Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Fuji vs Nikon  (Read 19269 times)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2014, 10:40:06 PM »

Getting closer to consistency here.
Not yet there as the temperature was low (~ 21F with direct effects on my judgement) and family was catching up.

Shot taken roughly at 27mm on full frame.
On the Nikon I set the exposure manually, the other did what they wanted (in aperture priority).

Nikon D750 with 24-120 at ~ 24mm** (I thought I did 27 but that's what the metadata says?!), F11, ISO 640, 1/50 with VR enabled.
Fujifilm XT-1 with 10-24 at ~ 18mm, F8, ISO 200, 1/30 with VR enabled.
Fujifilm XE-1 with 18-55 at ~ 18mm, F8, ISO 400, 1/30 with VR enabled.

Handheld, one after another. Not sure why XE-1 chose a different ISO than XT-1, maybe had a little less sky in the shot.
Framing similar. Focus was on the green spruce (or whatever it is). Subject pretty uninspiring but that's what I had.
Fuji sharpened with detail at 100, amount at 39, masking at 10. The Nikon was pushed until I saw crunchiness.

PS. as a side note the D750 had more dynamic range than the Fujis
« Last Edit: December 30, 2014, 10:44:14 PM by armand »
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #21 on: December 30, 2014, 10:41:11 PM »

XT-1 vs D750
10-24 vs 24-120

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #22 on: December 30, 2014, 10:42:01 PM »

X-E1 vs D750
18-55 vs 24-120

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2014, 10:42:51 PM »

X-T1 vs X-E1
10-24 vs 18-55

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #24 on: December 31, 2014, 03:43:52 AM »

This sort of test is very useful to conduct for oneself. While I understand the impulse to help others by publishing the results, that generally doesn't work too well on the internet. (Sorry, armand!)

I too find this comparison meaningless. Comparing two images from different cameras and lenses with images that have been processed to jpeg doesn't work. Unless one of the combinations is massively superior then it is a waste of time? :(

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1707
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2014, 08:21:54 AM »

stamper, you're misunderstanding me. I don't find armand's test meaningless at all. I fully understand what he's done and why. My statement is that this sort of test is very helpful for oneself but doesn't help others because they won't believe the results for various reasons (see most every post above for a variety of reasons, including your own.)

armand, I like your avatar, is that new? :)
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. Images: Work photos. Personal photos.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #26 on: December 31, 2014, 09:04:56 AM »

stamper, you're misunderstanding me. I don't find armand's test meaningless at all. I fully understand what he's done and why. My statement is that this sort of test is very helpful for oneself but doesn't help others because they won't believe the results for various reasons (see most every post above for a variety of reasons, including your own.)

armand, I like your avatar, is that new? :)

That was the thrust of my post.

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1707
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #27 on: December 31, 2014, 09:53:14 AM »

That was the thrust of my post.

Ah, okay. Sorry for any misunderstanding.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. Images: Work photos. Personal photos.

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1638
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #28 on: December 31, 2014, 01:41:16 PM »

Hello Armand,

sorry but i do not think this test is well done -sorry. Testing has to be done carefully or it has no meaning.
When i test something i try to rule out all other parameters that matter.

so ..
1 shoot raw- use the same raw converter
2 use a tripod and focus in liveview exact- use a remote to trigger ( use electronic first curtain if possible0
3 choose the same ISO and colortemperature , optimum sharpening .. etc etc..

(I agree that at f8 both lenses should do well- the Fuji will have more DOF so choose 5.6 maybe to compare)

In your first example the colours of the leaves from the fuji look over the top on my computer - they look very nice ,but not natural.








Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #29 on: December 31, 2014, 02:55:34 PM »

Hello Armand,

sorry but i do not think this test is well done -sorry. Testing has to be done carefully or it has no meaning.
When i test something i try to rule out all other parameters that matter.

so ..
1 shoot raw- use the same raw converter
2 use a tripod and focus in liveview exact- use a remote to trigger ( use electronic first curtain if possible0
3 choose the same ISO and colortemperature , optimum sharpening .. etc etc..

(I agree that at f8 both lenses should do well- the Fuji will have more DOF so choose 5.6 maybe to compare)

In your first example the colours of the leaves from the fuji look over the top on my computer - they look very nice ,but not natural.










Yes it's not perfect but I don't think people will be happy no matter how I do it.
I'm not interested in best quality in the best possible conditions, I'm not shooting in lab conditions, therefore handheld it is.
I chose different aperture (8 vs 11 btw) so to equalize DOF and exposure times will be different. If anything Nikon is a faster exposure time so it should have an advantage. ISO 640 shouldn't impair quality that much.
They both are processed in LR to the best of my ability, again real life and the Fuji should have a disadvantage sharpness wise.

In the first comparison I was not aiming for accuracy with the Fuji version but more for appealing.

I posted these results as I was surprised about the performance of Fuji lens vs Nikon and to also prove a point I made earlier in another post, that for suboptimal conditions where you have to shoot handheld above base ISO the Fuji is comparable as long as you don't need to freeze action.
That stupid mirror slap/ shutter shock in the Nikon is too much.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #30 on: December 31, 2014, 02:56:32 PM »

For the record I will try also on a tripod and see how things are working.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #31 on: January 01, 2015, 05:04:47 AM »

armand, there are members on the forum who don't accept the DXO tests which means you are facing an uphill struggle. But if you get enjoyment from pursuing this then good luck. :)

AFairley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1486
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #32 on: January 01, 2015, 12:59:59 PM »

I don't see anything wrong with Armand's testing methodology.  Who cares what outperforms what in the lab at the end of the day except for the purposes of benchmarking?  The important thing is what works best for you with your shooting technique, with your normal presentation.  If your technique is suboptimal you may or may not want to improve it (or, for that matter may not be able to improve it, i.e., shooting street on a tripod with mirror lock up could be a touch challenging) but that's a different can of worms.
Logged

Hulyss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
    • H.Bowman
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #33 on: January 01, 2015, 04:59:29 PM »

I was following a bit the crowd (many won't admit it) and jumped in the XT-1 story. Sold some gear, got the XT-1 and some lenses, good lenses. I'm happy that I sold the whole system today.

Don't get me wrong, it is a very good camera, very capable but at the end, I was utterly sad shooting with it. That's the word, sad. Nothing to compare against pro Nikon body like D700 or 8xx.

I sold my D700 some times ago to a friend and this friend knew my sadness with my brand new fragile hype system. This very friend offered me my D700 for Christmas and it was just emotional :D Yes, I do better photos with my Nikon gear than with any other gear because I feel comfortable. My Nikon is my tool, I can put it on rocks while climbing a cliff, I can put it on the floor while pissing in the forest, even under the rain, and yet, I feel comfortable. I was enable to do that with the XT-1.

So for me, the XT-1 and fuji lens system, even if LuLa praise it, isn't a comfortable system to shoot at all compared to Nikon High DSLR. It is just a condensate of technology in a very tiny and unergonomic body (compared again to the D700 or the D810 that I rent some times).

Fuji lenses are flawless but was a dust magnet, the worst I ever seen. You know what I'm speaking about, those tiny white spot on the lens barrel, those long minutes of cleaning with the brush of the lens pen :p

With Nikon : come back from outdoor >> quick inspection >> stored till next expedition.

Speaking about IQ ... herr ... what the hell is IQ ?? I do quality pictures with whatever gear I feel comfortable shooting with. This is as subjective as the bokeh. 
Logged
Kind Regards -  Hulyss Bowman | hulyssbowman.com |

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #34 on: January 01, 2015, 10:28:12 PM »

I have both systems now and I use them together.

The key word in what you said above is "tiny". With this will come some of the advantages and some of the disadvantages (most of your disadvantages at least).
I can get get a significantly smaller system which doesn't lose much in terms of image quality but will make you work harder at times. And the Nikon still has things that the Fuji can't touch. When I don't need those things and maximum image quality is not needed I tend to carry the Fuji.

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1100
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #35 on: January 02, 2015, 07:56:46 PM »

Quote
I'm happy that I sold the whole system today.

 ;D  Hulyss... You go through more camera systems with more "joy of the moment" than most of us!  I'm beginning to not know what to make of your wildly varying comments!  LOL

Rand
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2133
    • Photos
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #36 on: January 02, 2015, 08:43:43 PM »

Another thought of going small: the D750 is also missing some buttons compared to the bigger bodies.

2 things missing even compared to my D90:
- the autofocus button (which my D90 has on the top right hand plate) has been moved to the focus switch
- you need the rear screen to change the flash mode (because the top LCD is too small to show it)

Hulyss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
    • H.Bowman
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #37 on: January 03, 2015, 07:04:07 AM »

;D  Hulyss... You go through more camera systems with more "joy of the moment" than most of us!  I'm beginning to not know what to make of your wildly varying comments!  LOL

Rand

Yes you are right, but it stay reasonable. I have the opportunity to test a lot of different materials and I'm seeking good gear, good bang for the bucks. Spoiled by Sigma (not any more with there new hybrid bayer sensors...), spoiled by Nikon with the D700 line (not any more because I only need 16 MP in a good old D700 body), spoiled by fuji (but not willing to put that much money in a consumer APS-C system)... Fuji prices are gonna increase and already increased. The more they feel comfortable, the more they charge.

I will never buy this stupid Df or this sub par D750 because I often use 1/8000. Same goes for Sony gear... how ppl can love those wonder boxes after having used a D810 ? (I'm using an A7r once in a while).I'm a photographer who just hate gear because it is often more close to the scam than utility. So I'm testing and waiting. There is no system at the moment who really excite me.

I want a reliable tool, a brand who just not surf on marketing jedi mind-tricks but provide a Pro/semi Pro camera system you can keep for at least 5 or 6 years, very rugged and rigid, with reasonable amount of pixels.

The world need more brands. Hope some ppl will have the guts to do it. A camera made by professionals for professionals, without any refinement to please the metrosexual crowd or whatever fashion of the moment (and not at one billion dollars per unit ...). 
Logged
Kind Regards -  Hulyss Bowman | hulyssbowman.com |

JV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 996
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #38 on: January 03, 2015, 08:03:11 AM »

Fuji prices are gonna increase and already increased. The more they feel comfortable, the more they charge.

I would be surprised.  I believe 2015 will be the year of Sony and Fuji and Olympus will face increased price pressure from Sony.

Given that the full frame Sony a7II "only" costs $1,700 and the APS-C sensor based Fuji X-T1 $1,300 the margin for price increase for Fuji is relatively small.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 08:06:27 AM by JV »
Logged

barryfitzgerald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
Re: Fuji vs Nikon
« Reply #39 on: January 03, 2015, 08:28:02 AM »

I would be surprised.  I believe 2015 will be the year of Sony and Fuji and Olympus will face increased price pressure from Sony.

Given that the full frame Sony a7II "only" costs $1,700 and the APS-C sensor based Fuji X-T1 $1,300 the margin for price increase for Fuji is relatively small.


I would tend to agree here I think Fuji need to look again at some of their prices, saying that they are well known for some big discount bargains (current blowout XE-1 price is superb) as models get older they drop significantly and Fuji have always done this. I'm not complaining I've picked up some stonking bargains (X10 cost me a fraction of it's release price)

A more notable problem is lens prices they need looking at, Sony's E mount prices are also quite awful it's a disincentive for anyone considering moving to the system unless they bring many of their DSLR lenses with adapters. But then makers are losing out on lens sales big time. It's a very strange situation to be in ILC's tempt with adapters but not so much native lenses and system.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up