XT1 - Truly Superior IQ

Started Mar 29, 2014 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
trueview Regular Member • Posts: 180
Re: same here
1

guitarjeff wrote:

trueview wrote:

You may want to actually try the 5D3, especially at high iso. I personally skipped the 5D2, and went directly from the 1 to the 3.

As a long time user of film (and still using and processing it myself), my benchmark is how "'analog" digital noise is. The 5D3, similarly to the D800, has noise patterns that look more like film grain than the x pro 1, at least in my (granted, subjective) perception.

What is NOT subjective, is the ablility of the 5D3 to go really high up in iso. The following was taken at 25600 iso, 1/13th, f:4.0. Noise reduction is the LR standard : 0 in luminance, 25 in color. This is outdoors, the light coming from just one candle some distance away. THe actual light was significantly darker than the picture rendition.

Try that with the fuji. Number one, it has an extremely hard time locking focus. Number 2, in raw, the x pro 1 won't even let you go beyond iso 6400, which in effect is more or less equivalent to iso 3200 on the 5D3 (approx. one diaph difference between the x pro 1 and 5D3 when reading exposure from the same evenly lit standard grey card, with same iso and shutter speed).

The x pro 1 limits 12800 and 25600 setting to jpeg to apply in camera noise reduction. Objectively, the 5D3 is simply in another league.

However, I will admit that 25600iso is not something you need on a daily basis as a photographer. But when you need it, it's amazing how the 5D3 performs way up there.

But there we have it. Nice pic but I never use iso that high. In fact, my auto iso is at 1600. I know the 5D2 was terrible with banding and such, and the noise was not pleasing or film like to me.

Check out the noise on the shot posted here. For me it is very pleasing and film-like. And you are talking to a guy who routinely soups up Tri-x in Rodinal ! Which probably puts me in the category of severely diseased film grain lovers

Thedre we go, pleasing is unique to each of us. All I can do is compare my X-E1 to the 5D2 I had, and as I said, there really is no comparison. Yes, the 5D3 I'm sure is better than the 5D2 was at high iso, I have read that many times, but they also say not very much different as lower iso. The sensors are not that much different from what I read.

Maybe I am thinking of fine grained more specifically. I find the Fuji to have a much more pleasing noise. Never owned the 5D3 as I said but I do know that many say the iq with the 5D2 is similar,

Many say that the x trans sensor is barely useable for raw shooting, due to fatal demosaicing issues. Many say that the AF on the fuji cameras is a disaster. Do you give full credit to these many ?

Absolutely. That's why I can't really compare images from several cams because I never know what they used to convert the Fuji raws. Of course Fuji is slow to focus, definitely not a sports cam, but then again, I never shoot sports, not high iso. I have six flashes that I never seem to get a chance to use as it is. I love off cam triggering and big, fat see through umbrellas, but rarely get a chance to break that stuff out. So yes, a good fanboy knows what his cams aren't good at, lol

but the one thing they say is different is the high iso, which you have hung your hat on here. If you use that then it's a great reason for you to own it.

I found the aa filter on the 5D2 to be fairly strong and when the cr2 files were brought in to DPP with sharpening down the files were fairly blury. When considering the Fuji I literally looked at thousands of photos, and you also now that when you use a camera exclusively for a long while you are very tuned to what it offers. To me the image quality of the X trans is simply far and away better than that camera. Much more detail without the AA filter, more pleasing colors, better shadows and highlight recovery, just better all the way around.

I use the 5D3 and the x-pro 1 on a regular basis, and to be honest, when I go through my lightroom gallery, it is very hard for me to make a difference, without reading the filenames. Which says a lot about the Fuji, since it has a smaller sensor. But better details than the 5DIII overall ?

Well I know the Fuji has more resolution than the 5D2. Not sure about the 5D3. Smaler pixels I know, but the lack of aa filter in the Fuji made a huge difference to me in details.

My experience is that at default LR settings, differences in sharpness and details mostly depend on lenses. This is also true with C1.

i can see that. When I search for comparisons between the two I find the Fuji hanging right with the FF Canons, yet the Canons are using L glass that cost two or three times as much.

Check out this small gallery : http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6148996866/albums/fuji-canon, posted just now.

You will see that the fuji shot is ever so slightly less sharp. But I was using the 18mm, vs the 35mm 1.4 at optimal aperture on the canon. With a different set of lenses, the fuji would be slightly ahead.

The 18 to me was not my fav Fuji lens, I sold it. Against the Canon 35L, man, that's a real difference.

yes, the 18mm is not the sharpest, but the small size was a deciding factor for me. And yes, the 35L is better, and better be given the price difference

For me, in the end, marginal post processing with clarity, sharpening, white balance, etc is a great equalizer of minute out of camera differences. What I primarily want a camera to do is give me files which will lend themselves graciously to the tweaking which will allow me to reach what I previzualize. In that way, both the Fuji and the canon deliver, which is all that counts, at the end of the day.

Very true, we certainly agree there. For me though, the 5D2 was very problematic with banding and low ability to recover shadows because of it. I have found the Fuji to be much better in this situation. Again, I never owned the 5D3 and I have heard this is no longer a problem.

the 5d3 will show banding but you really have to give shadow quite a push for this to show. The shadow recovery slider of LR all the way to the right is not enough. You need to add some local brush exposure adjustment for that. The x pro 1 can go a bit further in my experience before becoming problematic. Neither camera hold up to the D800 which I could test, though, when comes to shadow recovery.

Taken with the Fuji :

and now the canon

and now film !

Whatever works

True. I simply prefer the look of the Fuji with no AA filter. There is a crispness that simply moves me in a good way, colors as well are more pleasing to me. Good chatting with you.

-- hide signature --

[[[If I am commenting on your awesome X trans photos in this post, I consider it a shame that there are a few users in this forum who claim that test charts keep them away from X trans cams, this then encompasses all photos, like these I am commenting on, so photos like these are part of what keep these few fellows away from X trans cams, amazing but true.]]]

Thanks for the compliment, but only one picture is x trans. The second is canon, and the third film, fuji neopan 400 if I remember well (so at least still fuji ). This picture was part of an exhibition along with others in my Madagascar gallery, and generated quite a bit of attention. Very satisfying for me as it was a big challenge to get a good fiber base print out of it. The young guy in the forefront is severely underexposed, making it difficult to balance him out against the harsh light of the background.

the first picture, taken with the x pro 1, I am very happy about? as I do not consider myself as a solid landscape photographer. So I'm very proud of it

SaltLakeGuy
SaltLakeGuy Forum Pro • Posts: 11,543
Re: They made me walk the plank

fotophool wrote:

SaltLakeGuy wrote:

here on this forum for my slamming of the mft stuff when I converted over from a EM1 to the X-T1. I'm sorry but frankly I don't consider them equal on ANY level.

Flash, video? Really?

They want to call me a fanboy go right ahead. I feel comfortable backing it up all day long.

Pictures are worth a thousand words, you know.

Which is what I find so funny about the two most vocal fanboys here -- you and guitarjeff.

You'd think that if the Fuji was truly the greatest camera ever invented that the both of you would be endlessly bombarding us on a daily basis with pics that any other camera or system could only dream about. After all, you "feel comfortable backing it up all day long."

Instead, we get mostly...verbiage. The same verbiage, I might add, over and over and over.

Ray Sachs has a perspective on this stuff. It might behoove you and guitarjeff to get one, too.

And he takes better pictures than the two of you, too.

And my apologies to Ray for dragging him into this.

Better IQ across the board PERIOD. Better high speed tracking and I prefer the layout. Oh well......

-- hide signature --

Fuji X-T1 Camera, Fuji 18-55 f2.8-f4 Lens, Fuji 55-200 f4-f5.6 Lens, Fuji 23mm f1.4 Lens, Fuji 56mm f1.2R Lens, Fuji EF-42 Flash, Picturecode PhotoNinja

Oh, well, indeed.

fotophool

My Flickr Pics

You are certainly entitled to your opinion anytime. We all have one. I'm so very sorry you don't care for my photographic expertise. I'm equally grateful my clients don't agree. With that said my camera has been at Fuji for a bit getting the light leak fixed, and until I get it back my photo taking is on hold. Enough others have substantiated the things I've spoken of, so It's not like I'm scrambling for a 2nd witness or anything.

-- hide signature --

Fuji X-T1 Camera, Fuji 18-55 f2.8-f4 Lens, Fuji 55-200 f4-f5.6 Lens, Fuji 23mm f1.4 Lens, Fuji 56mm f1.2R Lens, Fuji EF-42 Flash, Picturecode PhotoNinja

 SaltLakeGuy's gear list:SaltLakeGuy's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III Sony Alpha 7R II Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 70-200 F4 +7 more
Photo-Wiz OP Senior Member • Posts: 1,582
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ - Photo Samples

Here is what I am referring to re sharpness/focus.

XT1

GX7

GX7

XT1

Photo-Wiz OP Senior Member • Posts: 1,582
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ - Camelia Photo Samples

I'm not sure why the EXIF date got mangled. But both were taken March 28 within about 5 minutes of each other.  Both were focused on the Camelia in the center.  Again, the XT1 is sharper than the GX7 sample.  This GX7 picture was the best of 3 I took at around the same time, from the same spot.

nixda Veteran Member • Posts: 3,963
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ - Camelia Photo Samples

Well, EXIF data would be useful/crucial for judging what's going on. And you also need to specify whether the images are straight ooc, and if so, what the sharpness settings were. Did you play with the sharpness settings? What lenses did you use?

 nixda's gear list:nixda's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 +1 more
AzimLiza Regular Member • Posts: 252
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ - Camelia Photo Samples

GX7 and 14-42mm kit lens versus XT1 and  18-55mm midrange zoom will definite give different result in sharpness in favour of XT1. The problem with m4/3 right now is the lack of excellent midrange zoom like 18-55mm. What they have now are way too many kit lens and then 2 high end zoom (12-40mm and 12-35mm). Fuji has done it right with the 18-55mm. Even now shooting with m4/3 I am still using old 4/3 lens 14-54mm (with adaptor) hoping for eventual repacement of that lens in native m4/3 mount.

In next 2 or 3 years I will likely buying a new camera and hopefully at that time I can buy XT1 at a more affordable price once Fuji has come out with XT2 etc.

-- hide signature --

Azimliza

 AzimLiza's gear list:AzimLiza's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Olympus E-620 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 +8 more
forpetessake
forpetessake Senior Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ - Camelia Photo Samples

Two things immediately come to mind. Firstly, Panasonic kit zoom is pretty lousy, especially on the long end. Then, the noise reduction on Panasonic has to be more aggressive to compensate for the smaller sensor, which would also soften the image.

rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,614
Scientifically speaking

historianx wrote:

ryan2007 wrote:

The larger sensor matters.

Sorry that's way too scientifically logical for this group

If you're going to bring science into it,

GIVEN:

  1. equal sensor technology
  2. lenses that can equally resolve images on their respective sensors.

THEN: using equivalent settings will result in equivalent images. Size does not matter one iota.

This works with APSc to FF as well.

Does scientific logic work for you?

javaone360
javaone360 Regular Member • Posts: 116
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ

Yes, Fuji has much better IQ compared to mFT.  I switch two years ago with no regret at all.  The advantage about Fuji is it much superior optics (price less), color, larger sensor and 3:2 ratio (4:3 means you lose resolution when crop.)  Camera body will always evolve, but the optics will be a long term investment.

It is also time for me to think about unload all of my Nikon FF.

 javaone360's gear list:javaone360's gear list
Ricoh GR Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Nikon 1 V1 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D800 +31 more
CatchAlive Regular Member • Posts: 117
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ - Photo Samples

Hello!

I don't read all all the tread's posts so sorry if I point something that has been spotted... But if this is the max sharpness you can get with your GX7, it might have a problem. Go over the web and look at pics taken with it, you will clearly see the difference. You may told me that people make a lot of pixel pipping but honestly, starting with the (very low) sharpness of the flower pic above, nobody could make miracles... That is why I think yours may have a problem...

On another level, I will say that a camera is tool and if a tool can be inspiring, it can't substitute to the photograph's eye for making a great photo. And Ray Sachs posts proves me right: different tools but one great eye for making great pics

 CatchAlive's gear list:CatchAlive's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Ricoh GR Nikon D700 Pentax K-5 +14 more
DJF77
DJF77 Contributing Member • Posts: 983
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ

Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses - M43 strengths is the compact size (Which is the biggest reason most people choose them) they also have decent single shot focus speed, which is probably a result of the smaller sensor having a larger DOF.

The Fuji on the other hand really excels in IQ (and let's not pretend M43 is as good because it simply is not) due to the larger sensor and great Fuji optics.

I'm not sure why the M43 crowd would be upset by the OP, because let's face it, you didnt choose M43rds because you wanted the best IQ did you. If you are happy with it that is all that matters - be happy and enjoy.

Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,475
THIS is what started this whole thread????!!!!????
2

There are reasonable assertions around the edges of the gods of "IMAGE QUALITY" on which reasonable people can disagree. Perhaps the XT1 is marginally better in low light, maybe some people just prefer the various tradeoffs Fuji makes with their X-trans files. Almost ANYONE would agree that Fuji's jpegs are among the best there are the Panasonic jpegs are among the worst, but the raw files are a different story.

But a couple of slightly blurry photos cause you to assert without qualification that the XT1 has "Truly Superior IQ"???!!!! Really?

What lenses did you use? Are they raw or jpegs? If jpegs, what settings? If raw, how did you process them?

But really, the first question is probably the biggest part of it. If you're just using kit zoom lenses, the Fuji 18-55 is probably as good a kit lens as you'll find. The Panasonic 14-42 (and 12-32 collapsable) are just run of the mill crummy kit lenses.

Use decent lenses and SHARPNESS and crispness and detail are NOT issues with the GX7 or any current m43 camera (or just about any smaller sensor compact for that matter).

Here are a few GX7 shots, one from the set I posted above. You can say what you want about the quality of the shots, you might find noise in the skies, whatever - in some cases I actually accentuate the noise with my processing. But if you're not getting the sharpest photos, it's not because one camera has TRULY SUPERIOR IQ! It may be the lens, it may be user error, it may be you got a bad GX7.

-Ray
--------------------------------------
We judge photographers by the photographs we see. We judge cameras by the photographs we miss - Haim Zamir
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/

Ger Horgan Regular Member • Posts: 260
Re: THIS is what started this whole thread????!!!!????
1

I seriously doubt he had the GX7 at all ...

Each to their own with their fav camera... but to start  a thread basically stating  the GX7 is rubbish ..

well sorry Troll alert for me

-- hide signature --
 Ger Horgan's gear list:Ger Horgan's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8
Cogset
Cogset Senior Member • Posts: 1,408
Re: Can you tell them apart? X-Trans and GX7 shots (and others)...
1

Ray Sachs wrote:

Here are a bunch of shots taken with a variety of cameras, including X-Trans, m43 (both GX7 and 1 or 2 EM1 shots because I didn't have the GX7 all that long), other APS, full frame, and even some from a small sensor camera. The exif is stripped out, the aspect ratios are applied randomly, and all images are uploaded with a long edge of 2048 pixels, small enough so that this doesn't come down to extreme pixel peeping, but large enough to fill a 27" monitor and to see any really notable differences in quality. And these are real world examples of how I shot 'em (all raw) and how I processed them for my taste. Your taste may be different - that's fine, but that shouldn't keep you from calling out the obvious superiority of the X-trans files and inferiority of the m43 files...

So pick 'em as you see 'em. And if you true believers get enough of 'em right, MAYBE I'll start taking your pronouncements of superiority seriously.

I should also say that I don't doubt for a MINUTE that you (and I) may bond with Fuji cameras in a way we find particularly appealing and we just qualitatively like the images they produce. I do - I've been on the Fuji bandwagon with only minor interruptions since the first batch of X100 shipments hit North American shores in early 2011. I just don't believe, based on EXTENSIVE experience, that the technical image quality from the X-Trans sensor is head and shoulders above anything else, as some of you seem to believe. I find it right mid-pack actually, which in today's environment is a VERY VERY GOOD PLACE to be!!! It's the lenses and the feel of the cameras that make me a Fuji loyalist - I love their primes and the shooting experience. X-trans doesn't really hurt or help in my case.

So, call 'em as you see 'em:

While I agree overall, asking a group to look at a pile of photos that are all downsized and Post processed, is a waste of everyone's time. I mean, if there is any truth to the "fuji colors" concept, it has no chance of being shown in this case. And any sharpness advantages at 2048 pixels (e.g a 5x7 print) are not going to be apparent (or could easily be removed with a galmour glow filter). So my advice to True Believers is to wait for a better test.

But really nice photos for sure and I think you are right about sensors these days, they are all getting to the point where we don't need to talk about them so much .  I do think DR is important and my D800 shows me why on occasion.  Fuji has made the decision to make great glass and they have the Fujinon division to deliver, all in a great compact bodies. Their Post Processing (e.g jpeg conversions) are great, but for RAW shooters, it's more about what you do in Post that matters and any "fuji colors" are long replaced by the post processor's decisions.

Here's an interesting pet photographer who uses Canon FF DSLR and also an X-M1 and an X20 in some cases.  http://500px.com/Wieselblitz

For the most part, you can tell the Canon shots (simply because that's what she uses in studio) but there a few surprises.  As a viewer of these images, you can't tell which ones are Fuji's for the most part, which goes to your point.

-- hide signature --
 Cogset's gear list:Cogset's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon D4S Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +16 more
Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,475
Re: THIS is what started this whole thread????!!!!????

Ger Horgan wrote:

I seriously doubt he had the GX7 at all ...

Each to their own with their fav camera... but to start a thread basically stating the GX7 is rubbish ..

well sorry Troll alert for me

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one. If he was a troll he'd have taken on the EM1 because it gets so much more press and raves than the GX7 (unjustly I think - the EM1 and GX7 are both pretty amazing cameras in my experience).

I've had trouble getting good images out of a camera right away too, particularly when I was new to photography. So maybe he's just doing something wrong, maybe he has the AF settings doing something he doesn't realize. Or maybe it's just a really bad copy of an already pretty mediocre lens. Or maybe there's something wrong with his camera.

But to make such sweeping statements after a handful of photos that didn't come out the way you wanted. Jeez, it reminds me of the early days of the X100. More people returned that camera because they couldn't be bothered to learn how parallax worked and how to use the OVF. Even with all of it's early quirks (and I'm the first to admit that some of them were amazingly bizarre), that was and is a great camera but a lot of early adopters sent it back out of frustration...

-Ray
--------------------------------------
We judge photographers by the photographs we see. We judge cameras by the photographs we miss - Haim Zamir
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/

Marcello Zini
Marcello Zini Contributing Member • Posts: 894
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ
1

Photo-Wiz wrote:

After reading several favorable reviews I recently bought a Panasonic GX7 thinking it might stack up well to the Fuji X series cameras. I was partly influenced by Luminous Landscape review of the XT1 by Mr. Reichmann in which he wrote "Now, in early 2014, I don't believe that there are significant differences in image quality between major cameras and camera brands with roughly similar MP count sensors."

Turns out that is completely wrong. I compared pictures of the GX7 with my XT1 with similar settings. In every case, the XT1 pictures were visibly superior. Better sharpness and better color rendition. My experience with the GX7, much like my experience of a year ago with the Oly EM5 was that it has trouble taking truly sharp pictures. I don't know if that is because of shuttershock or something else. I even tried the Electronic Shutter option. But it made little difference. None of the pictures approached the IQ of the XT1. So I returned the GX7.

Fuji, it looks like I'm here to stay. Love my XT1.

What? Something was wrong with your GX7 package. I had a em-5 and I'm waiting for a new fuji package in the mail this week but not at all for lack of sharpness with m43 as pictures can really... cut your screen and prints if you put a Pana 20 or a Oly 45/75 on it. Now, if we talk about price of lenses, photographic feel, ergonomics then it's a different story because in 1 1/2 years I've not been able to "own" the camera as it was for others before when I could do anything without even thinking. If I didn't switch to fuji I'd have probably tried the gx7

-- hide signature --
 Marcello Zini's gear list:Marcello Zini's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Fujifilm 50-230mm +3 more
Ger Horgan Regular Member • Posts: 260
Re: THIS is what started this whole thread????!!!!????
2

Well for a novice (?) he already owns a XT1 / a Oly EM5.. maybe the guy needs lessons in photography 

There is something odd about all of this...

-- hide signature --
 Ger Horgan's gear list:Ger Horgan's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8
Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,475
Re: Can you tell them apart? X-Trans and GX7 shots (and others)...
3

Cogset wrote:

While I agree overall, asking a group to look at a pile of photos that are all downsized and Post processed, is a waste of everyone's time. I mean, if there is any truth to the "fuji colors" concept, it has no chance of being shown in this case. And any sharpness advantages at 2048 pixels (e.g a 5x7 print) are not going to be apparent (or could easily be removed with a galmour glow filter). So my advice to True Believers is to wait for a better test.

But really nice photos for sure and I think you are right about sensors these days, they are all getting to the point where we don't need to talk about them so much .

THAT was my only point. I wasn't trying to present this as any sort of a formal test. Only that if people were going to make what I considered to be outlandish claims about the vast superiority of one sensor over another, that it should be easy to pick them out even in such relatively non-challenging photographs. That it so rarely made any difference to the final product shows that it doesn't matter much.

I do think DR is important and my D800 shows me why on occasion. Fuji has made the decision to make great glass and they have the Fujinon division to deliver, all in a great compact bodies. Their Post Processing (e.g jpeg conversions) are great, but for RAW shooters, it's more about what you do in Post that matters and any "fuji colors" are long replaced by the post processor's decisions.

Agree completely. The quality of the raw files is the one thing I marginally regret about selling my RX1 - there was nothing I couldn't pull out of those with that camera's great DR (which I'd imagine still trails the D800). I do sometimes find the limits of a Fuji or Olympus raw file, although too rarely to worry about it. I too love Fuji jpegs but I still generally shoot raw because I do have my own processing preferences and, while Fuji jpegs hold up under processing better than most, I've seen some really ugly things start happening to them when they're bent just a little too far.

And, finally, yes, Fuji makes wonderful glass. Although there are specific lenses from other systems that I'd hold up at least as high, on balance Fuji makes more consistently great lenses at relatively reasonable prices than almost anyone out there. I loved the original 18 (despite its imperfections) and 35, and the 14 and 23 I also have now take it to a new level as I expect the 56 does as well. The Zeiss 35 in the RX1 is probably the nicest lens I've ever shot with and, while the Fuji 23 is not quite as good as that, it's actually close enough to keep me from missing that Zeiss! I'm not terribly concerned with zooms and teles (I'm sticking with m43 for those). Fuji's prime lenses are the primary reason it's my system of choice, with the camera bodies having their own charms and the sensor good enough to hold it's own among the many great sensors in cameras today.

I was merely trying to make the point that the X-trans is NOT the second coming of any deity!

-Ray
--------------------------------------
We judge photographers by the photographs we see. We judge cameras by the photographs we miss - Haim Zamir
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/

Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,475
Re: THIS is what started this whole thread????!!!!????
4

Ger Horgan wrote:

Well for a novice (?) he already owns a XT1 / a Oly EM5.. maybe the guy needs lessons in photography

There is something odd about all of this...

I had not noticed that in his original post he noted that this horrible experience was similar to his experience with his EM5, "that it has trouble taking truly sharp pictures".

Wow!

I think your troll theory may have something to it after all. I could chalk this one GX7 incident up to a novice having trouble with a new camera or maybe a bad copy. But if he's owned an EM5 for any period of time and can't get a sharp photo, the camera is not the problem....

-Ray
--------------------------------------
We judge photographers by the photographs we see. We judge cameras by the photographs we miss - Haim Zamir
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/

chuck12 Regular Member • Posts: 109
Re: XT1 - Truly Superior IQ
1

Photo-Wiz wrote:

After reading several favorable reviews I recently bought a Panasonic GX7 thinking it might stack up well to the Fuji X series cameras. I was partly influenced by Luminous Landscape review of the XT1 by Mr. Reichmann in which he wrote "Now, in early 2014, I don't believe that there are significant differences in image quality between major cameras and camera brands with roughly similar MP count sensors."

Turns out that is completely wrong. I compared pictures of the GX7 with my XT1 with similar settings. In every case, the XT1 pictures were visibly superior. Better sharpness and better color rendition. My experience with the GX7, much like my experience of a year ago with the Oly EM5 was that it has trouble taking truly sharp pictures. I don't know if that is because of shuttershock or something else. I even tried the Electronic Shutter option. But it made little difference. None of the pictures approached the IQ of the XT1. So I returned the GX7.

Fuji, it looks like I'm here to stay. Love my XT1.

If you cannot get a sharp photo with either the GX7 or OM-D E-M5 you probably need something more like this, I haven't seen a DP Review yet, but I am sure one will be around shortly.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads