gavinlg
Veteran
You're basing assumptions upon assumptions upon assumptions.
What I know:
1. Fujifilm have said this camera will have the highest DR of any of their cameras they've made. If it's higher than an s3/s5 it's going to be very good.
2. DXOmark is NOT the be all and end all of camera performance. Their 'test' results don't match real world results, and I have seen this firsthand.
Last edited:
$400? Keep dreaming.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
The sad thing about this camera is that once it hits the shelves and multiple RFFers have it in their hands all this obsessive fun will be over! 
What's next I ask?
What's next I ask?
bigeye
Well-known
Ranchu
Veteran
Okay. (3 years, maybe 2)
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
All this "excitement" reminds me most of the excitement pre-pubescent boys have when they get their first look at a girlie magazine and then let their imaginations take over. The reality is usually far removed from what they wish it or expect it to be.
Wait until you can get your hands on something real and save us the endless speculation.
Wait until you can get your hands on something real and save us the endless speculation.
videogamemaker
Well-known
DXOmark isn't the be all, end all, but it's consistent between sensors, and I trust their methodology more than anyone else on the internet, save myself. I personally haven't seen any real world results in my equipment or borrowed equipment that has gone against it. I don't make purchasing decisions solely on DXOmark, but I like the work they do and find their measurement's interesting. I certainly trust their un-biased measuring tools more than a person's fallible and most likely biased tests. Can you show an example of a measurement they have gotten wrong?
As for point 1, that's what makes me think maybe it's not the d90 sensor. The problem is that the d90 maintains great dynamic range all the way to ISO 3200. Several of these new cameras that have crazy dynamic range at base ISO drop off far too quickly for my tastes. So the x100, if it has a different sensor than the d90, might indeed have 15 stops of DR at iso 100, which would be beautiful, but I want to still have 10 at iso 1600 like the d90 sensor.
I don't care much at all about noise, I'm fine with a grainy image. I want to be able to lift shadows, increase volume via contrast, and see into highlights, even when I need to boost the ISO dial. Greedy? yes. Possible with a few sensors on the market right now? Certainly. I just want to know how it stacks up against those others.
videogamemaker
Well-known
Well, it should remind you of child-like excitement. There is nothing wrong with anticipation and having a bit of fun while waiting for something you want. Far too many adults have killed every aspect of fun in their lives.
As for "saving you from endless speculation" you can do that yourself very easily by not reading this forum till after the launch date. Interesting how that works, no? Unless you're also here because you're excited and want to see if there is new information, in which case you're not only being condescending, but also a hypocrite.
btgc
Veteran
Why they would consider X100 as alternative?
It haven't got impressive 18-55 zoom, and it doesn't look like a serious camera like DSLR does. With DSLR it's possible to use the best lenses on market (even if kit zoom is all one will ever use). We all know those tricks trying to fool potential buyers with fake retro design!
And finally, DSLR has pop-up flash which is better than next-to lens as on X100. Yeah, I've read raised flash is way better! It doesn't matter it's still positioned directly at subject.
When time to shell out good chunk of dollarettes comes, many say - wait, should I? Personally I know feeling how highly desired photographic piece of gear transforms into "just camera/lens". So far I haven't experienced strong buyer's remorse, but you get idea
Arjay
Time Traveller
All of this sounds nice, but is somewhat contradictory in itself:
DR is defined by two limits - saturation (one of the color channels at a value of 255 in an 8-bit file) at the upper end and a certain - excessive - S/N value at the lower end (this is where digital noise overrides any available shadow detail). So, DR is essentially is dependent on the definition of the acceptable S/N ratio at the lower end. This also explains the various and contradicting DR values one can read in different reviews.
Apparently you don't mind noise in the shadows - this makes me think you have little experience with digital cameras: Digital noise looks very much different from analog grain (different distribution in location, size and structure), and once you'll be confronted with it, I'm sure you won't like it. I usually add simulated film grain (noise) in Photoshop whenever I have noisy shadows. It goes without saying that this goes at the expense of shadow detail and thus DR.
Last edited:
X-100
-
gavinlg
Veteran
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:
D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90
I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
Last edited:
videogamemaker
Well-known
It shows them as having higher DR.... wait for it... at iso 100. Even at ISO 200 the pocket cameras already fell behind, and by 800 the rest (save the d90) trail behind as well. This is possible and believable with newer sensors. I shoot with a 5D, trust me. I love the sensor and wouldn't trade it for any of the above cameras purely because of how flat the DR curve is as the ISO goes higher. I still trust their measurements. I had a 40D before the 5D, and I found it to compare to the 5D exactly how their curve displays. similar at iso 100, less at 800 and 1600. This went from "I've experienced the inaccuracy in real life" to "there is no way these inferior cameras are as good as mine". That's the bias that makes me distrust the other review sites, and trust DXOmark's measurements via machine, cold, calculating, uncaring, brand agnostic, machines.
I've only shot with digital, but I've been spoiled by having a 5D. Lifting shadows is not a problem. Pixel peeping might make the noise look ugly, but in print it's fine. For example I have printed this shot (iso 1600) at a size of 90x120 cm on canvas and the noise is inoffensive to me, and I did a fair bit of shadow lifting and highlight adjustment for maximum dynamic range to fit into the readable image.
There is no use mentioning 255 values unless speaking of jpegs. Raw files have far, far more than 255 levels per channel, closer to 64,000 values if I remember correctly. Useless difference till you start adjusting curves and exposure masks, dodging and burning, etc. But since I do lot of that, I care about DR in the raw files.
All I know is that the 5D scores well on DXOmark, and my personal experience using the files at all ISO's lines up with their score. And when comparing the files shot from other, more poorly scoring cameras, I notice their lack of DR, particularly at higher ISOs.
This is neither here nor there, as we don't know what sensor is in the X100, and even if we did, we don't know if their particular implementation is better or worse than Nikon's with the d90. I will have the camera in hand far before DXOmark gets around to testing it, but at that point I'll look at how my experience lines up with their scores. I expect it to line up quite well.
Last edited:
gavinlg
Veteran
Well, not that it will make any difference to your view, but I've owned and used the d300 and have used a work-friends d90 regularly, as well as a g11 powershot, and IMO none of those have the same DR, even at base ISO, even if you compare iso 100 (base iso) on the 5d to iso 200 (base iso on the nikons). It's not a case of bias, otherwise I'd probably be using the other cameras instead. I really value DR.
videogamemaker
Well-known
You're right, it doesn't make a difference. Because it's individual observation with a single body of each, it could be those were faulty samples, it could be you look for more DR in shadows and they have more in the highlights or vice versa, or it could be bias you're unaware of. D'Nile is not just a river in Egypt.
Short of buying or borrowing a copy of every new camera that comes out, one needs to rely on online reviews at least in small part, to determine performance. The DXOmark review site is consistent and professional, and I've yet to see anyone demonstrably prove with examples their inaccuracy. Until I do, it remains far more important to me than someone assuring me it's incorrect from personal anecdotal and unscientific observation. They also work with the raw files only, vs the heavy weighting DPreview gives to jpegs (though they are getting better about showing raw results).
Now for yourself, I absolutely advise you to pay attention to your own opinion more than mine, not that I need to say that, really. I'm just saying I'm going to stick with DXOmark and my own personal observations.
gavinlg
Veteran
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all. If you disagree, thats cool - we're both probably just as excited for this camera to come out, and for the same reasons. My intention wasn't/isn't to call you out on your opinions.
videogamemaker
Well-known
I agree with this post completely.
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
I never said it was out of my budget just that it's at a too high price point for hype. Maybe in fact it will live up too everyones expectations but it's still too high.
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don
_larky
Well-known
All this talk of dynamic this at that, a great photo is a great photo and a little noise in the shadow areas will not change that. Sure, some of us may go 'ooh nasty' but the other 99.99% will still go 'ooh pretty'. There is a point where everyone turns something into something else, and we are all guilty of turning photography in a tech fest based around numbers and not enough shooting great pictures. I'm guilty of this.
So, back to the X100. It excites me because it's going to be a small, well-made, stunning looking camera which will finish my collection. I shoot with my DSLR on the street and never have a problem with people getting ticked off, so imagine how close I can get with something that looks like it came from the 60's. I'm very excited, and anything that gets me back to the streets is perfect in every way as far as I'm concerned, and the shadow noise wont stop me.
So, back to the X100. It excites me because it's going to be a small, well-made, stunning looking camera which will finish my collection. I shoot with my DSLR on the street and never have a problem with people getting ticked off, so imagine how close I can get with something that looks like it came from the 60's. I'm very excited, and anything that gets me back to the streets is perfect in every way as far as I'm concerned, and the shadow noise wont stop me.