Fuji X-A1 Image Quality better than X-M1 (and X-E1 and X-PRO1)?


Nice photos on that article (good looking subjects always helps in that department), but the reviewer spent lots of time telling us what we already knew -- that the XA1 is marketed towards a different crowd and has a different sensor. He alludes that in difficult situations, the difference in the sensors becomes apparent. But doesn't really discuss it and provide comparison photos other than the photo of the eyes.
 
Photo Ninja offers better demosaicing not only for X-Trans, but also for Bayer. It easily beats the built-in JPEG engines, and it easily beats Lightroom, for both CFAs.

I spent a major part of this weekend testing Photo Ninja and exchanging notes with Jim (the brain behind PN), and I am now in the happy position to have a prerelease version of PN that supports the X-M1 and the X-A1.

Obviously, I have already redeveloped some of my shootout samples in PN, and as expected, the lacking AA filter clearly shows, there's more clarity, more detail, even the noise at ISO 6400 is more refined (I completely turned off all luminance NR for these samples).


10123996633_f34f6480a1_c.jpg


10123818754_1b34875e01_c.jpg


10126230194_e4de9a2dec_c.jpg


10126340094_294c294873_c.jpg


10126682183_352e5a4d46_c.jpg
 
What's the conclusion here, though. If these are XA1 and XM1 pairs, I don't really see the difference, which gets back to John's point about why does one cost +$200 over the other.
 
I think the general consensus has been that if one is buying their first - or a oneoff- Fuji camera, the X-A1 represents better value than the X-M1. But if one is buying a second Fuji body to go with another X-Trans camera, the X-M1 may make more sense as one can maintain the same RAW processing settings and workflow.
 
If these are XA1 and XM1 pairs, I don't really see the difference

In this case, you either need (better) glasses, or you may have to use a different monitor. No kidding, so please don't get me wrong. :)
Of course, you clicked on each of the images to view them at full-size?
 
Are the tree photos on the right from XM1? And the house photo and painting photos on the left are from the XM1?

Differences are subtle, but there's more detail on the tree photos on the right. And smoother/finer noise grains on the house/painting photos on the left.
 
Thanks for the sample comparison, flysurfer. Curious if you sharpened each the same (assume Bayer would require/accept more sharpening)?

Photo Ninja is great news, especially for Windows users.


Differences are subtle, but there's more detail on the tree photos on the right. And smoother/finer noise grains on the house/painting photos on the left.

+1 that is what I was seeing as well!
 
In this case, you either need (better) glasses, or you may have to use a different monitor. No kidding, so please don't get me wrong. :)
Of course, you clicked on each of the images to view them at full-size?

I don't know how to reply to this. I'll just stop replying.
 
I don't know how to reply to this. I'll just stop replying.

Well, it's simple. Your eyes can fool you (they too have a resolution limit), or your monitor can be inadequate for pixel peeping. For example, I have a hard time seeing differences on my iPad, the retina pixel are just to small, at least for my eyes and my reading glasses. OTOH, I have no problem seeing the differences on my 17" laptop display with its larger pixels. So in order to get the most out of pixel peeping, you need a setup that allows you to spot the differences that are there.
 
Are you sure you don't need glasses? :rolleyes:

I did get new contact lenses recently!! Got correction for astigmatism on my left eye now. Didn't use to have that! :(

The difference is VERY subtle though. Probably not worth the price difference. On the other hand, the brown XM1 with silver kit zoom is VERY cool! Just missing an EVF. Maybe the new XE2 will come in brown!! :)
 
Well, it's simple. Your eyes can fool you (they too have a resolution limit), or your monitor can be inadequate for pixel peeping. For example, I have a hard time seeing differences on my iPad, the retina pixel are just to small, at least for my eyes and my reading glasses. OTOH, I have no problem seeing the differences on my 17" laptop display with its larger pixels. So in order to get the most out of pixel peeping, you need a setup that allows you to spot the differences that are there.

24" Dell SIPS panel color corrected. 1920X1080. As Armanius noted, the differences are subtle, and that's at 100%.
 
the differences are subtle, and that's at 100%.

Pixel peeping is always at least at 100%. Often, the real freaks are looking at 200% or 400% samples. Really! Not that I'd care, but that's what people are discussing, not only in this forum, but in all forums and in all blogs. It's everywhere! They have been discussing it since January 2012, there's no end to it, and now that Fuji has the same sensor with two different CFAs on offer, the frenzy's really kicking in. People don't care about colors, about the big picture or how to find a decent subject and expose it correctly. They care about the pixels. At 400%.
 
I'm not sure how viewing at 400 percent is useful. If using a program that does true 100 percent, pixel per pixel mapping, then going to 400 percent means that a pixel gets mapped to 4 pixels on a monitor. Problem is, looking at anything like that would depend on the program and and the ability for the video card to render the image.

I've found looking at more than 100 percent useful in detecting a stuck pixel and looking for sensor dust. Thats about it.
 
I'm not sure how viewing at 400 percent is useful. If using a program that does true 100 percent, pixel per pixel mapping, then going to 400 percent means that a pixel gets mapped to 4 pixels on a monitor. Problem is, looking at anything like that would depend on the program and and the ability for the video card to render the image.

I've found looking at more than 100 percent useful in detecting a stuck pixel and looking for sensor dust. Thats about it.

I haven't seen anyone on-line comparing at anything more than 100%.
 
Picked up a blue XA1 this morning. I know a 12 year old who will be very pleased come this Sunday. :) It is a very pretty little camera, to say the least.

I haven't had a chance to have a play with it yet (after all the batteries need to be charged :)). But I will be doing my own Xtrans vs bayer test this weekend. I expect the difference to be some where between "stuff all" and insignificant.

Gordon
 
Back
Top