an ISO setting and still insist to use JPEG. I have the feeling that some people desperately try to find something that doesn't work.
Click to expand...
I shoot raw, so it was never a problem for me. I try not to minimize the problems of others just because they don't affect me personally.
Joachim Gerstl said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
The other complaint is that higher ISOs are overstated (not as sensitive) compared to other cameras at the same ISO setting. This issue is only relevant when comparing cameras, so again, your examples aren't really relevant.

Nice photos though.
Click to expand...
I mentioned that in my comments and I think it is a valid point but there is still no other APS-C camera that takes better images in low light. Thank you!
Click to expand...
Yes, most current APS-C sensors perform very well. A modern APS-C camera with a fast prime is great combination for low light.
 
Joachim Gerstl said:
I mentioned that in my comments and I think it is a valid point but there is still no other APS-C camera that takes better images in low light. Thank you!
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is disputing that. However, the difference is smaller than the stated ISO might lead you to believe. E.g., at ISO 6400 or so you really should be comparing it to ISO 3200 on other brands. All that means is that the X-T1 is probably some fraction of a stop better rather than over a stop. The latter is still full frame territory.

To reiterate, not everyone who points out the ISO discrepancy is bashing the camera. I know all i care about is having the ability to make an apples to apples comparison to aid me when choosing a camera. Besides, there is more to a camera than how well it can see in the dark and Fuji certainly has that X factor. Only reason I haven't bought one yet is that I can't justify the cost when I already own a system that satisfies most of my photographic needs.
 
Pritzl said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
I mentioned that in my comments and I think it is a valid point but there is still no other APS-C camera that takes better images in low light. Thank you!
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is disputing that. However, the difference is smaller than the stated ISO might lead you to believe. E.g., at ISO 6400 or so you really should be comparing it to ISO 3200 on other brands. All that means is that the X-T1 is probably some fraction of a stop better rather than over a stop. The latter is still full frame territory.

To reiterate, not everyone who points out the ISO discrepancy is bashing the camera. I know all i care about is having the ability to make an apples to apples comparison to aid me when choosing a camera. Besides, there is more to a camera than how well it can see in the dark and Fuji certainly has that X factor. Only reason I haven't bought one yet is that I can't justify the cost when I already own a system that satisfies most of my photographic needs.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pritzl/
Click to expand...
I just bought a Fuji XM1 today and tested it out thoroughly. Should be same sensor at XT1 I think, or very similar at least if later version. As I already own a couple of other cameras both DX - Nikon D300s and FX - Nikon D700 for work and an Olympus EPL1, I was very pleasantly surprised on the high iso of XM1 at 3200 iso and 6400 iso on the Fuji Xtran sensor images, in moderate room light without flash even on the kit lens and OIS image stabilization at 1/15 sec. worked as well as also did the auto white balance.

My older Olympus pen could not come close at highest iso in image quality/low noise, (only my Nikon D700 FX could do better in Raw or Jpeg for low noise and fine detail retention, but the Fuji still did well with crisp edges at high iso and low noise very fine grain at iso 6400 at standard default camera setting). The Fuji XM1 intended for personal use mostly, is a lot lighter than my Nikons for carry around. I picked the Fuji xm1 over a upgrade to a Oly EPL5 or EPL7, because of iso performance and image clarity, with apsc size sensor which should be less noise compared to m43.

So if cost is an issue to buy an XT1 if you have other systems already, I would highly recommend the affordable XM1 with 16-50mm kit (around $599. now) which this kit lens does well for sharpness, and maybe add a prime, (I plan to add the 27mm f2.8 for general small size carry around use.) I owned 2 Fuji long ago which were S2Pro and S5Pro in DSLR so liking returning to Fuji for its colours for some of my photography and love the skin tones for my portraits. Highly recommended! any xtrans cmos sensor camera either ... XT1 or XM1 or XE2. The camera was also fast enough in operating speed for my personal needs.

Maybe Fuji does more NR in higher iso's but the images still come out great. I will test Raw vs. Jpeg as I get to it on images, to see the differences that may be attainable in my copy of Lightroom, or else Silkypix that comes with camera.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
The last time I was in Singapore the gardens were still under construction. I'm looking forward to the time I can use an X-T1 to photograph there. Thanks for the memories.

The problem I have with critics is that it is possible criticize anything, if it is small, it is not small enough, if it great, then it's too expensive. While it useful for users to know the limitations of a piece of equipment, the problem lies in the balance between pointing out limitations, and recognizing strengths. For a forum that is dedicated to the Fujifilm brand, my sense is that the balance is off.
 
Love your photo's. I haven't been to Singapore yet or the Red Square, but they are on my bucket list. "lol"
 
Joachim Gerstl said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
One complaint about high ISO of the X-E2/X-T1 is related to excessive NR applied to the OOC jpegs (specifically skin tones). As your examples are raw, not jpeg and also not skin tones, they do nothing to counter those complaints.
Click to expand...
I know it is about the portraits taken at ISO 6.400 in JPEG. If this really is the main subject/usage the Fuji X-Trans II cameras might not be the best option but I can't think of too many people that take portraits at such an ISO setting and still insist to use JPEG. I have the feeling that some people desperately try to find something that doesn't work.
Click to expand...
It's not uncommon to be a jeg shooter taking event pics in dimmer light. RAW processing would be inconvenient overkill for these kinds of uses. Not everyone has the time or inclination to RAW process.

Fuji were famous for their OOC jpegs, and those high ISO people pics were just great. No longer. What's frustrating about it is that it is evidently a software issue and easy enough for Fuji to either correct or give some kind of skin-NR option that can be switched off. In what's supposed to be a photographer's camera, taking away the photographer's choice is in these matters is significant.
 
Adrian Van said:
So if cost is an issue to buy an XT1 if you have other systems already, I would highly recommend the affordable XM1...
Click to expand...
Only trouble is, what I love about the X-T1 is not on the X-M1 (or even X-E2). I love the full dial operation. Apart from WB, which I can fix in post, pretty much everything I need is at my fingertips with the X-T1. That and the awesome EVF are what attract me to the camera.
Adrian Van said:
Maybe Fuji does more NR in higher iso's but the images still come out great. I will test Raw vs. Jpeg as I get to it on images, to see the differences that may be attainable in my copy of Lightroom, or else Silkypix that comes with camera.
Click to expand...
I shoot RAW almost exclusively so I'm not too bothered by in-camera JPEG processing. I am however concerned by the less than perfect demosaicing of X-Trans on Adobe Lightroom; although I'm told it's much improved now.

I just know I would love to use an X-T1 but also understand that as a general do-it-all camera I made the right choice with the 70D. Then again, if Fuji irons out the few remaining misgivings I have (decent off-camera ETTL options, better video, more lenses and perhaps a fully articulated screen) I think I would be very tempted to switch just for the handling experience. Maintaining two systems just seems like an invitation for one or the other to take up permanent residence on a shelf somewhere and I hate clutter; particularly expensive clutter.

Oh and I tried SilkyPix with my X10. Far too clumsy an interface for my taste.
 
Pritzl said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
I mentioned that in my comments and I think it is a valid point but there is still no other APS-C camera that takes better images in low light. Thank you!
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is disputing that. However, the difference is smaller than the stated ISO might lead you to believe. E.g., at ISO 6400 or so you really should be comparing it to ISO 3200 on other brands. All that means is that the X-T1 is probably some fraction of a stop better rather than over a stop. The latter is still full frame territory.
Click to expand...
I gotta check that. Will compare it to my 6D.
Pritzl said:
To reiterate, not everyone who points out the ISO discrepancy is bashing the camera. I know all i care about is having the ability to make an apples to apples comparison to aid me when choosing a camera. Besides, there is more to a camera than how well it can see in the dark and Fuji certainly has that X factor. Only reason I haven't bought one yet is that I can't justify the cost when I already own a system that satisfies most of my photographic needs.
Click to expand...
 
Pritzl said:
Adrian Van said:
So if cost is an issue to buy an XT1 if you have other systems already, I would highly recommend the affordable XM1...
Click to expand...
Only trouble is, what I love about the X-T1 is not on the X-M1 (or even X-E2). I love the full dial operation. Apart from WB, which I can fix in post, pretty much everything I need is at my fingertips with the X-T1. That and the awesome EVF are what attract me to the camera.
Pritzl said:
Maybe Fuji does more NR in higher iso's but the images still come out great. I will test Raw vs. Jpeg as I get to it on images, to see the differences that may be attainable in my copy of Lightroom, or else Silkypix that comes with camera.
Click to expand...
I shoot RAW almost exclusively so I'm not too bothered by in-camera JPEG processing. I am however concerned by the less than perfect demosaicing of X-Trans on Adobe Lightroom; although I'm told it's much improved now.

I just know I would love to use an X-T1 but also understand that as a general do-it-all camera I made the right choice with the 70D. Then again, if Fuji irons out the few remaining misgivings I have (decent off-camera ETTL options, better video, more lenses and perhaps a fully articulated screen) I think I would be very tempted to switch just for the handling experience. Maintaining two systems just seems like an invitation for one or the other to take up permanent residence on a shelf somewhere and I hate clutter; particularly expensive clutter.

Oh and I tried SilkyPix with my X10. Far too clumsy an interface for my taste.
Click to expand...
 
The Name is Bond said:
The Name is Bond said:
The Name is Bond said:
One complaint about high ISO of the X-E2/X-T1 is related to excessive NR applied to the OOC jpegs (specifically skin tones). As your examples are raw, not jpeg and also not skin tones, they do nothing to counter those complaints.
Click to expand...
I know it is about the portraits taken at ISO 6.400 in JPEG. If this really is the main subject/usage the Fuji X-Trans II cameras might not be the best option but I can't think of too many people that take portraits at such an ISO setting and still insist to use JPEG. I have the feeling that some people desperately try to find something that doesn't work.
Click to expand...
It's not uncommon to be a jeg shooter taking event pics in dimmer light. RAW processing would be inconvenient overkill for these kinds of uses. Not everyone has the time or inclination to RAW process.

Fuji were famous for their OOC jpegs, and those high ISO people pics were just great. No longer. What's frustrating about it is that it is evidently a software issue and easy enough for Fuji to either correct or give some kind of skin-NR option that can be switched off. In what's supposed to be a photographer's camera, taking away the photographer's choice is in these matters is significant.
Click to expand...
If its really just software it could be cured via firmware update. If thats the case I think there is a high chance that Fuji will address this.
 
is that the high ISO output retains very decent colour, colour accuracy and quality is excellent. Nice images by the way, I enjoyed them.
 
Joachim Gerstl said:
The Name is Bond said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
Joachim Gerstl said:
One complaint about high ISO of the X-E2/X-T1 is related to excessive NR applied to the OOC jpegs (specifically skin tones). As your examples are raw, not jpeg and also not skin tones, they do nothing to counter those complaints.
Click to expand...
I know it is about the portraits taken at ISO 6.400 in JPEG. If this really is the main subject/usage the Fuji X-Trans II cameras might not be the best option but I can't think of too many people that take portraits at such an ISO setting and still insist to use JPEG. I have the feeling that some people desperately try to find something that doesn't work.
Click to expand...
It's not uncommon to be a jeg shooter taking event pics in dimmer light. RAW processing would be inconvenient overkill for these kinds of uses. Not everyone has the time or inclination to RAW process.

Fuji were famous for their OOC jpegs, and those high ISO people pics were just great. No longer. What's frustrating about it is that it is evidently a software issue and easy enough for Fuji to either correct or give some kind of skin-NR option that can be switched off. In what's supposed to be a photographer's camera, taking away the photographer's choice is in these matters is significant.
Click to expand...
If its really just software it could be cured via firmware update. If thats the case I think there is a high chance that Fuji will address this.
Click to expand...
 
Pritzl said:
Adrian Van said:
So if cost is an issue to buy an XT1 if you have other systems already, I would highly recommend the affordable XM1...
Click to expand...
Only trouble is, what I love about the X-T1 is not on the X-M1 (or even X-E2). I love the full dial operation. Apart from WB, which I can fix in post, pretty much everything I need is at my fingertips with the X-T1. That and the awesome EVF are what attract me to the camera.
Pritzl said:
Maybe Fuji does more NR in higher iso's but the images still come out great. I will test Raw vs. Jpeg as I get to it on images, to see the differences that may be attainable in my copy of Lightroom, or else Silkypix that comes with camera.
Click to expand...
I shoot RAW almost exclusively so I'm not too bothered by in-camera JPEG processing. I am however concerned by the less than perfect demosaicing of X-Trans on Adobe Lightroom; although I'm told it's much improved now.

I just know I would love to use an X-T1 but also understand that as a general do-it-all camera I made the right choice with the 70D. Then again, if Fuji irons out the few remaining misgivings I have (decent off-camera ETTL options, better video, more lenses and perhaps a fully articulated screen) I think I would be very tempted to switch just for the handling experience. Maintaining two systems just seems like an invitation for one or the other to take up permanent residence on a shelf somewhere and I hate clutter; particularly expensive clutter.

Oh and I tried SilkyPix with my X10. Far too clumsy an interface for my taste.
Click to expand...
 
forpetessake said:
Les James said:
Love your photo's. I haven't been to Singapore yet or the Red Square, but they are on my bucket list. "lol"
Click to expand...
Make sure the Red Square is the last item on your bucket list ... you never know, Moscow police shoots first then asks questions :)
Click to expand...
Hi,

I was there a couple of times. The only thing that can happen to you is that somebody tries to sell you an over prized fur hat.





DSCF3650-Bearbeitet.jpg




--
Joachim
http://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com
 
Last edited:
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