Something odd about Fuji's sensors

On 2014-03-02 08:03:45 +0000, RichA said:

I've played with various sample images from their cameras that use the non-
Bayer sensors and I've never seen one that matches the sharpness of a m4/3
or APS sensor. They have really low noise and good control of moire, lower
noise than some FF sensors, which I thought at first was due to some kind
of blurring function. But even using careful sharpening to the limit befor
e artifacts crept in, I couldn't get their shots as sharp as a conventional
sensor's. It's not all bad. Their control of noise actually preserves so
me resolution better than that of noisier Bayer sensors, but in critical in
stances where ultimate sharpness is needed, they don't hold up.
At least as far as the samples I've seen.

These don't seem too bad for an Fujifilm APS-C X-Trans CMOS;

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...x_pro1_007.JPG


http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...x_pro1_030.JPG


http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...x_pro1_018.JPG


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2014-03-02 23:51:50 +0000, RichA said:

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:12:38 AM UTC-5, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-03-02 08:03:45 +0000, RichA said:


I've played with various sample images from their cameras that use the non-
Bayer sensors and I've never seen one that matches the sharpness of a m4/3
or APS sensor. They have really low noise and good control of moire, lower
noise than some FF sensors, which I thought at first was due to some kind
of blurring function. But even using careful sharpening to the limit befor
e artifacts crept in, I couldn't get their shots as sharp as a conventional
sensor's. It's not all bad. Their control of noise actually preserves so
me resolution better than that of noisier Bayer sensors, but in critical in
stances where ultimate sharpness is needed, they don't hold up.
At least as far as the samples I've seen.


These don't seem too bad for a Fujifilm APS-C X-Trans CMOS;


http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...x_pro1_007.JPG


http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...x_pro1_030.JPG


http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...x_pro1_018.JPG

They

do look pretty good. I'll have to wait for he X-T1 to show up.

I am kind of taken with their X-Pro1.
http://fujifilm-x.com/x-pro1/en/index.html


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014030216441368365-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

RichA:
do look pretty good. I'll have to wait for he X-T1 to show up.

I am kind of taken with their X-Pro1.
http://fujifilm-x.com/x-pro1/en/index.html

What about the X-E2? If either had been FF, I would have bought it instead
of the RX1.


--
Sandman[.net]

On 2014-03-03 08:03:11 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 2014030216441368365-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

RichA:
do look pretty good. I'll have to wait for he X-T1 to show up.

I am kind of taken with their X-Pro1.
http://fujifilm-x.com/x-pro1/en/index.html

What about the X-E2?

Same APS-C sensor, but with the X-Pro1 you get the hybrid OVF/EVF.

If either had been FF, I would have bought it instead
of the RX1.

As much as I like the idea of a FF camera, I really don't need one.
There is still a place for APS-C, and I like a lot of what the X-Pro1
promises.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014030300210368524-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

On 2014-03-03 08:03:11 +0000, Sandman said:

RichA:
do look pretty good. I'll have to wait for he X-T1 to
show up.

Savageduck:
I am kind of taken with their X-Pro1.
http://fujifilm-x.com/x-pro1/en/index.html

Sandman:
What about the X-E2?

Same APS-C sensor, but with the X-Pro1 you get the hybrid OVF/EVF.

Yeah, if a OVF is important to you (even if it's "just" a rangefinder) then
the X-Pro1 is the route to go. I can relate to that, of course. I really
dislike EVF's still. Even on the Sony A7.

Sandman:
If either had been FF, I would have bought it instead of the RX1.

As much as I like the idea of a FF camera, I really don't need one.
There is still a place for APS-C, and I like a lot of what the
X-Pro1 promises.

As do I. I was reluctant to invest in a new range of optics. If there was a
Nikon equivalent of the X-Pro1 with F-mount I would have bought it in a
heartbeat.


--
Sandman[.net]

On 2014-03-03 10:03:26 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 2014030300210368524-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

On 2014-03-03 08:03:11 +0000, Sandman said:

RichA:
do look pretty good. I'll have to wait for he X-T1 to
show up.

Savageduck:
I am kind of taken with their X-Pro1.
http://fujifilm-x.com/x-pro1/en/index.html

Sandman:
What about the X-E2?

Same APS-C sensor, but with the X-Pro1 you get the hybrid OVF/EVF.

Yeah, if a OVF is important to you (even if it's "just" a rangefinder) then
the X-Pro1 is the route to go. I can relate to that, of course. I really
dislike EVF's still. Even on the Sony A7.

Sandman:
If either had been FF, I would have bought it instead of the RX1.

As much as I like the idea of a FF camera, I really don't need one.
There is still a place for APS-C, and I like a lot of what the
X-Pro1 promises.

As do I. I was reluctant to invest in a new range of optics. If there was a
Nikon equivalent of the X-Pro1 with F-mount I would have bought it in a
heartbeat.

Then you should find this interesting reading:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05...M-OM-FD-K-F-MD


http://www.fujixseries.com/discussio...tal-cameras/p1

....and

http://www.fotodioxpro.com/fotodiox-...s-cameras.html


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014030410133048802-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Sandman:
As do I. I was reluctant to invest in a new range of optics. If
there was a Nikon equivalent of the X-Pro1 with F-mount I would
have bought it in a heartbeat.

Then you should find this interesting reading:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05...M-OM-FD-K-F-MD


http://www.fujixseries.com/discussio...tal-cameras/p1

...and
http://www.fotodioxpro.com/fotodiox-...s-cameras.html

Yes, I've seen them. It has a pretty unwieldy way to deal with Nikon
G-lenses that lack an aperture ring.

Also, you lose autofocus, right?


--
Sandman[.net]

On 2014-03-04 19:11:45 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 2014030410133048802-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Sandman:
As do I. I was reluctant to invest in a new range of optics. If
there was a Nikon equivalent of the X-Pro1 with F-mount I would
have bought it in a heartbeat.

Then you should find this interesting reading:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05...M-OM-FD-K-F-MD


http://www.fujixseries.com/discussio...tal-cameras/p1

....and


http://www.fotodioxpro.com/fotodiox-...s-cameras.html

Yes,

I've seen them. It has a pretty unwieldy way to deal with Nikon
G-lenses that lack an aperture ring.

Also, you lose autofocus, right?

Yup!
It seems to be more trouble than it is worth unless there is some
specific need to use a particular Nikkor G-Series lens.

So, I intend to buy an X-Pro1 and a few of the Fujifilm X-mount lenses,
starting with the XF 35mm f/1.4.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...talogue_01.pdf


--
Regards,

Savageduck