ravinj Posted August 28, 2010 Share #1 Posted August 28, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) From... Magazine - Colorfoto - colorfoto - Magnus.de 5D MK II Image quality ISO 100 / 400 / 800 / 1600 (max. 75 points) 60.5 / 60/59/58, 5 points X1 Image quality ISO 100 / 400 / 800 / 1600 (max. 75 points) 62/59/54, 5 / 51 points NEX: Image quality ISO 100 / 400 / 800 / 1600 (max. 75 points) 56.5 / 56 / 55, 5 / 51, 5 points GH1: Image quality ISO 100 / 400 / 800 / 1600 (max. 75 points) 50.5 / 50/47/40, 5 points GF1: Image quality ISO 100 / 400 / 800 / 1600 (max. 75 points) 49,5 / 45/40, 5 / 35, 5 points Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 28, 2010 Posted August 28, 2010 Hi ravinj, Take a look here For those interested in facts..... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
BB W Posted August 28, 2010 Share #2 Posted August 28, 2010 Hmm, I think I will need a translation. Would love to see and be able to read the article you're referring to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravinj Posted August 28, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted August 28, 2010 Hmm, I think I will need a translation. Would love to see and be able to read the article you're referring to. You can search by manufacturer here: Tests - Tests nach Produktkategorien - Foto - Magnus.de X1 Test: colorfoto.de Leica - colorfoto - Magnus.de Bottom line: not the best performance, but best image quality. we know that already, but good to see it at the top of the heap in IQ. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlosecpf Posted August 28, 2010 Share #4 Posted August 28, 2010 Bottom line: not the best performance, but best image quality. we know that already, but good to see it at the top of the heap in IQ. From this test it is clear that the X1 has the best image quality only at ISO100. For any other ISO value, at least one of the competitors produce better IQ. For High ISO (800 and 1600) the X1 is ranked in third place according to Magnus.de . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravinj Posted August 28, 2010 Author Share #5 Posted August 28, 2010 From this test it is clear that the X1 has the best image quality only at ISO100. For any other ISO value, at least one of the competitors produce better IQ. For High ISO (800 and 1600) the X1 is ranked in third place according to Magnus.de . It is also clear that the other "competitor" is physically a whale compared to shrimp like X1. And it is miles ahead of 4/3. At ISO 400 X1 stands up to 5D MK II. Which makes X1 even more impressive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlosecpf Posted August 28, 2010 Share #6 Posted August 28, 2010 the ratings you posted here refers only to ISO picture quality, so did my reply. Thus size, bulk and weight was not considered. Again, according to magnus.de, the leica X1 takes the 3rd place in terms of high ISO performance... It underperforms at High ISO not only when compared to 5D MkII, but ALSO when compared to Sony NEX-5, a compact camera. Nonetheless, it is still better than Leica M9 (59.5 / points 57/51/39) in this particular criteria, according to the same website. It is worth mentioning that all cameras mentioned in your post can benefit a lot by using faster glass to improve their performance in low light, but the X1 can't. It is "stuck" with max aperture of 2.8. Regardless of this test results, I still like my X1 a lot and I am pretty satisfied not only with it's overall IQ but also with the whole Leica experience it offers me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravinj Posted August 28, 2010 Author Share #7 Posted August 28, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is worth mentioning that all cameras mentioned in your post can benefit a lot by using faster glass to improve their performance in low light, but the X1 can't. It is "stuck" with max aperture of 2.8. Regardless of this test results, I still like my X1 a lot and I am pretty satisfied not only with it's overall IQ but also with the whole Leica experience it offers me. For cameras like GF1 whose base ISO performance is much inferior to the X1, faster glass will not help. At best, using a faster glass on GF1 will make its ISO 800 performance equal to its base ISO level. Which would still be inferior to X1. I am guessing that the Sony Nex can probably equal or outperform the X1 at base ISO levels with a lens like Panasonic's 20mm F1.7 - assuming Sony can build a lens like it. And of course, we all like our X1s which is why we are here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted August 28, 2010 Share #8 Posted August 28, 2010 83% of people have more affection for their cameras than partners 42% would leave their partner before the would change camera brands Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted August 29, 2010 Share #9 Posted August 29, 2010 They test everything. EVERYTHING. That's the only fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted August 29, 2010 Share #10 Posted August 29, 2010 Hey Ravinj, thanks for the valuable info! Having compared images from the cameras rated I have always held my firm belief that the X1 produces the best images not just for a compact, but better than many APS-C DSLRs even. The comparison between 5D Mk2 which I believe is full frame raises the bar even further. To think the X1 triumphs over the 5D at base iso, amazing! Goes to show what the x1 is capable of, now to learn how to harness this gem and take better pictures. No excuses! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted August 29, 2010 Share #11 Posted August 29, 2010 Were the final tallies typo'd? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardM8 Posted August 29, 2010 Share #12 Posted August 29, 2010 Magnus.de ?... Facts ?... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted August 30, 2010 Share #13 Posted August 30, 2010 Just yesterday I did again some comparison shots between m4/3 (E-P2 with 17mm) and the x1 and I have to say as much as I love the x1 I can not really see that real practical image quality advantage of the x1.(I still use the x1 more because I prefer the user interface, I like the small focus point (when doing spot AF), I like the flash for fill, I like the slightly shallower DOF when shooting f2.8 due to the larger sensor. If you compare m4/3 and gf1 I think one needs to keep in mind that DOF is larger at same f-stop. So to get the same DOF effect one could allways shoot the m4/3 one stop wider open meaning ISO one step lower. So for me it makes sense to compare for example the E-P2 at ISO 200 f2.8 with the x1 at f4.0 ISO 400 and so on. Thats what I did and even though the 17mm Oly-lens is not said to be the sharperst lens the IQ even wide open is still very good IMO. I am at the point where I say for my taste both are IQ-wise so good that IQ would not be the factor for me to decide between the 2 cameras. Putting IQ just in points doesnt say much at all IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardM8 Posted August 30, 2010 Share #14 Posted August 30, 2010 I don't agree Tom. Yesterday (too) I went through holiday pictures with a friend he shot with the EP2 - 17mm (and a D700). To my eyes the images from the EP2 get visibly noisy from ISO 200 on. They also lack the dynamic range, sharpness, the rich colors and 3D qualities of many X1 files. The RAW files don't hold up nearly as good as the DNGs from the X1 when 'pushed & pulled' in Lightroom. To me these camera's are in a different league. Their prices are too so that's ok. Richard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 30, 2010 Share #15 Posted August 30, 2010 You didn't say how the X1 compares with the D700... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardM8 Posted August 30, 2010 Share #16 Posted August 30, 2010 You didn't say how the X1 compares with the D700... No 'cos that wasn't the subject... This friends shoots his D700 with Zeiss primes only. Stunning combination... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 30, 2010 Share #17 Posted August 30, 2010 Even better with Leica primes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted August 30, 2010 Share #18 Posted August 30, 2010 Even better with Leica primes As a diversion since we are on this topic what are good lenses to mount on Nikon bodies? I read somewhere that some Leica lenses cannot be modified for Nikon bodies? Currently entertaining this thought of using R lenses on my Nikon as well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanCderidder Posted August 30, 2010 Share #19 Posted August 30, 2010 Hasselblad lenses on FF Nikon seem to hit the spot rather well. Perhaps a rather unlikely combination but if you don't mind the size and weight it might be worth checking this out as well as a possible 80mm and/or 150mm solution. I have the Zeiss 35mm which gets more use than the 24-70 2.8 which although being of excellent quality turns the combo (D700) into something which might require 2 wheel support in future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 30, 2010 Share #20 Posted August 30, 2010 As a diversion since we are on this topic what are good lenses to mount on Nikon bodies? I read somewhere that some Leica lenses cannot be modified for Nikon bodies? Currently entertaining this thought of using R lenses on my Nikon as well... I have converted everything from a Series 1 19mm Elmarit-R to a 250 Telyt. All of mine have worked perfectly on the D700, examples of which are in the photo section (some from yesterday) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.