Ultimate pocket camera: X1 vs Nex vs S95 vs DP2S vs Oly vs Panny vs Fuji

[jankap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I believe it is the other way round, judging from the size of the files. Sigma overstates the MP and count the RGB layers separately, so i believe they overstate the actual file size 3 times. I see it from files from the DP2s, really small compared to the X1. Colors are nice but to my eyes the X1 produce better colors. The X1 DNGs have way more latitude for PP too compared to the sigma.

 

CJ

 

File size cannot be the measure. With Photoshop you can blow up files to every size.

For your information a typical X3F-file has about 14 MB, a RWL-file (Dlux-4) 11 MB.

You should look at the hardware. In the cameras small Photoshops do their work (extrapolating, color lookup tables, sharpening, lenscorrection).

The Dlux-4 has for instance 10 M sensorcells (5 M green, 2,5 M red and 2,5 M blue). The outcome is 3648 x 2736 giving about 10 M RGBpixel.

Jan

[phancj]

Jan,

 

I am wondering really if you have tried the DP2S files. They are REALLY small. In terms of actual pixels.

 

Also, the X1's sensor is way larger.

 

 

CJ

[robert blu]

I'm not a real expert in digital technology but IMO having a fixed focal lens made possible a good optimisation lens/sensor based on their specifics, which could be more difficult in case of a zoom lens. This could be a contribute to the IQ. Or is it just my idea? Not sure.

robert

[matlep]

Also, the X1's sensor is way larger.

 

 

CJ

 

 

Isn´t the X1, X100 and DP2 all APS-C???

[jankap]

I have the DP1S, but that doesn´t matter in case of file sizes. It has the same sensor and the same developer software (SPP).

The sensor has the size 20.7 x 13.8 mm (manual) and APS-C has the size 25,1 x 16.7 mm (Wiki).

Sorry, X1 and DP both have fixed lenses (no zooms).

Jan

[phancj]

Isn´t the X1, X100 and DP2 all APS-C???

 

Nope, only the X1 and X100 are APS-C. Sony nex too.

 

CJ

[jankap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the DP1S, but that doesn´t matter in case of file sizes. It has the same sensor and the same developer software (SPP).

The sensor has the size 20.7 x 13.8 mm (manual) and APS-C has the size 25,1 x 16.7 mm (Wiki).

Sorry, X1 and DP both have fixed lenses (no zooms).

Jan

 

The Dlux-4 (with zoom lens) was also mentioned. Its sensor measures about 8.4 x 5.6 mm. The sensor is a 1/1.63" type, I recalculated for 3:2 in metric measure.

Jan

[Archiver]

Isn´t the X1, X100 and DP2 all APS-C???

 

The X1, X100 and NEX use a 1.5x crop sensor. Sigma's Foveon sensor is just a touch smaller than Canon's 1.6x crop. I think the Foveon is 1.7x.

 

Daylight image quality from the DP2 is out of this world. Even though the files are small in comparison with those from a 12mp Bayer sensor, they are loaded with dynamic range and unique colour, and they can be comfortably upsized to an 8mp equivalent. The slowness of operation and poor high ISO performance are what let Sigma compacts down.

 

When the X1 was announced, I noted that the image quality and performance needed to be seriously better than the DP2 for me to want to get one. While the X1 has produced some great photos, I prefer the Foveon look, and the operation speed is still way under par. Indeed, if the X100 doesn't work out, the Ricoh GXR will be next on the list.

[Archiver]

I agree Andy.

The X1 is actually good value IMO (and not to justify my purchase) coz the sensor is the same (from consistent info) as my D300 and it has a great lens on it and is the same price as the D300 when I bought it three years ago. IQ, image processing better, operationally slower, has better build and materials I do not find it expensive. Maybe many think it small so it shouldnt be priced as such, but really if you look at its innards and the exterior materials my D300 looks to my eyes more overpriced.

 

In just a few weeks, Fuji will release a camera that has a customized 1.5x crop sensor, most likely a variation of that same Sony sensor. It incorporates offset microlenses that minimize vignetting in the same manner as our beloved M9.

 

It has features and operation speed that trump the X1 in all ways, and will most likely be far more the operational equivalent of the D300 than the X1 will ever be. The lens is a stop faster, it focuses and shoots at least as fast as an entry level DSLR, and does 720p HD video to boot. Build quality includes full magnesium alloy top and bottom plate as well as frame, and all the dials are machined out of metal.

 

The only disadvantage is that it is bigger and heavier than the X1. It won't really fit in your pocket, but then, how well does the X1 do that?

 

The opening retail price is $1199. Looks like pretty good value to me.

[h00ligan]

Did you look at the flat images that comprised fuji's sample shots just released?

 

Just saying...

 

I have an x100 on preorder, but i sort of think that going bigger than the x1, I may as well take a dslr.. for more flexibility. Obviously something the size of mft or m9 with interchangeable would be better.. however the former doesn't do well in low light and the latter is 7k.

 

I think some are counting the chickens a bit early on the x100.. and again I have a preorder in.. and am still not convinced that's a good idea.. whereas I lusted after the iq of the x1.

[Archiver]

Did you look at the flat images that comprised fuji's sample shots just released?

 

Just saying...

 

I have an x100 on preorder, but i sort of think that going bigger than the x1, I may as well take a dslr.. for more flexibility. Obviously something the size of mft or m9 with interchangeable would be better.. however the former doesn't do well in low light and the latter is 7k.

 

I think some are counting the chickens a bit early on the x100.. and again I have a preorder in.. and am still not convinced that's a good idea.. whereas I lusted after the iq of the x1.

 

Funny, but I like the X100 sample images more than those I saw from the X1. I also saw some of the work that some posters on DPReview did with them, and they came out looking great. I think that with raw processing, they will look fantastic.

 

For me, I would think of the X100 as the camera to take when I can't take a M9, due to weight or concerns about safety/loss. Sure, it doesn't have interchangeable lenses, but I can live with a 35/2 lens quite comfortably for most of the time. With battery, the X100 weighs a fair bit less than the M9 body alone.

[h00ligan]

I agree we need to see what raw development does.. however, the intial poster that said they were shot in film style as jpg may not have been correct. On the dpreview user adjustments.. the ones I saw were at greatly reduced resolution, nothing at 'native size' so it's hard to know what artifacting came with the adjustments.

 

Fixed 35/2 is a good thing, i agree.. but I don't agree the images posted so far exceed the iq of the x1.. however it looks to be much faster.

 

I take your point about loss on the m9, for sure I would worry about that were I carrying one.

 

I'm sure most here know, but I'll restate, I'm obviously not a blind lover of leica. The x1 has issues, hopefully some can be resolved.. that said.. I am a bit less excited about the x100 now, but then that's always the danger when new tech is hyped hard.

[Ecaton]

In just a few weeks, Fuji will release a camera that has a customized 1.5x crop sensor, most likely a variation of that same Sony sensor. It incorporates offset microlenses that minimize vignetting in the same manner as our beloved M9.

 

It has features and operation speed that trump the X1 in all ways, and will most likely be far more the operational equivalent of the D300 than the X1 will ever be. The lens is a stop faster, it focuses and shoots at least as fast as an entry level DSLR, and does 720p HD video to boot. Build quality includes full magnesium alloy top and bottom plate as well as frame, and all the dials are machined out of metal.

 

The only disadvantage is that it is bigger and heavier than the X1. It won't really fit in your pocket, but then, how well does the X1 do that?

 

The opening retail price is $1199. Looks like pretty good value to me.

 

Am not a fan of mtf charts, but the one for the X100 lens does not make me jump up and down of joy or sleepless at night;) It needs to be seen how it performs in direct comparison with the X1 and Ricoh GXR A12 optics. Otherwise, the X100 concept looks tempting.

[Ecaton]

Did you look at the flat images that comprised fuji's sample shots just released?

 

Just saying...

 

I have an x100 on preorder, but i sort of think that going bigger than the x1, I may as well take a dslr.. for more flexibility. Obviously something the size of mft or m9 with interchangeable would be better.. however the former doesn't do well in low light and the latter is 7k.

 

I think some are counting the chickens a bit early on the x100.. and again I have a preorder in.. and am still not convinced that's a good idea.. whereas I lusted after the iq of the x1.

 

I don't remember ever having seen first sample shots of a new camera looking great.

[phancj]

In just a few weeks, Fuji will release a camera that has a customized 1.5x crop sensor, most likely a variation of that same Sony sensor. It incorporates offset microlenses that minimize vignetting in the same manner as our beloved M9.

 

It has features and operation speed that trump the X1 in all ways, and will most likely be far more the operational equivalent of the D300 than the X1 will ever be. The lens is a stop faster, it focuses and shoots at least as fast as an entry level DSLR, and does 720p HD video to boot. Build quality includes full magnesium alloy top and bottom plate as well as frame, and all the dials are machined out of metal.

 

The only disadvantage is that it is bigger and heavier than the X1. It won't really fit in your pocket, but then, how well does the X1 do that?

 

The opening retail price is $1199. Looks like pretty good value to me.

 

The X100 cannot be the operational equivalent of a D300. The AF system of DSLRs are in a different league altogether.

 

Portability is a big factor for the X1, any bigger I expect a FF sensor. Really. Or at least interchangeable lenses.

 

Viewed the images they are alright colors are nice and vibrant. The B&W looks noticeably poorer than those straight out of an X1. The images are less sharp also but I suppose it may be different degrees of sharpening. Really hard to tell from tiny file sizes anyway.

 

I think what the X100 has is that VF which many seem to crave and if one absolutely needs a VF, I would say the X100 makes a compelling option.Speed will be faster than the X1 but I do not think in the realm of DSLRs. So some may still complain. Really depends on what one is shooting.

 

I am curious on low light photos, but not much to see there so no comments.

 

I would think majority of X1 users will not be jumping with joy and embracing the X100 except those who need VFs and do not mind the extra bulk/weight. If one is on the fence then portability/VF/speed considerations will come into the equation. You can fit the X1 in a pocket, but with the X100 it is impossible. So it shouldnt even be considered in this discussion since the thread says "pocket" which the X100 isnt. The X1 is probably the largest "pocketable" camera already.

 

Price is a big issue most of the time but on a Leica forum where many own the M9 I do not see it as a big deciding factor here. More functionality, IQ, size.

 

I wouldnt jump to conclusions right now until I have seen more images. But I recall when I was deciding on the X1 Peter Lueck's first images with the X1 took my breath away. I do not see images that astounding from the fuji site not to say they are not possible with this camera.

 

My two cents.

 

CJ

[ck1]

Having owned many of the cameras discussed and more (X1, GF1, M7/8, D700) I have always been looking for the elusive "one" for street photography.

 

Assuming it is classed as a pocket camera, today, I may just have found it - the Ricoh GXR with 50mm modules (the 28mm module is also on order)

 

Prior to this I was using the X1 almost daily and had adapted to its slow af, with a hand written hyperfocal distance guide stuck on the base plate etc. Beautiful pictures, though.

 

The GF1 was ok up to 400 and then fell apart. Loud as well.

 

Out of the box the GXR was as almost as slow as the X1 in terms of AF. Then I updated the firmware (NB you may be amused to know that since March 2010 there have been 5 firmware updates for the Ricoh) which turned it into a completely different animal. Fantastic.

 

But what is more fantastic is the user interface and other touches:

Manual focussing has a depth of field gauge on the screen.

It remembers all setting including focus when turned off.

The lens has a manual focus ring.

The auto iso is vastly configurable

It takes filters ! !

Rather than go on (there are dozens more), download the manual from the Ricoh website.

 

As for picture quality, so far (after a few hours) I am really hard pressed to see any quality difference between the GXR and the X1. Time will tell, though.

 

For now, sadly, the X1 sits on the shelf - I really do hope any new fw upgrade at least gets it into the same ball park, speedwise as the GXR. In most other aspects, I'm afraid, the X1 is prehistoric. It's also built less well (it's been back to Leica already with stuck buttons) whereas the GRX is like a mini D3 (which makes it heavier). It's also a bit bigger.

 

One downside is that initially it has a huge number of options and settings - if you hate setting up cameras you won't like this. But once set up, you can forget about the other options and get on with picture taking.

 

It may well be that this love affair is temporary, in which case I'll let you know asap . However, I'm currently deeply impressed with this camera.

[h00ligan]

I have heavily considered switching from x1 to gxr with both modules. I'm hard pushed to see much of a difference.. the speed difference is minimal.. but having a 50 is a very nice option.

 

I have no idea how it handles though, so just keep reading reviews.. I'm also not sure I'd buy into it as a system camera.. as I'm not sure what the longevity on the module system is going to be.

 

The most recent gxr shot on your site is great btw.

[Archiver]

The X100 cannot be the operational equivalent of a D300. The AF system of DSLRs are in a different league altogether.

 

Portability is a big factor for the X1, any bigger I expect a FF sensor. Really. Or at least interchangeable lenses.

 

Viewed the images they are alright colors are nice and vibrant. The B&W looks noticeably poorer than those straight out of an X1. The images are less sharp also but I suppose it may be different degrees of sharpening. Really hard to tell from tiny file sizes anyway.

 

I think what the X100 has is that VF which many seem to crave and if one absolutely needs a VF, I would say the X100 makes a compelling option.Speed will be faster than the X1 but I do not think in the realm of DSLRs. So some may still complain. Really depends on what one is shooting.

 

I am curious on low light photos, but not much to see there so no comments.

 

I would think majority of X1 users will not be jumping with joy and embracing the X100 except those who need VFs and do not mind the extra bulk/weight. If one is on the fence then portability/VF/speed considerations will come into the equation. You can fit the X1 in a pocket, but with the X100 it is impossible. So it shouldnt even be considered in this discussion since the thread says "pocket" which the X100 isnt. The X1 is probably the largest "pocketable" camera already.

 

Price is a big issue most of the time but on a Leica forum where many own the M9 I do not see it as a big deciding factor here. More functionality, IQ, size.

 

I wouldnt jump to conclusions right now until I have seen more images. But I recall when I was deciding on the X1 Peter Lueck's first images with the X1 took my breath away. I do not see images that astounding from the fuji site not to say they are not possible with this camera.

 

CJ

 

Peter Lueck's images are great because they come from Peter Lueck. I bought a Voigtlander 40/2 Ultron lens for my 5D Mark II on the basis of his images. so I understand the draw.

 

I brought up the X100 as you mentioned value and price yourself. The X100 potentially gives you a lot more than the X1 for a lot less money, size notwithstanding. The D300 comparison was also yours; note that I did not say that it would be the operational equivalent of the D300, but that it would be much closer than the X1.

 

And I think that if you expect a 35mm sensor in any camera bigger than the X1, you'll have to wait quite a few years before that happens. Interchangeable lenses, yes, but full frame?

 

I have hemmed and hawed about the X1, attracted by the great image quality but put off by the slow operation. I am no stranger to slow cameras as I own the Sigma DP1 and DP2, and I know how infuriating it can be to lose shots, so the last thing I want is another slow large-sensor camera.

[phancj]

Archiver,

 

I agree totally with the X100 being better value. Thats for certain. Leica will always be leica eith leica's prices to match.

 

With the M9 having a FF sensor with interchangeable lens, it is not inconceivable to have a fized lens on a smaller body. Anyway the X100 is not small. It may be a while before that happens though we may not have to wait for long if the X100 takes off. Actually I am very happy if it flies coz it will make all camera manufacturers take notice of how fixed lens may still have an audience. Then the idea of a high end FF fixed lens compact camera will materialize.

 

These are exciting times!

 

CJ

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[h00ligan]

Have a look if you care to.

 

So I adjusted some x100 samples how I would prep for web (3.2 mb total): Fujifilm Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review