Reading mode: Light Dark

X-T30 vs Xiomi Mi-10-Pro

Go to last post
K

krisssssk

Member
Messages
17
Reaction score
6
Quality comparison



8aaf42f001244e52a1979f8f7495b5d1.jpg
 
The Xiomi is sharper. What lens were you using with the X-T30?
 
Last edited:
krisssssk said:
Quality comparison

8aaf42f001244e52a1979f8f7495b5d1.jpg
Click to expand...
In good light it is obviously the 108mp resolving power to show off.

You upscaled the X-T30 to match the huge dimensions of the Mi10pro...

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If only closed minds came with closed mouths..
 
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
 
krisssssk said:
Quality comparison

8aaf42f001244e52a1979f8f7495b5d1.jpg
Click to expand...
First of all you've enlarged the X-T30 photo to about 400% so obviously it will look like crap. Second of all the lens is more important for image quality than the camera, especially if we're talking about things like sharpness.
 
Last edited:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
 
krisssssk said:
X-T30 shot with 27mm.

See EXIF in both full res photos below.

X-T30
X-T30

View attachment f79624f0bef24c08b8738202a4648fd1.jpg
Mi-10-Pro
Click to expand...
EXIF says 18-55mm and not 27mm.

Viewing those on my 27" screen the X-T30/18-55mm photo definitely looks better. More detailed, more contrast, better color tonality and it overall just looks more natural. And that's just with the Fujinon 18-55mm which isn't even among Fuji's best.
 
Last edited:
Although Mi-10-Pro looks sharper but it is no more detailed than X-T30 as it is way over sharpened. Also the colour depth of X-T30 is much deeper than phone, e.g. colour of trees, wall, parking meter etc

X-T30 for me
 
Last edited:
JayPhizzt said:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
Click to expand...
Agree, but keep in mind most of the photos are uploaded to the web, cropped, and not all people zoom them at 100%. So most of them, including me will not find the difference.

Under normal condition I mean good light, static objects, etc.

My point was the phones are good enough for most people. The cameras are for people who need maximum quality, or this is their job, or just for fun and the different experience.
 
miroshi said:
JayPhizzt said:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
Click to expand...
Agree, but keep in mind most of the photos are uploaded to the web, cropped, and not all people zoom them at 100%. So most of them, including me will not find the difference.

Under normal condition I mean good light, static objects, etc.

My point was the phones are good enough for most people. The cameras are for people who need maximum quality, or this is their job, or just for fun and the different experience.
Click to expand...
 
Jay,

I am not suggesting that smartphones are just as good as dedicated cameras, but for most people on vacation etc dedicated cameras are overkill being heavy to carry and harder to use.

Since you complained that I enlarged X-T30 to show more fuzziness I did opposite and reduced Mi10Pro from 108MP to pixel size matching X-T30 26MP. See this new comparizon for yourself below.



c16e63afcd3c408cb8e6628c5a122a11.jpg
 
My Fuji doesn't harvest data for the CCP.
 
What some people call "harder to use", others might call involving, participatory and entertaining. If the goal is simply to "get" a snapshot, then any type of camera will do. If your goal is to "make" something, then using a tool that lets you make the decisions rather than letting the software do it may be worth making a small amount of effort.

I have a phone camera and I use it a lot. It's fast, and I always have it with me. But the fun and creativity of it comes in post processing, and even then I know that my images are a pretty deep collaboration between me and the software team.
 
krisssssk said:
Jay,

I am not suggesting that smartphones are just as good as dedicated cameras, but for most people on vacation etc dedicated cameras are overkill being heavy to carry and harder to use.

Since you complained that I enlarged X-T30 to show more fuzziness I did opposite and reduced Mi10Pro from 108MP to pixel size matching X-T30 26MP. See this new comparizon for yourself below.

c16e63afcd3c408cb8e6628c5a122a11.jpg
Click to expand...
Your phone photo looks washed out and lacking in depth or detail, which is what I expect from a tiny sensor. That being said, it's a good photo, for a phone.

--
www.darngoodphotos.com
 
Last edited:
miroshi said:
JayPhizzt said:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
Click to expand...
Agree, but keep in mind most of the photos are uploaded to the web, cropped, and not all people zoom them at 100%. So most of them, including me will not find the difference.

Under normal condition I mean good light, static objects, etc.

My point was the phones are good enough for most people. The cameras are for people who need maximum quality, or this is their job, or just for fun and the different experience.
Click to expand...
 
Holden75 said:
miroshi said:
JayPhizzt said:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
Click to expand...
Agree, but keep in mind most of the photos are uploaded to the web, cropped, and not all people zoom them at 100%. So most of them, including me will not find the difference.

Under normal condition I mean good light, static objects, etc.

My point was the phones are good enough for most people. The cameras are for people who need maximum quality, or this is their job, or just for fun and the different experience.
Click to expand...
I don't agree. I'd love my phone to be good enough and get the best camera phone every time I upgrade. If I wanted to take photos of things (not people) it is fine and even good. But taking photos of people I find them poor. Poor in terms of subject separation. Poor in terms of IQ when in contrasty situations. Poor in terms of getting a useable image of a person moving normally in lower light. People photography in low light is just not even worth talking about! So for me I find phones not to be good enough for what most people use them for - people photography. Side by side in normal use there is still no competition. I hope they improve in the future because it would be more convenient!
Click to expand...
And still, most people seem to think that they are good enough ;-)
 
Sir Anselm said:
Holden75 said:
miroshi said:
JayPhizzt said:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
Click to expand...
Agree, but keep in mind most of the photos are uploaded to the web, cropped, and not all people zoom them at 100%. So most of them, including me will not find the difference.

Under normal condition I mean good light, static objects, etc.

My point was the phones are good enough for most people. The cameras are for people who need maximum quality, or this is their job, or just for fun and the different experience.
Click to expand...
I don't agree. I'd love my phone to be good enough and get the best camera phone every time I upgrade. If I wanted to take photos of things (not people) it is fine and even good. But taking photos of people I find them poor. Poor in terms of subject separation. Poor in terms of IQ when in contrasty situations. Poor in terms of getting a useable image of a person moving normally in lower light. People photography in low light is just not even worth talking about! So for me I find phones not to be good enough for what most people use them for - people photography. Side by side in normal use there is still no competition. I hope they improve in the future because it would be more convenient!
Click to expand...
And still, most people seem to think that they are good enough ;-)
Click to expand...
I guess so!
 
Holden75 said:
miroshi said:
JayPhizzt said:
miroshi said:
From what I saw till now every modern smartphone camera can compare to crop camera in normal conditions.

But we get cameras for other conditions, and because we want more control over the shooting process, the handling also. The experience is so different.

When I try to get photo with my phone I even can hold it steady, or always put some of my fingers of front of the camera.
Click to expand...
If it can compare to crop cameras it can compare to medium format since the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. If you're just viewing the photos at smaller sizes/resolutions/screens they can often compare to "real" cameras yes, but once you start viewing them at larger sizes the differences start to become apparent. Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by "normal conditions".
Click to expand...
Agree, but keep in mind most of the photos are uploaded to the web, cropped, and not all people zoom them at 100%. So most of them, including me will not find the difference.

Under normal condition I mean good light, static objects, etc.

My point was the phones are good enough for most people. The cameras are for people who need maximum quality, or this is their job, or just for fun and the different experience.
Click to expand...
I don't agree. I'd love my phone to be good enough and get the best camera phone every time I upgrade. If I wanted to take photos of things (not people) it is fine and even good. But taking photos of people I find them poor. Poor in terms of subject separation. Poor in terms of IQ when in contrasty situations. Poor in terms of getting a useable image of a person moving normally in lower light. People photography in low light is just not even worth talking about! So for me I find phones not to be good enough for what most people use them for - people photography. Side by side in normal use there is still no competition. I hope they improve in the future because it would be more convenient!
Click to expand...
Strange
 
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