IQ XE1 vs. XT1

Enir4 · Feb 2, 2015

I posted weeks ago that I slowly overcame my fear regarding the possible watercolor effect of the X-Trans sensors. I started cautiously and bought the X30. No problems. Then I got the XE1 with the 18-55 kit lens. I simply love it, except for the lenshood. I do miss, though, AF speed, grip and a bigger EVF. So now I'm considering the XT1. Lenses will come later. Shooting raw, is there any IQ difference between the XT1 and the XE1? If not, I will get the XT1.

By the way, I read many times how lousy ACR is with X-Trans files. I disagree. Among other things, converting raw with ACR default settings and Provia profile will give you an exact replica of OOC JPEG's, which I find generally quite excellent.

Enrique

DanielFjall · Feb 2, 2015

Both cameras sports the exact same sensor technology. There is no difference in IQ at all.

Sal Baker · Feb 2, 2015

Enir4 said:
I posted weeks ago that I slowly overcame my fear regarding the possible watercolor effect of the X-Trans sensors. I started cautiously and bought the X30. No problems. Then I got the XE1 with the 18-55 kit lens. I simply love it, except for the lenshood. I do miss, though, AF speed, grip and a bigger EVF. So now I'm considering the XT1. Lenses will come later. Shooting raw, is there any IQ difference between the XT1 and the XE1? If not, I will get the XT1.

By the way, I read many times how lousy ACR is with X-Trans files. I disagree. Among other things, converting raw with ACR default settings and Provia profile will give you an exact replica of OOC JPEG's, which I find generally quite excellent.

Enrique

The X-E1, X-E2 and X-T1 all have the same RAW IQ.

Sal

Ysarex · Feb 2, 2015

Enir4 said:
I posted weeks ago that I slowly overcame my fear regarding the possible watercolor effect of the X-Trans sensors. I started cautiously and bought the X30. No problems. Then I got the XE1 with the 18-55 kit lens. I simply love it, except for the lenshood. I do miss, though, AF speed, grip and a bigger EVF. So now I'm considering the XT1. Lenses will come later. Shooting raw, is there any IQ difference between the XT1 and the XE1? If not, I will get the XT1.

By the way, I read many times how lousy ACR is with X-Trans files. I disagree. Among other things, converting raw with ACR default settings and Provia profile will give you an exact replica of OOC JPEG's, which I find generally quite excellent.

Enrique

Same basic sensor but I believe the X-E1 was equipped with a 12 bit A/D and the X-T1 has a 14 bit A/D -- not too a big deal there.

Marco Cinnirella · Feb 2, 2015

Ysarex said:
Enir4 said:

I posted weeks ago that I slowly overcame my fear regarding the possible watercolor effect of the X-Trans sensors. I started cautiously and bought the X30. No problems. Then I got the XE1 with the 18-55 kit lens. I simply love it, except for the lenshood. I do miss, though, AF speed, grip and a bigger EVF. So now I'm considering the XT1. Lenses will come later. Shooting raw, is there any IQ difference between the XT1 and the XE1? If not, I will get the XT1.

By the way, I read many times how lousy ACR is with X-Trans files. I disagree. Among other things, converting raw with ACR default settings and Provia profile will give you an exact replica of OOC JPEG's, which I find generally quite excellent.

Enrique

Click to expand...

Same basic sensor but I believe the X-E1 was equipped with a 12 bit A/D and the X-T1 has a 14 bit A/D -- not too a big deal there.

As an X-E1 and X-E2 (same x-trans v2 sensor as X-T1) owner I have, like some others, noted a few IQ differences, even in raw. Color response seems a bit different in raw, and high ISO noise performance is slightly different. Skin tones too. Not yet sure which I like best. Think I prefer X-E1 skin tones but X-E2 high ISO...

--
"When words become unclear, I shall focus with photographs. When images become inadequate, I shall be content with silence." Ansel Adams.

oliverst · Feb 2, 2015

Marco Cinnirella said:
Ysarex said:

Enir4 said:

I posted weeks ago that I slowly overcame my fear regarding the possible watercolor effect of the X-Trans sensors. I started cautiously and bought the X30. No problems. Then I got the XE1 with the 18-55 kit lens. I simply love it, except for the lenshood. I do miss, though, AF speed, grip and a bigger EVF. So now I'm considering the XT1. Lenses will come later. Shooting raw, is there any IQ difference between the XT1 and the XE1? If not, I will get the XT1.

By the way, I read many times how lousy ACR is with X-Trans files. I disagree. Among other things, converting raw with ACR default settings and Provia profile will give you an exact replica of OOC JPEG's, which I find generally quite excellent.

Enrique

Click to expand...

Same basic sensor but I believe the X-E1 was equipped with a 12 bit A/D and the X-T1 has a 14 bit A/D -- not too a big deal there.

Click to expand...

As an X-E1 and X-E2 (same x-trans v2 sensor as X-T1) owner I have, like some others, noted a few IQ differences, even in raw. Color response seems a bit different in raw, and high ISO noise performance is slightly different. Skin tones too. Not yet sure which I like best. Think I prefer X-E1 skin tones but X-E2 high ISO...

57LowRider · Feb 2, 2015

XT-1 JPGs are slightly more saturated and contrasty, RAWs are similar to X-E1, perhaps a little bit "smoother".

Auto WB is very good on the X-E1, shot thousands without fiddling with it, whereas I have to keep an eye on the X-T1 which will run away to the cool end a bit on bright days outdoors - I set temp around 5300 - 5900 manually to compensate.

sfmorris · Feb 2, 2015

just wanted to jump in with a clarification, as I am not sure the all answers you have received are completely accurate as written.

"Both cameras sports the exact same sensor technology. There is no difference in IQ at all."

At a minimum the first half of that statement isn't true - the xe1 and xt1 share neither the exact same sensor design nor image engine (relevant for jpegs, which you seem to be interested in).

You can find the info clearly outlined under the features tab on Fuji's own camera-pages (e.g. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_e1/features/)

- the xe1 had both the first generation Xtrans and EXR ProcessorPro

-the xt1 has the second generation of both

second generation of Xtrans differs primarily in that it introduced phase detect pixels (http://fujifilm-x.com/development_story/en/sensor/)

second generation of the EXR engine sports various differences (http://fujifilm-x.com/development_story/en/processor/), but seems to have been part of the upgrade to Xtrans II (new sensor, new engine)

for what it is worth, and it isn't clear if the EXR II engine is the main/only culprit, but a good number of people feel the jpeg output of the second generation hardware is inferior to that of the first - i have shot nearly every x-camera and am one of these people (jpeg output of the x100s for example, for detail, sharpness, color, and dynamic range didn't seem to my eye to come close to that of the x100 - i was so surprised when i first started shooting the x100s i took it back twice thinking it was a lemon)

Re the notion that the 'RAW' IQ is the same, that may (or may not be) the case, but since you mentioned liking the OOC jpegs I thought i would add some more info to the conversation.

if anyone sees something that needs correcting here, feel free~

Sal Baker · Feb 2, 2015

sfmorris said:
just wanted to jump in with a clarification, as I am not sure the all answers you have received are completely accurate as written.

"Both cameras sports the exact same sensor technology. There is no difference in IQ at all."

At a minimum the first half of that statement isn't true - the xe1 and xt1 share neither the exact same sensor design nor image engine (relevant for jpegs, which you seem to be interested in).

You can find the info clearly outlined under the features tab on Fuji's own camera-pages (e.g. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_e1/features/)

- the xe1 had both the first generation Xtrans and EXR ProcessorPro

-the xt1 has the second generation of both

second generation of Xtrans differs primarily in that it introduced phase detect pixels (http://fujifilm-x.com/development_story/en/sensor/)

second generation of the EXR engine sports various differences (http://fujifilm-x.com/development_story/en/processor/), but seems to have been part of the upgrade to Xtrans II (new sensor, new engine)

for what it is worth, and it isn't clear if the EXR II engine is the main/only culprit, but a good number of people feel the jpeg output of the second generation hardware is inferior to that of the first - i have shot nearly every x-camera and am one of these people (jpeg output of the x100s for example, for detail, sharpness, color, and dynamic range didn't seem to my eye to come close to that of the x100 - i was so surprised when i first started shooting the x100s i took it back twice thinking it was a lemon)

Re the notion that the 'RAW' IQ is the same, that may (or may not be) the case, but since you mentioned liking the OOC jpegs I thought i would add some more info to the conversation.

if anyone sees something that needs correcting here, feel free~

His inguiry was specifically about RAW. He mentioned that ACR RAW conversion was an exact replica of OOC JPEG's. I can see no differences between X-E1 and and X-E2 (I have both) RAW files once they are adjusted to the desired look.

Sal

MrFresno · Feb 2, 2015

Marco Cinnirella said:
As an X-E1 and X-E2 (same x-trans v2 sensor as X-T1) owner I have, like some others, noted a few IQ differences, even in raw. Color response seems a bit different in raw, and high ISO noise performance is slightly different. Skin tones too. Not yet sure which I like best. Think I prefer X-E1 skin tones but X-E2 high ISO...

I have never seen a difference between X-E1 and X-E2 raw IQ and I am not aware of any thread on this forum that has ever shown such a difference. Would you care to share a couple images demonstrating the differences you describe?

DarnGoodPhotos · Feb 3, 2015

DanielFjall said:
Both cameras sports the exact same sensor technology. There is no difference in IQ at all.

The X-T1 has the X-Trans 2 sensor, while the X-E1 has the X-Trans 1. Its been shown with camera JPGs, that not only are the tone curves slightly different but the XTrans 2 cameras have really aggressive noise reduction at high ISOs.

The below was taken with a X-T1 at ISO6400, on the left is a camera JPG (converting RAWs in the camera yields the same results), and on the right is a RAW conversion on the computer.

If you shoot JPG on your X-E1, you will be unhappy with the X-T1's IQ, but if you only shoot RAW then it doesn't matter.

Marco Cinnirella · Feb 3, 2015

Randy Benter said:
Marco Cinnirella said:

As an X-E1 and X-E2 (same x-trans v2 sensor as X-T1) owner I have, like some others, noted a few IQ differences, even in raw. Color response seems a bit different in raw, and high ISO noise performance is slightly different. Skin tones too. Not yet sure which I like best. Think I prefer X-E1 skin tones but X-E2 high ISO...

Click to expand...

I have never seen a difference between X-E1 and X-E2 raw IQ and I am not aware of any thread on this forum that has ever shown such a difference. Would you care to share a couple images demonstrating the differences you describe?

Not at all, I am certainly not the only one to have observed albeit realtively subtle raw differences between x-trans v1 and x-trans v2

See here for example, where the writer notes some slight noise differences in raw between the X-E1 and X-E2

Loading…

admiringlight.com

Sal Baker · Feb 3, 2015

Marco Cinnirella said:
Randy Benter said:

Marco Cinnirella said:

As an X-E1 and X-E2 (same x-trans v2 sensor as X-T1) owner I have, like some others, noted a few IQ differences, even in raw. Color response seems a bit different in raw, and high ISO noise performance is slightly different. Skin tones too. Not yet sure which I like best. Think I prefer X-E1 skin tones but X-E2 high ISO...

Click to expand...

I have never seen a difference between X-E1 and X-E2 raw IQ and I am not aware of any thread on this forum that has ever shown such a difference. Would you care to share a couple images demonstrating the differences you describe?

Click to expand...

Not at all, I am certainly not the only one to have observed albeit realtively subtle raw differences between x-trans v1 and x-trans v2

See here for example, where the writer notes some slight noise differences in raw between the X-E1 and X-E2

http://admiringlight.com/blog/fujifilm-x-e1-vs-x-e2-raw-performance/

Ed B · Feb 3, 2015

Enir4 said:
I posted weeks ago that I slowly overcame my fear regarding the possible watercolor effect of the X-Trans sensors. I started cautiously and bought the X30. No problems. Then I got the XE1 with the 18-55 kit lens. I simply love it, except for the lenshood. I do miss, though, AF speed, grip and a bigger EVF. So now I'm considering the XT1. Lenses will come later. Shooting raw, is there any IQ difference between the XT1 and the XE1? If not, I will get the XT1.

By the way, I read many times how lousy ACR is with X-Trans files. I disagree. Among other things, converting raw with ACR default settings and Provia profile will give you an exact replica of OOC JPEG's, which I find generally quite excellent.

Enrique

Let's face it, the XT-1 is a newer camera that does out perform the X-E1 when it comes to autofocus speed, and the X-T1 does have a couple of very good features that aren't part of the X-E1's makeup.

If someone can afford the X-T1, it would be the "better" overall camera but when it comes to image quality the lines get a little blurred.

JPEG image quality on the X-Pro1 and X-E1 are about the best a person can get with a camera that has an APS size sensor. Naturally, that shouldn't be attributed to just the sensor but to a combination of sensor and processor.

With the X-T1 and the other newer Fuji cameras, Fuji made changes to their processing algorithms that does affect JPEG output and causes some smoothing at higher ISOs. Fuji said this was done on purpose because many of their customers (Far East) prefer this look.

When it comes to raw output (your question) there is little or no difference between the cameras. The sensor in the X-T1 does have a slightly higher bit rate than the X-E1 but I don't believe anyone could actually see a difference.

I, personally, think the X-E1 is a great camera that is only let down by autofocus tracking speed. I honestly find no other valid criticism of the camera. It's not the right camera for everyone but it's still a very good camera.

Just the same, as I said above, the X-T1 would be the better overall camera. JPEG image quality, at higher ISOs, isn't quite as good as the X-E1 but they are still very good and if a person shoots raw, they won't find a camera that performs better.

Search

IQ XE1 vs. XT1

Enir4

Senior Member

DanielFjall

Guest

Sal Baker

Forum Pro

Ysarex

Veteran Member

Marco Cinnirella

Veteran Member

oliverst

Member

57LowRider

Veteran Member

sfmorris

Member

Sal Baker

Forum Pro

MrFresno

Veteran Member

DarnGoodPhotos

Forum Pro

Marco Cinnirella

Veteran Member

Loading…

Sal Baker

Forum Pro

Ed B

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts