kiwi2
Veteran Member
Thanks. I probably need to update mine then.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Fuji X100F vs X-T100 jpg comparison
- Thread starter scheekwok
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fujifilm x100f
Bernie Ess
Veteran Member
Never post a comparision with a kind of conclusion because you will be flamed for posting a "ridicilous" comparision, comparing "apples and oranges", not being scientifically precise enough (as opposed to real life photography which of course is always totally scientific, hahaha), you're biased, payed by a company, by the devil himself, having a very strong agenda etc.
Mostly the people who read your comparision will have one OR the other of the cameras, or seriously consider buying one of them. In either case, you will be flamed for being too negative towards that one.
It is a children's game. Truth is, the xt-100 is excellent IQ for the money, it overcomes the inherent processing flaws of the still not very well supported (by Raw converters) x- Trans sensor and delivery very sharp results out of the box. Oh, and it has a selfie screen
Mostly the people who read your comparision will have one OR the other of the cameras, or seriously consider buying one of them. In either case, you will be flamed for being too negative towards that one.
It is a children's game. Truth is, the xt-100 is excellent IQ for the money, it overcomes the inherent processing flaws of the still not very well supported (by Raw converters) x- Trans sensor and delivery very sharp results out of the box. Oh, and it has a selfie screen
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
Kiwi2,
if you go to https://wetransfer.com/ and send the email to yourself, and attach the files, the link will arrive in your email, copy the link and post it and we can download the raws. You got some really nice shadow ther too I’d like to look at. I am getting some more glass next week for my x-t100
but I don’t have another body to do these tests. I am 100% convinced from raw, the x-t100 is the current state of the art sensor and nothing can get close, not even the a7iii. Upres files to 46mp are also comparable with the a7r iii and the D850 too. It’s a miniature power house and I think it’s absolutely stellar, everyone should have one it’s the defacto standard for iq, what’s more it’s absolutely modern in every way.
Many thanks if you can do this
if you go to https://wetransfer.com/ and send the email to yourself, and attach the files, the link will arrive in your email, copy the link and post it and we can download the raws. You got some really nice shadow ther too I’d like to look at. I am getting some more glass next week for my x-t100
but I don’t have another body to do these tests. I am 100% convinced from raw, the x-t100 is the current state of the art sensor and nothing can get close, not even the a7iii. Upres files to 46mp are also comparable with the a7r iii and the D850 too. It’s a miniature power house and I think it’s absolutely stellar, everyone should have one it’s the defacto standard for iq, what’s more it’s absolutely modern in every way.Many thanks if you can do this
That's what I think as well. There's not much in it to worry about. I'm guessing the X-T100 has a bit more sharpening and contrast applied at the standard setting. Consumer market cameras usually have a bit more punch to keep most people happy.They're very close in IQ, I think the XT100 has a little more contrast in its jpeg, but you don't really buy a 24mp sensor for jpegs. Whatever difference there is could be made up in post.I just got myself a X-T100 today for a second camera.
I've tried to keep things the same as possible. The same 35mm F2 lens at f/5.6. ISO 200, 1/640 sec. Both on Provia/Standard and with all the color, sharpness etc set on 0. AWB. Shot from a sturdy tripod with 2 sec timer.
Camera produced jpegs. Auto focus and made sure it was on the distant house. Only the distant row of houses and trees where focused on and exposed for. Forget about any of the closer foreground. I chose the scene for a mixture of foliage and straight lines from the houses to gauge fine detail from.
X-T2...
X-T2
X-T100...
Keep in mind I only just got home with the X-T100 and haven't even familiarize myself with it or read the manual yet.
I'm going to reduce sharpening and contrast to the -1 position tomorrow and see how the jpgs look then.
But it's a sweet wee camera to have in my kit bag that I can grab and go for road trips with a wide angle lens attached while the X-T2 keeps the 55-200 on...
--
https://www.flickr.com/gp/158098310@N03/ja5n6b
DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
Put them on something like Dropbox and post the links.
Robert Garcia NYC
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,200
- Reaction score
- 787
xt100 is slighter brighter and warmer that is the difference to me. No fuss no muss.
From the JPG outputs with no photoshop, both the Bayer and X-Tran images look identical
--
Gear List:
A camera.
Stesinou
Leading Member
- One single lens, 23/2 is OK
- Two camera bodies with tripod mount plate each, attached identically
- One single tripod installed once in the one single position
- Bodies both set to ISO AUTO, identical shutter speed, exposure compensation 0 (zero), wb either fixated to daylight or auto - this is to taste but daylight is better; shoot raw
- Test shots are to be done with this same single lens at identical apertures
- Focus point at the same spot of the scene
- All shots are made in a time interval short enough so the Sun not have time to move much, changing lighting of the scene
JS Burnie
Senior Member
You can't change the lens on the X100F, so this will always be a bit of an apples to pineapples comparison.
Stesinou
Leading Member
This is exactly what I said
JS Burnie
Senior Member
You said "lens and tripod and scene and light are all the same". Not possible when comparing the X100F to any interchangeable lens camera. Did I misunderstand you?
kiwi2
Veteran Member
Okay, hope this works...
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16lIjH5I9bHGaZIKCOUso8CJ6rqfUMejk?usp=sharing
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
kiwi2
Veteran Member
Pretty crappy photos though. It was a race against losing the light yesterday afternoon. I'll be heading out today to find a more pleasing/suitable looking scene.Excellent, thanks, will take a look
Plus I'm sure dpreview will have its full test scene shots up soon.
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
I am surprised how long they have taken, considering they had the first review out!Pretty crappy photos though. It was a race against losing the light yesterday afternoon. I'll be heading out today to find a more pleasing/suitable looking scene.Excellent, thanks, will take a look
Plus I'm sure dpreview will have its full test scene shots up soon.
rwbaron
Forum Pro
Thanks for the comparison but as ooc Jpeg's it's obvious to see that either the settings in camera were not identical or if they were then Fuji's calibrated the X-T100 settings differently than the X-T2 (not surprising if true). I say this because the X-T100 image clearly shows sharpening artifacts (look at the halo along the ridge of the hills) whereas the X-T2 shows none.I just got myself a X-T100 today for a second camera.
I've tried to keep things the same as possible. The same 35mm F2 lens at f/5.6. ISO 200, 1/640 sec. Both on Provia/Standard and with all the color, sharpness etc set on 0. AWB. Shot from a sturdy tripod with 2 sec timer.
Camera produced jpegs. Auto focus and made sure it was on the distant house. Only the distant row of houses and trees where focused on and exposed for. Forget about any of the closer foreground. I chose the scene for a mixture of foliage and straight lines from the houses to gauge fine detail from.
X-T2...
X-T2
X-T100...
Keep in mind I only just got home with the X-T100 and haven't even familiarize myself with it or read the manual yet.
I think it would be best to shoot raw and then open both in the same converter to compare. I'd suggest LR as the base but then use X-Transformer on the X-T2 file and then compare both in LR and see how far each can be pushed on sharpening before artifacts appear and then compare the images on that basis.
Bob
--
Galleries by Robert W. Baron
www.pbase.com
kiwi2
Veteran Member
It's just started to rain heavily as I was about to head out for some more shots this morning.
Anyhow, I updated Lr last night and it now recognizes the X-T100 raws.
So here's two different frames converted from fresh with the exact exact same settings in Lr...
X-T2
X-T100
Amount 70, radius 0.8, detail 0.
Luminous noise reduction 15, color noise reduction 0.
Provia/Standard color profile and 'as shot' WB.
--
lewiedude2
Senior Member
First of all, I love your images and you present your talent very very well in your photography. Second, light is quite different for both images. There are in and out of shadow differences for both. I applaud your efforts but this stuff is getting somewhat out of hand and please, no one needs to tell me that I can ignore the threads covering these contentious subjects. There needs to be balance when information that is almost entirely subjective is being presented as the absolute. When warranted, I will continue to counter. Further, I am happy with what I got and aint nobody going to rid me of my happiness!!
Kiwi2, keep shooting and keep on posting. Good luck to all and long live fujifilm!
Kiwi2, keep shooting and keep on posting. Good luck to all and long live fujifilm!
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
xt100 for landscape, outstanding!It's just started to rain heavily as I was about to head out for some more shots this morning.
Anyhow, I updated Lr last night and it now recognizes the X-T100 raws.
So here's two different frames converted from fresh with the exact exact same settings in Lr...
X-T2
X-T100
Amount 70, radius 0.8, detail 0.
Luminous noise reduction 15, color noise reduction 0.
Provia/Standard color profile and 'as shot' WB.
--
https://www.flickr.com/gp/158098310@N03/ja5n6b
where did the rocks go on the right?
A bit of moire in water on x-t100, can be removed in lr, but admit it is there a touch, not unexpected for this level of detail/resolution and no olpf!
kiwi2
Veteran Member
No, they were taken only minutes apart with very similar light. Have a look at the shadows on the house. The length of the chimney shadow etc. There was a very small amount of thin high haze starting to creep in.
But I agree the differences are so small it's not worth worrying about. These differences will have no impact on the final image once it's resized to screen resolution. Having an interesting photo with good composition and light is a hundred times more important.
The speed and handling of the X-T2 is in another league. The X-T100 is not a replacement for the X-T2. It's mainly a lightweight complement to my kit bag.
The fact it's a small camera but still has a decent sized APS-C sensor and can utilize all my existing XF lenses makes it a nice addition. A 2nd smaller body with no sacrifice in image quality.
--
kiwi2
Veteran Member
I wouldn't draw anything definitive from these. My X-T2 is nearly a year old with heavy use like lens changes on cold frosty nights that could have easily resulted in moisture condensation on the warm sensor and a tiny film of gunk can grow. Who knows, a brand new X-T2 or a proper wet clean of mine may look just as sharp.xt100 for landscape, outstanding!
where did the rocks go on the right?
A bit of moire in water on x-t100, can be removed in lr, but admit it is there a touch, not unexpected for this level of detail/resolution and no olpf!
--
https://www.flickr.com/gp/158098310@N03/ja5n6b
Last edited:
lewiedude2
Senior Member
I hear ya, man. Some light differences for the foreground where there is an illuminated head of a plant for the X-T2 and not illuminated for the T100. The color cast for each photo is different and I did read that entry level of the T100 may indeed be more punchy for its target market. You really, really have to jump into some major pixel peeping to see differnces between them and they are indeed negligible in both camera’s favor.
Cheers, mate!
Cheers, mate!
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum