I am looking for some landscape examples of the same scene from both cameras. I am thinking about dumping my Canon 5D2 kit (24 T/S, 24-105, 100 Macro) after having the Sigma DP1/2 Merrills for over a month. They satisfy a good portion of my landscape work, but I need something to fill in the more on the go stuff when I do not have time to stop and set up the tripod or just need more versatility. Also, to have something a little longer and wider when needed. Typically convert a good portion of the images to BW.
I do know about the raw issues with the Fuji, which is part of the reason for trying to get files of the same scene to judge for myself.
Sample conversions are being posted on the web (though I'm not sure those responsible aren't breaking an agreement doing so...) of Fuji X Trans files pushed through C1 Pro-- that look very, very good. Much better than anything else.
I think landscape is not the Fuji's strength for other reasons though. The lenses seem tuned for mid-range stuff, as do the colors.
I don't know anything about IQ from these two cameras, but the EVF in the NEX-6 is really sweet, the first that I think is better than the Olympus VF-2/E-M5.
justruss wrote:
I think landscape is not the Fuji's strength for other reasons though. The lenses seem tuned for mid-range stuff, as do the colors.
I think that's a personal thing, because I really like the Fuji colors/tonality for landscapes. However, I use a custom camera profile for more accurate colors. The large dynamic range and low noise are also nice for landscapes.
Fine detail indeed isn't great, but I hope C1 will be much better than ACR.
carstenw wrote:
I don't know anything about IQ from these two cameras, but the EVF in the NEX-6 is really sweet, the first that I think is better than the Olympus VF-2/E-M5.
Agreed. The NEX-6 EVF is fantastic, better than the one in the X-E1. Less laggy.
justruss wrote:
Sample conversions are being posted on the web (though I'm not sure those responsible aren't breaking an agreement doing so...) of Fuji X Trans files pushed through C1 Pro-- that look very, very good. Much better than anything else.
I think landscape is not the Fuji's strength for other reasons though. The lenses seem tuned for mid-range stuff, as do the colors.
Still not the bayer sensor level. Better than OOC JPEG or Silky though. But seems to be good enough.
Jochenb wrote:
I think that's a personal thing, because I really like the Fuji colors/tonality for landscapes. However, I use a custom camera profile for more accurate colors. The large dynamic range and low noise are also nice for landscapes.
Fine detail indeed isn't great, but I hope C1 will be much better than ACR.
Agreed. The NEX-6 EVF is fantastic, better than the one in the X-E1. Less laggy.
No doubt, it's definitely personal. And I haven't spent much time with the XE, whereas I've spent YEARS scrutinizing my Canon files (most recently 5D and 5D2), and sending them to editors. So I'm definitely biased, definitely more experienced with getting the most from the Canon.
But I do LOVE the XE, and its lenses. The 35 is killer, and I'm gonna add the 18. That and some alt lenses w/ adaptor... killer tiny kit.
Downloaded some raws from the website Quesabesde that compared the X-E1 to the NEX 6. The NEX samples from the kit zoom were soft or there were focus issues. The FUJI kit zoom was sharper even with the sharpening set to 0 and the Sony with some applied.
Anyone have experience with the Sony 16-50 kit zoom? I am not expecting great performance from a kit zoom, but difference was not to be ignored.
What software did you open the raws in? I've heard the 16-50 isn't superb, but I've no personal experience. The complaints I've heard have been more about weak corners and distortion rather than general softness. I know the NEX 18-55 kit zoom can be quite sharp at medium focal lengths, around 25-35mm.
alwang wrote:
What software did you open the raws in? I've heard the 16-50 isn't superb, but I've no personal experience. The complaints I've heard have been more about weak corners and distortion rather than general softness. I know the NEX 18-55 kit zoom can be quite sharp at medium focal lengths, around 25-35mm.
LR 4.3. There was a general softness across the entire frame. Only looked at two of the raws. I will download the other ones and see if it is common to all. Maybe I am spoiled from looking at the DP2M files.
justruss wrote:
Two quick things: BW from the Fuji blows me away.
Sample conversions are being posted on the web (though I'm not sure those responsible aren't breaking an agreement doing so...) of Fuji X Trans files pushed through C1 Pro-- that look very, very good. Much better than anything else.
I think landscape is not the Fuji's strength for other reasons though. The lenses seem tuned for mid-range stuff, as do the colors.
So C1 Pro is the best RAW converter for the X-Trans produced images? Have Phase One finally figured it out while Adobe limps along to get the X-Trans images right?
