Canon 5D Mark II Vs. Canon 7D Vs. Fujifilm X100 - 100% Crops.

Yeah... sadly, Canon's AWB (specifically for indoors) has seemingly been the worst of the lot and that doesn't look like it's going to change... ever.

jwcdds wrote in post #12176739
Yeah... sadly, Canon's AWB (specifically for indoors) has seemingly been the worst of the lot and that doesn't look like it's going to change... ever.

I agree with you there Julian. It's been all over the map and I need to bring an Xrite passport with me at all times during paid gigs just to make the WB perfect! It's quite ridiculous.

The crops look much tighter on the 5d and 7d. They look almost double (or is it 1.6 )by eyeballing it. So I have 2 questions:

1. Does the "23mm" include the crop factor. In other words, is the lens really a 14mm and fugi is calling it a 23mm "FF equivalent"? If not, then why the difference in the image crops?

2. Wouldn't the tighter crops of the dslrs "magnify" any noise, thus making it an unfair comparison?

I know you said that your test is not scientific, but it seems to me you should at least try to maintain the same crop on all 3 images.

sharrowm wrote in post #12176776
The crops look much tighter on the 5d and 7d. They look almost double (or is it 1.6 )by eyeballing it. So I have 2 questions:

1. Does the "23mm" include the crop factor. In other words, is the lens really a 14mm and fugi is calling it a 23mm "FF equivalent"? If not, then why the difference in the image crops?

2. Wouldn't the tighter crops of the dslrs "magnify" any noise, thus making it an unfair comparison?

I know you said that your test is not scientific, but it seems to me you should at least try to maintain the same crop on all 3 images.

I believe the Fuji uses a Sony(?) sensor, so it's likely a 1.5x crop. The main difference here is that it is only 12mp, so I believe that is why there is such a big difference in FoV with the set resolution crops.

I believe all lenses are labeled properly (and not as its "equivalent" value). For instance, if you look at any other tiny-sensor P&S, the lenses are like 7.1mm-20mm, etc... but when you factor in the enormous "crop factor" value, they end up being like 35mm-etc...

Pretty impressive. I find it interesting that Fuji, who is not known for it's high ISO's, is able to produce something that can even compare to the 5d II and possibly beat it!

Has the technology changed that much in 2 1/2 years? Or does it go back to the pixel size/MP war? Or a combination of both? If the 7d were 12-14mp.. Would it be that much better?

Does fujifilm even have 1/10 the knowledge, experience, R&D of Canon when it comes to sensor development? Or are they just smart enough to keep the megapixels at a normal level?

sharrowm wrote in post #12176776
The crops look much tighter on the 5d and 7d. They look almost double (or is it 1.6 )by eyeballing it. So I have 2 questions:

1. Does the "23mm" include the crop factor. In other words, is the lens really a 14mm and fugi is calling it a 23mm "FF equivalent"? If not, then why the difference in the image crops?

All of the cameras and lenses have a 35mm Equivalent
5D Mark II + 35L = 35mm FL
Fujifilm X100 + 23mm f2 (fixed lens) = 34.5mm FL
Canon 7D + 24L = 38.4mm FL

the difference in crops that you see is based on the megapixels. The 5D Mark II leads at 21mp, the 7D follows at 18mp and the Fujifilm is last at 12.8mp.

sharrowm wrote in post #12176776
2. Wouldn't the tighter crops of the dslrs "magnify" any noise, thus making it an unfair comparison?

I know you said that your test is not scientific, but it seems to me you should at least try to maintain the same crop on all 3 images.

tighter crops don't magnify the noise because what you see in the samples are at the pixel level so that everyone is on the same playing field. Now there was talk earlier that the 5D Mark II and the 7D should be down resolved to 12.8mp to match the X100. It is something that I have to look into after I finish the finals as this takes about an hour or two to complete.

Marloon wrote in post #12176822
All of the cameras and lenses have a 35mm Equivalent
5D Mark II + 35L = 35mm FL
Fujifilm X100 + 23mm f2 (fixed lens) = 34.5mm FL
Canon 7D + 24L = 38.4mm FL

the difference in crops that you see is based on the megapixels. The 5D Mark II leads at 21mp, the 7D follows at 18mp and the Fujifilm is last at 12.8mp.

I know you said that your test is not scientific, but it seems to me you should at least try to maintain the same crop on all 3 images.

tighter crops don't magnify the noise because what you see in the samples are at the pixel level so that everyone is on the same playing field. Now there was talk earlier that the 5D Mark II and the 7D should be down resolved to 12.8mp to match the X100. It is something that I have to look into after I finish the finals as this takes about an hour or two to complete.

Hmm...well, maybe I'm thinking about this wrong, but it seems to me that the only thing that counts in the end is the final image (regardless of the number of pixels), and you are in effect, comparing different images (crops). I would love to see the 3 images side by side with the identical FOV.

Drozz119 wrote in post #12176814
Pretty impressive. I find it interesting that Fuji, who is not known for it's high ISO's, is able to produce something that can even compare to the 5d II and possibly beat it!

Has the technology changed that much in 2 1/2 years? Or does it go back to the pixel size/MP war? Or a combination of both? If the 7d were 12-14mp.. Would it be that much better?

Does fujifilm even have 1/10 the knowledge, experience, R&D of Canon when it comes to sensor development? Or are they just smart enough to keep the megapixels at a normal level?

I heard a rumour that X100 has the same Sony sensor as Nikon D90. Don't know if it's true or not, but that would explain the good low-light image quality. For P&S cameras, Fuji has two famous and very good in lowlight, F10 and F31 both using CCD sensors. Fuji did not compete in the megapixel-race back then either.

http://www.dpreview.co​m/reviews/fujifilmf10z​oom/
http://www.dpreview.co​m/reviews/fujifilmf31f​d/

Look at the comparison with Nikon D50 having 5x larger sensor size.

http://www.dpreview.co​m …/fujifilmf31fd/​page15.asp

So I would say Fuji is pretty good at handling high ISO.

sharrowm wrote in post #12176925
Hmm...well, maybe I'm thinking about this wrong, but it seems to me that the only thing that counts in the end is the final image (regardless of the number of pixels), and you are in effect, comparing different images (crops). I would love to see the 3 images side by side with the identical FOV.

Well, Marlon's going to find some time to resize after his finals so we'll get to see whether that makes any difference.

It appears to me that Fuji's default *.jpg settings has more sharpness/contrast SOOC. But also (and this could be the much-touted Sony sensor improvement), the shadows are brighter than that of both 5D2 & 7D. The white fabric appears higher in value (brighter). Now both the 7D and X100 were shot at f/4. So I can only assume that the same shutter speeds were used.

But of course with the 5D2 @ f/6.3, that will change the exposure setting altogether. Meh, but now we're just nitpicking. Let's enjoy the X100 for what it is. (And when the RAW converters are updated, I can then trouble Marlon again. :lol

interesting comparison, thanks. Still, looking forward to seeing same output size (upsizing or downsizing) images.
Also, the x100 image pretty much looks like it was run through a similar workflow of NR that I use for my 7D images. Remove noise first then sharpen the edges while leaving the uniform areas "soft".

Simply amazing results from a pocket camera. Gone are the days you have to compromise image quality when traveling light.

Thanks Marlon for all your work here. Much appreciated.

Hogloff wrote in post #12178230
Simply amazing results from a pocket camera. Gone are the days you have to compromise image quality when traveling light..

Now if only they had interchangeable lenses so you wouldn't have to compromise everything else.

Hardcore wrote in post #12178611
Now if only they had interchangeable lenses so you wouldn't have to compromise everything else.

Nothing wrong with a fixed lens. The 35mm f2 equivalent is a pretty sweet range. I shoot my fuji 6x9 without any issues and it is a fixed lens.

Fuji most likely optimized the sensor around that fixed lens making a very nice combination.

The Fugi has more contrast to meter off of, make it the same or flush it down the toilet. Obviously trying to give fugi some edge here. Fan boy!!!!!

you need to upsize the x100 and 7d image to match the 5d2 or, downsize the 5d2 and 7d image to match the x100.