Fujifilm X-mount Image Thread
/forum/topic/1097477/67

1       2       3              67      
68
       69              577       578       end

tardegardo
Registered: Jan 26, 2013
Total Posts: 75
Country: Italy

Jman13 wrote:
I'm looking on my iPad right now, so it may be hard to definitively say, but they look similar, but with higher contrast on the EP3. What are the JPEG sharpening settings?


they are at zero, on both cameras…
the Olympus seems sharper to me, but even if they were exactly the same that would be weird as well.
I was expecting fuji to be better.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 16163
Country: Germany

tardegardo wrote:
justruss wrote:
Is sharpness being tested w/ sensor size/resolution normalized? You know, the whole debate about comparing different sensor sizes/resolutions at 100%-- or not, depending on application.

That said, some lens-camera-sensor combinations don't necessarily shine. I've stopped using my Tammy SP 17mm on my XE because I didn't like the look, and it seemed mushy/watercolor heavy compared to everything else-- though this lens is great on my 5d2. And my FL 55 1.2 is like magic on the XE.


What do you mean with "normalized".
I shot them both super fine jpegs (or how they call it).


There are several factors which are different. First of all, you are testing the quality of JPG engines, and Olymus is known to have an excellent one. Secondly, you shot the Fuji closer, and many lenses do not perform as well that close. And then there is the depth of field.

I would shoot something outside, at a middle distance, with RAW, and stop down to f/5.6 to avoid depth of field being an issue so much. Shoot maybe a brick wall at an angle, so that you can choose the spot with sharpest focus afterwards.



tardegardo
Registered: Jan 26, 2013
Total Posts: 75
Country: Italy

carstenw wrote:
tardegardo wrote:
justruss wrote:
Is sharpness being tested w/ sensor size/resolution normalized? You know, the whole debate about comparing different sensor sizes/resolutions at 100%-- or not, depending on application.

That said, some lens-camera-sensor combinations don't necessarily shine. I've stopped using my Tammy SP 17mm on my XE because I didn't like the look, and it seemed mushy/watercolor heavy compared to everything else-- though this lens is great on my 5d2. And my FL 55 1.2 is like magic on the XE.


What do you mean with "normalized".
I shot them both super fine jpegs (or how they call it).


There are several factors which are different. First of all, you are testing the quality of JPG engines, and Olymus is known to have an excellent one. Secondly, you shot the Fuji closer, and many lenses do not perform as well that close. And then there is the depth of field.

I would shoot something outside, at a middle distance, with RAW, and stop down to f/5.6 to avoid depth of field being an issue so much. Shoot maybe a brick wall at an angle, so that you can choose the spot with sharpest focus afterwards.


Yes, thank you, but I am actually trying to determine which camera performs better with this lens (canon fd 50mm) at f1.4. As per the brick wall, is actually what I did somehow, using the tilted sheet paper with text, in order to be able to find the most focused part….



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

To me (on my computer now), there appears to be the same amount of resolution (or higher on the fuji), just that the Olympus default ('0') sharpening is actually a little more aggressive.



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 12605
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
To me (on my computer now), there appears to be the same amount of resolution (or higher on the fuji), just that the Olympus default ('0') sharpening is actually a little more aggressive.


yeah i would shoot raw if you want to compare sharpness, jpeg engines will have very different levels of sharpening even if you set them both to zero.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

Although, in RAW, the X-E1 requires higher sharpening than bayer sensors due to the way it demosaics...the resolution is there, but you need more aggressive sharpening to bring it out fully.



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 12605
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
Although, in RAW, the X-E1 requires higher sharpening than bayer sensors due to the way it demosaics...the resolution is there, but you need more aggressive sharpening to bring it out fully.


but it doesn't have an AA filter, does it really need more sharpening? i haven't played with the raws since adobe and C1 updated their processing.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

You'd think, but not the case. Frankly I see no resolution benefit to the Xtrans sensor. It controls chroma noise extremely well, and luminance noise is well controlled too. Beautiful skin tones and overall tonal separation and gradation, but resolution seems on par or slightly below my OMD.



tardegardo
Registered: Jan 26, 2013
Total Posts: 75
Country: Italy

Jman13 wrote:
You'd think, but not the case. Frankly I see no resolution benefit to the Xtrans sensor. It controls chroma noise extremely well, and luminance noise is well controlled too. Beautiful skin tones and overall tonal separation and gradation, but resolution seems on par or slightly below my OMD.


Yes, it seems so, but in my case it seems to be on par with e-p3 as well….
here is btw another 100% crop from a RAW file, as requested, imported with LR third

resolution is pretty much the same, not better than micro4/3's

Anyway, I am afraid I will resign myself to use that lens with a micro4/3 camera



xenor
Registered: Dec 06, 2012
Total Posts: 115
Country: N/A

Sand Beach (X-E1 with 18-55mm)






KatieInTexas
Registered: Jan 27, 2011
Total Posts: 1229
Country: United States

Hi All ... Looking to trade my 35mm for the 18-55 zoom if anyone is interested...

some from this weekend with the 35:



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

Wow. I like the 18-55, and I use it a lot, but I wouldn't give up the 35 for it.



buggz2k
Registered: Mar 10, 2010
Total Posts: 1938
Country: United States

Katie, I would class the 35 as a great lens, I love mine.
I like my 18-55 also, but I also would not trade my 35 for it.

Jman13 wrote:
Wow. I like the 18-55, and I use it a lot, but I wouldn't give up the 35 for it.


KatieInTexas wrote:
Hi All ... Looking to trade my 35mm for the 18-55 zoom if anyone is interested...




deang001
Registered: Apr 23, 2011
Total Posts: 1793
Country: China

Got an X-Pro 1 & 18-55 a couple of weeks back. Liking it so far as a lightweight alternative to my Nikon gear.

First I used this camera was with the 2.0 update, so everything seems to be fine with it. My only real gripe is having to press that "AF" button to change focus points !! AF speed seems fine enough with the 18-55.

Very surprised and happy with the 18-55 "kit" lens. You can still squeeze some bokeh out at 55 f/4


DSCF0089 by deang0001, on Flickr


DSCF0121 by deang0001, on Flickr


DSCF0118 by deang0001, on Flickr



deang001
Registered: Apr 23, 2011
Total Posts: 1793
Country: China

And a few taken with the X-Pro 1 & my 50 Summilux ASPH via the Fuji M adapter ...


L1000833 by deang0001, on Flickr


DSCF0002 by deang0001, on Flickr


DSCF0040 by deang0001, on Flickr



KatieInTexas
Registered: Jan 27, 2011
Total Posts: 1229
Country: United States

But I don't EVER shoot 50mm equivalent focal length! I would be so much better off with a 35mm or wider as a main AF lens. As far as primes go, I have my M mount lenses in 15mm, 21mm, 28mm and a cheapo 50ishmm (industar). I KNOW I want the 55-200 zoom this summer ... but just don't think the 35mm --> basically a 50mm should be my go to AF prime. I'm having a hard time composing with this length. Maybe I'll keep it until I get the zoom and then decide from there.



KatieInTexas
Registered: Jan 27, 2011
Total Posts: 1229
Country: United States

just images...



dgenx24
Registered: Jan 30, 2008
Total Posts: 803
Country: United States

This is my first post here at fuji forum.
I bought a x-pro1 used couple of days ago since I've sold my beloved m8.2.
When I held x-pro1 in hand for the first time. I was so disappointed.
I was even more disappointed with the 35 1.4.
Mainly because I was so used to heavy & tight leicas.
My 35 summicron asph seems to have slightly soft edges sometimes (I use the fuji m adapter)

And the OVF is truely wasting time when using leica glass. The frame line is so inaccurate.
maybe I'm doing something wrong here.

Most of the time, I only use EVF.
So what I'm going to do next is add X-E1 !!
The IQ is great and overal speed is so much faster than my leica although I miss that craftmanship.
And the panorama is so much fun!

Here are couple images I've taken at first outting with fuji and leica glass.



corposant
Registered: Jul 14, 2010
Total Posts: 2960
Country: United States







frezeiss
Registered: Sep 13, 2011
Total Posts: 587
Country: Indonesia

great shot guys..

xe-1 & 14 mm













1       2       3              67      
68
       69              577       578       end