Gave The GX7 MkII Another Go...

MrALLCAPS wrote:

mmartel wrote:

My most used lens with my GX7ii as you insist upon calling it is the 14-140mm zoom. Also, you'd be shocked by how many people claim to shoot and enjoy the Pen F with 12-100mm f4. 🤷‍♂️

Also, Jacques is right about DXO prime NR and pretty much everything else he tried to correct you on.

Youcan choose not to use DXO Prime. But to claim that it doesn't produce final results that are very close to APS-C images handled with LR without any experience yourself on this point is, how shall I say this, willful ignorance.

I have M43, APS-C and Full Frame kits. Let's just say I use DXO prime for all of them...

Physics still reigns supreme, that's what.

Oh wait, it there may be some issues with x-trans algorithm because DXO never messed with Fuji X, they didn't even review their sensors to this day. So who's ignorant? Shouldn't DXO cater to All camera systems, not just Bayer sensor cameras? At least Adobe tries to work with X-Trans. Maybe it's DXO that's Ignorant, Lazy...

That's beside the point, which is that DxO's PRIME NR makes MFT just about competitive with the output that's possible with Fuji hardware and other software.

1. I know because I tested a Fuji XT-20 against the "GX-7 ii" for a week before deciding the ultimate image quality from RAWs processed with DXO Prime vs Fuji with Lightroom were close enough that image quality differences were not significant in my final decision to go with micro43 (though the Fuji was still very slightly better). Also my prior was DSLR system was Nikon DX so I have a decade with APS-C under my belt for comparison.

So yeah.

Yeah, so you used one Software/system vs another and Drew your conclusion. Now let's say I do the same thing with Capture One with the Fuji and Lightroom with the Lumix. Guess which one comes out on top? -Heres a hint, Fujifilm. And again, I have them all, for me, it's not even slightly better, it's Clearly better. But again, that's my opinion.

By the way, I looked at Jacque’s images and there was a lot of noise. A lot.

Which images? My website contains photos made with many of the cameras in my gear list going back 15 years. Some of them were processed more than 10 years ago and would look leagues better if I reprocessed them today. Also, on my website, you're looking at 3MP compressed JPEGs. Hardly indicative of actual image quality. My 16MP MFT images processed with Optics Pro/PhotoLab are essentially noiseless in a 16"x24" print, and crisp as I could want.

Fuji is a very nice system too. If someone gave me an XH1 or XT30 I'd keep it and enjoy it. I wish you continued happy shooting, whatever your choices.

Look, you complained that you couldn't get results from your GX85 that were close to what you got from your Fuji. Several of us here have suggested ways to close the gap, and you've ignored or resisted those suggestions from the get-go. Consequently, it appears that you are not interested in getting the most from your GX85 but simply in promoting the idea that it's inferior. Smacks of trolling against MFT in the MFT forum.

If you want to know how to do better with your GX85, c'mon back. I, and probably others, will be glad to help. Otherwise, I think you'll find a more receptive audience for your "Fuji is better" diatribe in the Fuji forum.