X100 vs D700, M8, Ep1, E5 pics

[nugat]

Only one scene in full sun (got the X100 couple of hours ago). All cameras at standard jpeg presets (however X100 is at "Astia" because as Barjohn noticed Astia is actually Provia which is standard--a mixup bug in the menu, when you select Provia it is soft-really Astia). Apertures f4, f5.6 anf f8 depending on format. Focus on the first yellow flowers in the pot. All Exifs embeded.
Until LR3 serves Fuji .raf I do not undertake any comparisons here.

I added full size original here: just click "original" in the picture title

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...45&refresh=944

[nugat]

and crops now...

I added full size originals here: just click "original" in the picture title.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...45&refresh=944

[Terry]

Try and shoot some neutral without Provia - I find the neutral colors very pleasing as well.

[bradhusick]

I prefer the edge to edge consistency of the M8 file.

[woodyspedden]

Brad

I would agree with your statement but you are comparing apples and oranges!

It would be better to compare the X1 with the X100 if you want to compare Leica and Fuji.

JMHO

Woody

[nugat]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

Try and shoot some neutral without Provia - I find the neutral colors very pleasing as well.

How do you actually do that? I have the impression that "standard" is actually second-named "Provia" (which we know is buggy and actually reversed with "soft-ASTIA", so to get "standard" I use ASTIA).
Sorry, didn't fully read the manual yet....

[nugat]

I added full size JPEGS (all limited to 3MB) here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...45&refresh=944

Just click "original" in the picture title.

[Terry]

Originally Posted by nugat

How do you actually do that? I have the impression that "standard" is actually second-named "Provia" (which we know is buggy and actually reversed with "soft-ASTIA", so to get "standard" I use ASTIA).
Sorry, didn't fully read the manual yet....

OK my bad was thinking Velvia. I have a working RAW converter so ignore me. I just left all the jpeg settings as standard and I liked the colors. The colors on yours seem a bit more saturated than what I was seeing which makes sense if you think I was using Astia. Not sure if the provia Astia setting is reversed for in camera jpeg or when you convert a RAW to jpeg in camera manually. Would be good to get clarification.

[Paratom]

The Oly and Fuji seem to render dogs much better than the others

[nugat]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

OK my bad was thinking Velvia. I have a working RAW converter so ignore me. I just left all the jpeg settings as standard and I liked the colors. The colors on yours seem a bit more saturated than what I was seeing which makes sense if you think I was using Astia. Not sure if the provia Astia setting is reversed for in camera jpeg or when you convert a RAW to jpeg in camera manually. Would be good to get clarification.

For sure the positions ASTIA (soft) and PROVIA (std) are buggy and in fact reversed.
When you currently select PROVIA jpg it is soft, just as ASTIA should be. When you select ASTIA it is more saturated just as PROVIA should be, but not as much as VELVIA, which seems correct now.

[nugat]

Originally Posted by bradhusick

I prefer the edge to edge consistency of the M8 file.

ooops...the pic I orignally selected for M8 was too close a framing, so a higher detail resolution might have resulted (I noticed on the licence plate in the right top corner). As much as I like Leica, the Summilux was not that much better than Zuiko SHG in all my previous tests. Now it's ok and back to normal. Slight advantage Leica in the corner.

[Paratom]

I think its hard to judge color based on presets.
In my experience the Nikon WB set to sunny draws much different than for example the M8/M9 (which supplys colder color when set to sunny than the Nikon).
I would recommend to use custom WB if you want to compare colors.

Just from how they look in your comparison I like the E5 image best, even if it may come out a little warm.
Fuji looks somewhat artificial to me, The Nikon and M8 to cold (more a wb thing which could be fixed) and the EP1 also looks a little artificial to me.

[nugat]

Originally Posted by t_streng

I think its hard to judge color based on presets.
In my experience the Nikon WB set to sunny draws much different than for example the M8/M9 (which supplys colder color when set to sunny than the Nikon).
I would recommend to use custom WB if you want to compare colors.

Just from how they look in your comparison I like the E5 image best, even if it may come out a little warm.
Fuji looks somewhat artificial to me, The Nikon and M8 to cold (more a wb thing which could be fixed) and the EP1 also looks a little artificial to me.

Actually I would not judge colors from jpegs either. But can't compare raws yet (all in LR3 anyway). This little game is more about everything else than color rendition. But believe me, what you see (especially when you download full jpegs from dpreview) is very close to what I am seeing. From coldest to warmest they are:
Nikon, M8, Fuji, E5, EP1.
But this is more about the camera jpeg engine and auto WB than anything else. Later today I'll try to process raws, Fuji in attached Silkypix, and will post results.

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by t_streng

I think its hard to judge color based on presets.
In my experience the Nikon WB set to sunny draws much different than for example the M8/M9 (which supplys colder color when set to sunny than the Nikon).
I would recommend to use custom WB if you want to compare colors.

Just from how they look in your comparison I like the E5 image best, even if it may come out a little warm.
Fuji looks somewhat artificial to me, The Nikon and M8 to cold (more a wb thing which could be fixed) and the EP1 also looks a little artificial to me.

This is exactly the reason why I switched from Nikon to Olympus E5

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by nugat

Actually I would not judge colors from jpegs either. But can't compare raws yet (all in LR3 anyway). This little game is more about everything else than color rendition. But believe me, what you see (especially when you download full jpegs from dpreview) is very close to what I am seeing. From coldest to warmest they are:
Nikon, M8, Fuji, E5, EP1.
But this is more about the camera jpeg engine and auto WB than anything else. Later today I'll try to process raws, Fuji in attached Silkypix, and will post results.

After all the X100 results are not too bad

[Paratom]

Originally Posted by ptomsu

This is exactly the reason why I switched from Nikon to Olympus E5

for the good jpeg engine? just kidding

[nugat]

Finally processed raws. X100 in the horrible Finepix Viewer Raw Converter, the rest in LR3. In fact the Fuji soft is so bad that OOC jpegs offer slightly better resolution--or I could not get it to work properly. I set WB, tweaked exposition. All other standard.
Based on this one scene/setup (full sun behind, landscape, f4-f8 based on format, base ISO), my ranking is:
1) E5
2)M8, D700
3) EP1, X100

You can find the pics here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=38304681

Full 7-8MB jpegs can be downloaded by clicking "original" in the pics titles.
Strongly recommended for any meaningful comparisons.

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by t_streng

for the good jpeg engine? just kidding

For the very weak AA filter and the 2/14-35 and 2/35-100.

I never use JPEG OOC and also tried from the E5 and was not happy. But ORF rocks, especially when processed in C1 Pro.

[nugat]

Yesterday LR3.4 was released that opens X100 rafs.
Comparing to Finepix it's day and night.
Detail is at OOC jpeg level, color is better.

[nugat]

As a matter of record. At the linked dpreview address they are in full glory 11-15MB "originals" tweaked each under a minute to look best.