Studio scene comparison (JPEG)
This is an image in the comparison of our
standard Studio taken from the same tripod position. Lighting: daylight
simulation, > 98% CRI. Crops are at 100%. Ambient temperature was around
22°C (~ 72°F).
Note: This
page highlights our new interactive studio image comparison. Click here to know
more.
The
X-E1 creates exceptional results at low ISO
Like its sibling model of the X-Pro1, the
X-E1 creates exceptional results at low ISO, offering the sharper,
more-detailed results than Bayer cameras with the same equivalent number of
pixels, with a natural color performance. As you go up according to the ISO
standard scale, fine detail is retained very well. In our well-lit studio
scene, there is not almost any obvious difference between ISO 100 and 800.
Overcoming this, detail gradually decreases and noise increases, but even
standard ISO 3200 also provides noticeably high quality.
Studio scene comparison (JPEG High ISO)
At
ISO 6400, the output of the X-E1 starts to have the obvious problems.
At ISO 6400, the output of the X-E1 starts
to have the obvious problems, but the Fujifilm is still one of the APS-C
cameras, which performs best. The first two ISOs (which are only available in
the JPEG format) are not really good. The colors are saturated and detail is
dirty. These settings should be possible to be reserved for smaller output
formats.
Studio scene comparison (Raw)
This is our standard studio scene
comparison image taken from the same tripod position. Lighting: daylight
simulation,> 98% CRI. Crops are at 100%. Ambient temperature was around 22 °
C (~ 72 ° F).
For better quality display cases for
comparison we also shot our studio scene in RAW mode with each camera and converted
it by using Adobe Camera Raw. Since Adobe Camera Raw applies different levels
of sharpening to different cameras (this confirmed) we use the following
activity streams for these conversions:
·
Download the RAW file into Adobe Camera RAW
(Auto mode disabled)
·
Set 'No Sharpness' configuration, all of the
other settings default
·
Open the file in Photoshop
·
Apply an Unsharp mask: 100%, Radius 0.6,
Threshold 0
·
Save as a file of JPEG quality 11 for display
and download.
Using our
criteria, with noise reduction in Adobe Camera Raw settings to a minimum, the
X-E1’s images look quite different from the Bayer sensor cameras’, and
especially display much lower chroma noise. This means that direct comparisons
should be treated with caution, in effect, the de-mosaicing algorithms required
by the X-Trans CMOS sensor consists of a level of chroma NR. There was ACR 7.4
earlier, Adobe's support for the X-E1’s Raw files was not terribly powerful and
gave artifacts in the areas of fine detail, but ACR 7.4 deals with this problem
and as you are able to see, the image quality of the X-E1 in Raw mode is deadly
good. A lot of detail is exactly handled up to 6400 ISO, and noise is well
controlled. Low frequency chroma noise starts to turn into clear in the dark
areas at ISO 3200, and only creeps into midtones at ISO 6400, but even at this
moment, it is only really worth noting in the range of simple tone, when
inspecting at the close distance. With all disabled sharpening ACR, ACR 7.4
gives slightly less sharp results than 7.3, a little crisp, but a sophisticated
application of Unsharp Mask is enough for things to be visibly nice.
The
images of the X-E1 look quite different from those from the camera sensor
Bayer.
Conclusion
Strong points
·
The camera’s design is so unique that makes you
want to take photos.
·
JPEG is excellent. There is less need to shoot
raw most of the time.
·
Scale and AWB system are reliable. The colors
are good (with the "movie mode" option)
·
Exposure control dial allows checking the
settings easily by glancing at the top floor, especially with the fixed lens.
·
Image quality is impressive at all of the ISO
settings - good resolution and low noise
·
Built-in flash is handy to cover illumination in
one click
·
Film Simulation offers quick access to the
different color modes and the black and white filters.
·
Using the electronic viewfinder simplifies the
interface while maintaining most important features.
·
Quick menu offers quick access to most digital
controllers that are not included in the dials or buttons
·
Integrating supports the degree when shooting
landscapes
·
Bracketing modes are different to be easy to set
up via the Drive button.
·
relatively quiet shutter
·
Excellent Fixed Lenses are available
The
camera’s design is so unique that makes you want to take photos.
Weak points
·
The level of implementation is not always as
accurate as we’d expect.
·
AF is relatively slow that makes shooting the
children’s images more difficult.
·
Frame speed in continuous shooting mode is not
entirely consistent.
·
The camera disables RAW capture without warning
in some of the bracketing modes.
·
LCD rear screen resolution is relatively low
compared to cameras in the same generation.
·
The panorama mode can lead to the image strip in
panning tone.
·
Automatic ISO often choose the extensively slow
shutter speed (which is especially problematic with longer fixed lens)
·
The minimum controls are available in video
modes.
·
Continuous control modes save different files
with different names, place them at the bottom.
·
The large and heavy composition will not fit
everyone.
General conclusion
There are so many things to say about the
shape and functions and there is no doubt about Fujifilm X camera series that
creates certain reactions from those who love both photography and
well-structured applications. The great thing about the X series’ cameras and
lenses is that they are not only like the old photographic tools, but also they
successfully integrate digital controllers and something that is similar. In
addition, the same old-type dials is a really great way to help for concepts
such as shutter speed and aperture, the two main elements of photography that a
person has to learn to use the camera effectively.
Those who understand the casual concepts
have no problem to understand the numbers on an LCD, but those who are learning
can benefit from seeing the parameters set in a linear way, and in fact, we
still find it beneficial from rotating buttons to adjust the aperture, as we
can do with the X-E1. As for new users, how to rotate it surrounding lens is
completely different from to rotate the shutter speed surrounding the camera
body.
When
using the fixed XF lenses, image shooting interface elements in the right side
of the front and clearly, in the shape of a physical dial. Photography students
would do well to fix a fixed lens for this reason (and other reasons). Users
who use the lens will have to pay attention to the numbers on the LCD screen.
But that's not all Fujifilm did right with
the X-series cameras. The layout of their simple buttons also makes accessing common
functions more convenient. The important functions such as Drive mode, Exposure
and autofocus are dedicated to three buttons on the left-side of LCD - a good
place to adjust each setting. First, a button for Drive mode seems unnatural
compared to a dial, but including quick access into the bracketing mode of the
Fujifilm that makes them even more useful. The Quick Menu allows access to
almost all the other important adjustments that the average still photographers
will want to do, including ISO, resolution and aspect ratio. Only one similar
control needs to be fixed: Exposure Compensation dial is slightly loose, which
can be inadvertently rotated, both in the hand and when being carried around or
put in and taken out of a camera bag.
Of course, the problem is video. Although
the X-E1's design principle is based on offering you all the direct control you
may need, this does not apply to video, which generally seems thorough as it is
in the X-Pro1 and X100. For now, the X series does simply not rival its peers
in terms of video functions.
Fujifilm
FinePix X100
It is as impressive as the Hybrid
Viewfinder on the other cameras in the X-series; the electronic viewfinder of
the X-E1 is great. Compared the X-Pro1’s viewfinder in the electronic mode, the
X-E1 provides a higher resolution and better image, but of course it cannot
pull off the impressive tricks of the X-Pro1 when switching to an optical view
for the times you want a real "window" on the world in front of your
lens. The X-E1’s EVF cannot take the place of the X-Pro1’s OVF but if you do
not really need or want an optical viewfinder, the X-E1 is obviously a better
option than the X-Pro1, thanks to the superior EVF and lower general cost.
