Sony pictoral comparison between RX100 and Fuji X100

petemasty

Regular
Location
wiltshire, UK
As I have both cameras i was intrigued as to the comparative image quality. Just done a test shot from the same position, and converted to JPEG with only fill light added in Lightroom. Yes the colour cast is different but thats because the Sony was on DAYLIGHT and the Fuji was on AUTO WB.

Shot at f5.6 ISO 200. The full jpegs were 5.8MB so wouldn't upload onto Flickr. The central crops are 327 kB for Sony, and 245kb for Fuji. Crop sizes are 929 x 395 for FUJI, and 1075 x 483 for SONY. The central point of focus is on the salt and pepper pots to the left. So, take a look and see what you think.

Personally, i think the Sony holds up really well against a camera that is renowned for it's image quality.

do remember, I'm not a camera or photography scientist, it's just a comparison of image quality and there has been no sharpening, or other adjustments from RAW except that mentioned, i.e. fill light.

As I don't know how to post the pics on here the link is

sony RAW central crop | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
fuji RAW central crop | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
 

Julien

Top Veteran
Location
Paris, France
Real Name
Julien
Personally, i think the Sony holds up really well against a camera that is renowned for it's image quality.


f5.6/ISO 200/center crop, are the parameters that yield the least differences between cameras/lenses. So your comparison make sense if you're always shooting in ideal conditions (studio) but if you could do the same tests with f2/ISO 3200/borders crop I'd be more interested in the results.
 

petemasty

Regular
Location
wiltshire, UK
f5.6/ISO 200/center crop, are the parameters that yield the least differences between cameras/lenses. So your comparison make sense if you're always shooting in ideal conditions (studio) but if you could do the same tests with f2/ISO 3200/borders crop I'd be more interested in the results.

F2on the x100 is'notoriously soft, so I reckon the rx100 will beat it hands down. This was the reason I chose f5.6 as it generally gives the best results on the x100 . That said, I will give it a shot this weekend.
 

Tilman Paulin

All-Pro
Location
Vancouver B.C.
Real Name
Tilman
Thanks for this comparison!

I'd also be interested in a corner comparison. (Doesn't have to be ISO 3200 though. If you roll too many test-parameters into one, you might not be able to tell if the differences are caused by the lens or by noise reduction)

cheers!
 

retow

All-Pro
F2on the x100 is'notoriously soft, so I reckon the rx100 will beat it hands down. This was the reason I chose f5.6 as it generally gives the best results on the x100 . That said, I will give it a shot this weekend.

Pictures please. It's soft at close range but not at medium or normal distance. Repeating this heresay false claim doe not make it more true.
 

petemasty

Regular
Location
wiltshire, UK
for what its worth, I'll post two corner crops of each image so you can compare.

Retow,

For your information, and for clarity, the statement i made regarding the softness at f2 is not a repeat of anything I have said in this thread, nor is it a repeat of anything I have ever posted in these forums, it is a statement made by me based on my experiences alone using the Fuji X100. hence it is not a claim i am making, it is a statement of fact based on MY experience.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom