Fuji ISO improvements of the X100s?

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
In my experience, its a stop or nearly a stop better. The X100 was very good at ISO 3200 and was useable but pretty rough at 6400. The X-Pro, X-E1, and X100s, with the X-Trans sensor are all quite good at 6400 and sort of useable but rough at 12,800 (which isn't a native ISO - its a jpeg only option). There's a question of how these ISO values compare to other cameras, but clearly they're pretty comparable between the X100 and newer X-Trans Fujis.

So, I'd say about a stop, give or take.

-Ray
 

Argus

New Member
Apr 13, 2013
1
In my experience, its a stop or nearly a stop better. The X100 was very good at ISO 3200 and was useable but pretty rough at 6400. The X-Pro, X-E1, and X100s, with the X-Trans sensor are all quite good at 6400 and sort of useable but rough at 12,800 (which isn't a native ISO - its a jpeg only option). There's a question of how these ISO values compare to other cameras, but clearly they're pretty comparable between the X100 and newer X-Trans Fujis.

So, I'd say about a stop, give or take.

-Ray
I find X100S to underexpose up to 2/3 stop compared to X100 with equal ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Taking that into account, I am not sure how much improvement X100S is in terms if image quality. It also looks as X100S has more aggressive NR than X100. I have just compared up to ISO 3200.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
I find X100S to underexpose up to 2/3 stop compared to X100 with equal ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Taking that into account, I am not sure how much improvement X100S is in terms if image quality. It also looks as X100S has more aggressive NR than X100. I have just compared up to ISO 3200.
That's interesting. We had a recent discussion of Fuji ISO inflation and I'd seen it with the X-Pro and (to a slightly greater extent with the X100s). I never noticed anything that gave me any reason to do any comparisons when I had the X100, but given that it was a Bayer sensor, maybe the changes in the way it exposes at a given ISO started with the X-Trans sensor?

-Ray
 

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
123
Houston, Texas
Jack
Dave, to my eyes, the X100S appears to have a slight edge over the X100 in high ISO. But the X100's files sharpen up better in Lightroom than the X100S'.
 

Argus

New Member
Apr 13, 2013
1
That's interesting. We had a recent discussion of Fuji ISO inflation and I'd seen it with the X-Pro and (to a slightly greater extent with the X100s). I never noticed anything that gave me any reason to do any comparisons when I had the X100, but given that it was a Bayer sensor, maybe the changes in the way it exposes at a given ISO started with the X-Trans sensor?

-Ray
Hi Ray,

I acutally haven't compared the ISO sensitivity between the X100/X100S and the X-Pro1. It is kinda odd as these ISO differencies interest me. However I have compared the X100 and X-Pro1/XF 35mm with 5DII/5DIII , 35L and 50L. At the moment I cannot say if there is any difference between the X100S and X-E1/X-Pro1 regarding the ISO.

There is a very good review with comparison between the X-E1 and 5DIII. I think it's one of few if not the only one where the difference in ISO sensitivies in mind before the image quality is compared. I'm afraid this might be known to you already but here it goes:

Martin Doppelbauer: Review of the Fujifilm X-E1
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Sep 21, 2010
123
Not too far from Philly
you should be able to figure it out...
Thanks for that link Martin. It appears his findings relative to the Canon were very similar to mine relative to a few other cameras. I raised that in THIS thread. There were some concurring anecdotes but also a fairly good technical discussion that refuted the assertions, at least partially. Based on various factors such as how the cameras expose differently. Its worth a read if you want to dig down further into this. My ultimate conclusion based on a combination of what I've experienced and what I've read is that the Fuji models (at least those with X-Trans sensors) are very good low light cameras, but that they're not much, if any, better than a number of competing models that they initially may have appeared to be notably better than.

-Ray
 

Argus

New Member
Apr 13, 2013
1
Thanks Ray. Interesting thread. It only raises my curiousity whether there is any difference between the X-Trans generation I in X-Pro1/XE-1 and II in X100S regarding higher ISO and the noise reduction, even in RAW? I don't recall posts anywhere complaining about this "plastic" skin effect for X-Pro1/X-E1.
 

ean10775

All-Pro
Feb 13, 2013
88
Cleveland, Ohio
Eric
Thanks Ray. Interesting thread. It only raises my curiousity whether there is any difference between the X-Trans generation I in X-Pro1/XE-1 and II in X100S regarding higher ISO and the noise reduction, even in RAW? I don't recall posts anywhere complaining about this "plastic" skin effect for X-Pro1/X-E1.
I certainly noticed it with my X-E1 in the JPEG files at high ISO
 

bartjeej

Hall of Famer
Nov 12, 2010
124
bart
According to dpreview, the X100's actual sensitivity are about 1/6th EV lower the stated ISO values, which they state is within the tolerance allowed by the ISO specification:
Fujifilm FinePix X100 In-Depth Review: Digital Photography Review

The X-Pro 1 tested 1/3 to 1/2 stop less sensitive than stated ISO values, which is a bigger difference than usual:
Fujifilm X-Pro1 in-depth review: Digital Photography Review
and the same applies to the X-E1:
Fujifilm X-E1: Digital Photography Review

So based on those results, it wouldn't surprise me if the X100S overstates its ISO values by the same amount. I hope they'll have a full review of the X100S and include the same ISO value test, so we can know for sure.

The Olympus OM-D E-M5, for what it's worth, was about 1/3 stop less sensitive than the stated ISO values:
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Review: Digital Photography Review

all the above is based on jpeg files, but apparently that's how ISO is supposed to be measured...
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom