1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

I am rapidly changing to Fujifilm X

Discussion in 'Back Room' started by entropicremnants, Sep 9, 2013.

  1. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    No, it's definitively a subjective issue. If you go up and read your posts and Gordon's, you agree with one another on the objective fact that there is a measurable and demonstrable difference. Where Gordon differs from you is that under his shooting conditions (lighting, etc), workflow (Lightroom), processing, and output (eg print sizes), the difference is not a "quantum leap" as you put it. You can't measure and demonstrate a quantum leap.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    This IS a qualitative discussion.

    Image quality, right?
    There are many many features of image quality from digital sensors that are purely qualitative and subject to human preferences. But I'm guessing you yourself will concentrate on high-ISO noise and dynamic range (which can be measured quantatively)... in which the e-pL1 sensor is very poor by today's standards.

    My e-pL1 has vast colour advantage over the Fujis that I briefly tried. I've seen posted Fuji samples which have good colour, and those with bad. I do not tolerate blueish foliage.
    My e-pL1 also works well with my 4/3rds 9-18 ... I don't know what the Fuji-X equivalent is.
    My e-pL1 is consistently sharp with reliable WB and focus and a very nice Jpeg processor, I'm willing to believe a Fuji-X is equivalent in those areas but hardly superior. You can convince me with evidence of those things, go ahead.

    Now Rooz before you leap into insults just remember this is not DPR.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team Subscribing Member

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Curious to understand the Fuji-X experience (and prepared to let GAS take root and try one), I downloaded some sample XE-1 raw files. I opened up Lightroom ready to be blown away - and.... I was struggling to see any meaningful difference from my Oly u43 files. I was quite happy about this since it meant I could keep my wallet closed!

    I'm more than happy with the IQ of my E-M5 and E-PL5 - they constantly amaze me with their IQ and the range of lenses is superb. I've made prints up to A3+ and have no concerns at all doing so.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. robbie36

    robbie36 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2010
    Bangkok
    rob collins
    Can you measure a quantum? Heroically optimistic thread in a photo forum.
     
  5. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Agreed! I provided a link to the mu-43 classified advert where he said he is selling up to get an X-E2. After what, 12 weeks of 'love'? As for the 'keeper' kit lens, gone! No doubt for a 'better' lens. Like I say, I don't want to be there when he sees the next pretty girl wearing a wet A7r t-shirt. Carnage, surely! :tongue:

    Philosophically, the fun question is: was it good enough when he bought it? What happened 12 weeks later? It got worse? :rolleyes: 
     
  6. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team Subscribing Member

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Yes, we can measure a quantum, and oddly, it the SMALLEST possible energy increment.
     
  7. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
    Best performing sensor on the market today? Really? In what area? High ISO noise? Nope. Resolution? Nope. Dynamic range? Nope. Bit Depth? Nope. It's not the best sensor in any area and is thoroughly trounced in several by some other cameras. The D800. The new Sonys. And every medium format sensor made today are superior in one or more ways. Even the lowly Foevon sensor smashes it in resolution at base ISO. Good sensor? Sometimes, if you avoid Adobe processing. The best. Certainly not. Try taking the Nikon DF for a spin and see if you still think the Fuji is superior.

    Raw data means nothing until you use it to create a file. And the workflow and subject matter affect the quality and appearance of that finished file as much as the raw data itself. It's like using a D800 wifh a holga lens on the front. The ultimate file quality is only as good as the weakest link in the chain.A sensor without a lens in front of it and software to make the file is useless. I like to consider the entire imaging chain rather than rely on tests that rely on non real world data. Not that there arevany really difinitative tests on the Xtrans sensor any way. Even DXO ( which has never reflected real world results) can't test the Xtrans sensor.

    It's all well and good to harp on about the theoretical limits of a sensor but the reality is that rarely, if ever, are we able to extract to entire image quality of a sensor. It's well known that the Fuji sensor is far more difficult to process thriugh Adobe products. You can go on all you like but the FACT is that sometimes the detail of an Xtrans sensor is so poorly demosaiced with Lightroom that an EPL1 will easily show more actual detail. I'm in the middle of trying to rescue some very poor skin renders using an XE1 at the moment. I would have killed for an EPL1 and a 75mm 1.8. I either have to run the images through a different converter or ditch 70 percent of the shots. The files are crap, pure and simple. And I'm not about to redo my workflow for a single camera when I can easily get a camera that will work well with my workflow.

    Gordon
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Someone could tell me that they think they get the best images from one of the myriad of Micro 4/3 cameras that have been produced. Another might prefer images from one of the Fuji X cameras, or a Samsung NX, or a Sony NEX, or a Ricoh GR, or a GXR, or a Canon G1X, or EOS M, or Nikon Coolpix A, or a Pentax, Nikon, or Canon DSLR. The thing is that I wouldn't disbelieve any of them, but at the same time I don't have to believe any of them either until I've shot the same camera myself and processed the images myself. Personally I don't hold the E-PL1 in quite the same high esteem as Flash and Ulfric seem to, but it did have something a little special about and I don't have an issue with their assertions. The characteristics of the current Sony-based Micro 4/3 cameras just suit me better, but there are still circumstances where a couple of cameras in my long list above will float my boat more than my E-M5 or E-P5 will. Even then, whether that perceived technical image quality will manifest itself to any great degree on a printed medium is debatable, and the images I choose to print are about the image more than the image quality anyhow. I have plenty of images that I could pixel peep to my heart's content but I wouldn't pay to have printed and displayed. That certainly explains why a few of my favourite prints came from a Canon 350D.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    Well, for what little it's worth (and in threads like this I'd say its worth damn near nothing, but what the hell...) I agree that there's a pretty large gap between the EPL1 files (or others from the 12mp Panasonic sensors) and those from newer sensors. To me an easy "tell" is what happens when you try to pull some detail out of the shadows in a reasonably exposed shot. With those older m43 sensors, almost ANY raising of exposure in the shadows resulted in atrocious noise - tons if it.

    But the difference between a modern m43 sensor and Fuji is vanishingly small. There's a slight advantage in low light to the Fuji's but I don't think it's much, particularly taking Fuji's evident ISO inflation into account. I've seen pretty cogent technical arguments that it's only about a third of a stop or so, but the experience of a number of pretty experienced photographers (me among them) is that it's closer to a stop.

    There are qualitative differences between an X-Trans file and new m43 files and anyone could easily have a preference for one or the other (I'm damn fond of both and maintained both systems for a couple of years as a result) but in terms of any technical advantage, I find very little difference between the new m43 sensors and pretty much any APS sensor.

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Persnicketty correction: Sony-sensor-based.

    Like your post though, very sane.
     
  11. Absolutely agree in regards to the quantity and quality of dynamic range when it comes to the 12mp Micro 4/3 sensor, but even though I love a good 12+ stops of DR as much as anyone it is still what I would describe as an outlying factor WRT to making a great looking image. For example, the file quality I can get from my Canon G1X I consider to be right at the pointy end of those from any of the cameras that I have owned, but it's dynamic range actually kind of sucks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Oops, good pickup :redface:
     
  13. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    I had to delete some posts. Please let's not go sideways here, folks.

    If you must repeat the same arguments over and again, do so politely without name calling, patronizing comments, baiting, accusations of defensiveness, etc.

    As a reminder, these are the terms of service for this website: https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=286
     
  14. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    Gosh, no argument from me regarding DR & noise ;
    I think our opinions on relative IQ of sensors is weighted more or less on different aspects of that IQ, and if pulling up shadows was important to me I'd have a different opinion on things. This e-pM2 is definitely the tool for that job, and I'm sure the Fujis too.
     
  15. val

    val Mu-43 Top Veteran

    548
    Dec 19, 2013
    Australia
    William
    Fuji definitely make some incredible gear and I'm always impressed by their photo quality and colours.

    So long and farewell :) 
     
  16. hazwing

    hazwing Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Nov 25, 2012
    Australia
    Point taken... but I feel we should avoid direct attacks on individual's gear choice.
     
  17. WT21

    WT21 Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    John's selling his gear for an XE2. You should look at his body of work on Fuji. He and Fuji surely get along.
     
  18. yekimrd

    yekimrd Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 14, 2012
    Cincinnati, OH
    Mikey
    Hmm.. I guess I'm having a really hard time trying to see the purpose behind this post.

    People change camera bodies and lenses all the time to suit their own photographic needs or sometimes because of GAS. And don't tell me you've never sold a lens only to re-purchase it at a later time (unless you hang on to everything you buy).

    How is the OP's situation any different from someone who discovered micro four thirds and purchased an E-M5 + Panny 12-35 12 weeks before the E-M5 and 12-40 came out? Does this also mean that the E-M5 got worse 12 weeks after he bought it? :eek: 

    If you look at the OP's sig on FujiXSpot, these are the Fuji X items he has: x-e2 • x-m1 • 18mm • 35mm • 55-200mm • zeiss: 12mm tout. It looks like he just prefers the use of primes for the standard focal lengths. It's common knowledge that the 18-55 kit is sharper at 18mm than the 18mm prime. So again, this all boils down to individual needs. He even swapped the x100s for an x-m1 likely because the latter has a tillable LCD screen and is interchangeable.

    The 18mm is a very good lens, just not as good as the 18-55 kit zoom. In the micro four thirds world, how many people have opted for the 17/1.8 over the 20/1.7 (because of faster AF, the classic 35mm FOV, and the clutch mechanism) even if the 20/1.7 is the clearly superior lens?
     
  19. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    A strange and incomprehensible thing called humour.

    Not once in my whole life. I am starting to understand why my post was so confusing to you!

    It's identical, especially if rumours of the new release were swirling in the air when buying the first model. Keep the beautiful and rewarding 12-35, if it's any good. Is it any good? Of course it is!

    I knew all that and posted as much way back in post #105. I couldn't have not known it, given that I quoted the OP's classified that ... oh, never mind.

    per 12 weeks.... :wink:
     
  20. yekimrd

    yekimrd Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 14, 2012
    Cincinnati, OH
    Mikey
    ...which unfortunately sometimes doesn't translate well on the internet

    Some people wait until the new models come out to be able to buy the previous model at a cheaper price. Certainly, there are those who waited to buy an E-M5 until the E-M1 was announced. I honestly would try to minimize costs when switching systems. So getting a Fuji X-E1 which was available right then and there for much cheaper makes sense than waiting and getting the more expensive X-E2.

    I myself have purchased used lenses to try them out only to turn around and sell them after less than a month (e.g. the Panny 35-100, 20/1.7, Olympus 9-18)... so why not? :biggrin:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.