I am rapidly changing to Fujifilm X

Amin Sabet

Administrator
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
10,892
Location
Boston, MA (USA)
lol its not about agreeing to disagree or not. this is not a qualitative discussion. it is a quantitative concept not only noticeable anecdotally, but measurable and demonstrable.
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.
 

Ulfric M Douglas

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
3,709
Location
Northumberland
This IS a qualitative discussion.

Image quality, right?
lol its not about agreeing to disagree or not. this is not a qualitative discussion. it is a quantitative concept not only noticeable anecdotally, but measurable and demonstrable..
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.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,565
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
lol its not about agreeing to disagree or not. this is not a qualitative discussion. it is a quantitative concept not only noticeable anecdotally, but measurable and demonstrable.

I cant believe you're arguing that a 2011 4/3 sensor, not renowned at all as being a benchmark of sensor capability even back then, is the equivalent of what is widely regarded, bar none, as one of the best performing sensors on the market today. it wasn't until the omd came where the m4/3 sensors really started to catch up. you should think about whether or not that makes sense or not before you go on. logic alone should guide you in the right direction. if after you seriously evaluate your argument and genuinely take a moment to process your thought pattern, you still think what you say holds water good luck to you, but understand that it is PURELY in your imagination...either that or the magical sensor pixie fairies paid your epl1 a visit. I tend to believe the former. :tongue:

im not bashing 4/3 here at all, I am heavily invested in it at the EXPENSE of the Fuji system. but facts don't change according to preference.
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.
 

robbie36

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
1,579
Location
Bangkok
Real Name
rob collins
Can you measure a quantum? Heroically optimistic thread in a photo forum.
 

T N Args

Agent Photocateur
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
3,480
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Real Name
call me Arg
He's still a Fuji user and in fact owns 2 bodies, except he upgraded his X-E1 to an X-E2. On the FujiXSpot site, he just put up a review for a newly acquired Zeiss 12/2.8 in X mount.
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:
 

flash

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
2,004
Location
1 hour from Sydney Australia.
Real Name
Gordon
lol its not about agreeing to disagree or not. this is not a qualitative discussion. it is a quantitative concept not only noticeable anecdotally, but measurable and demonstrable.

I cant believe you're arguing that a 2011 4/3 sensor, not renowned at all as being a benchmark of sensor capability even back then, is the equivalent of what is widely regarded, bar none, as one of the best performing sensors on the market today. it wasn't until the omd came where the m4/3 sensors really started to catch up. you should think about whether or not that makes sense or not before you go on. logic alone should guide you in the right direction. if after you seriously evaluate your argument and genuinely take a moment to process your thought pattern, you still think what you say holds water good luck to you, but understand that it is PURELY in your imagination...either that or the magical sensor pixie fairies paid your epl1 a visit. I tend to believe the former. :tongue:

im not bashing 4/3 here at all, I am heavily invested in it at the EXPENSE of the Fuji system. but facts don't change according to preference.
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
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,397
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
Nic
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.
 

Ray Sachs

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
2,704
Location
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
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,397
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
Nic
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.
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.
 

Ulfric M Douglas

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
3,709
Location
Northumberland
Gosh, no argument from me regarding DR & noise ;
... EPL1 files ...
. 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.
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.
 

val

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
548
Location
Australia
Real Name
William
Fuji definitely make some incredible gear and I'm always impressed by their photo quality and colours.

So long and farewell :)
 

hazwing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
2,135
Location
Australia
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:
Point taken... but I feel we should avoid direct attacks on individual's gear choice.
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,567
Location
Boston
Above is the OP of this thread. "I bid you all farewell --" etc.

So, how is the 12-week-old "once I tried the cameras I was a goner" love affair going with his X-E1, X100S, "kit lens is a keeper", etc? The answer lies below.

Man, I hate to see what happens when he tries a Sony A7r! Carnage I say, carnage! :evilsmile:
John's selling his gear for an XE2. You should look at his body of work on Fuji. He and Fuji surely get along.
 

yekimrd

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,039
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Real Name
Mikey
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:
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?
 

T N Args

Agent Photocateur
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
3,480
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Real Name
call me Arg
Hmm.. I guess I'm having a really hard time trying to see the purpose behind this post.
A strange and incomprehensible thing called humour.

And don't tell me you've never sold a lens only to re-purchase it at a later time.
Not once in my whole life. I am starting to understand why my post was so confusing to you!

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?
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!

If you look at the OP's sig on FujiXSpot, these are the Fuji X items he has:
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.

So again, this all boils down to individual needs.
per 12 weeks.... :wink:
 

yekimrd

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,039
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Real Name
Mikey
A strange and incomprehensible thing called humour.
...which unfortunately sometimes doesn't translate well on the internet

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!
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.

per 12 weeks.... :wink:
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:
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom