X-T1 with 23mm f1.4 lens |
In
February 2014 I
posted an opinion piece on this blog titled ‘Fuji X-T1, an ergonomiccontrarian view’.
This was based on ergonomic analysis of many cameras
and a discussion of the relative merits of the traditional [aperture
ring+shutter speed dial+exposure compensation dial] control layout versus the
modern [mode dial+control dial] layout.
With respect to the X-T1 the discussion was conceptual in nature.
I recently had the opportunity to borrow an X-T1 from a family member and use it for a
week. It was fitted with the 23mm f1.4
lens and was running Firmware 3.0.
This is the Camera Ergonomics blog so I will concentrate
on ergonomic issues in the next post.
However I will make some observations in this post about
image quality and performance.
Both the photos below were made on a tripod with 2 second timer delay.
Both the photos below were made on a tripod with 2 second timer delay.
FZ1000 |
FZ1000 Crop. Compare this to the X-T1 crop below. Foliage and other details are rendered more clearly without smearing or artefacts. |
X-T1 |
Image
quality This has been
extensively and favourably reviewed elsewhere, however I did note some issues which
I think worthy of note.
Overall the camera does a good job with particularly
low luminance noise levels at high ISO sensitivity settings. It is well suited to indoor use without
flash, which is a good thing because the camera lacks a built in flash.
ISO
Range luminance noise. I tested the X-T1 against my usual camera,
the Panasonic FZ1000.
For my testing the X-T1 was fitted with the quite
large but optically very nice 23mm f1.4 lens which gave good results right from
f1.4. Stopped down a little, images were sharp across the frame.
At low ISO sensitivity setting (200) the X-T1 showed no noise at all. The FZ1000
at ISO 100 had just detectable noise.
At high ISO sensitivity settings the X-T1 easily
outperformed the FZ1000 with a two EV step luminance noise advantage at ISO
6400. Unfortunately the X-T1 does not offer RAW
capture at ISO settings higher than 6400.
Files from the X-T1 at ISO 6400 had about the same
amount of luminance noise as those from the FZ1000 at ISO 1600.
I also noted clear differences between the two cameras
in the character of the luminance grain.
The FZ1000 produces sharp, clearly defined grains,
reminiscent of black and white film of yester year. Grain from the X-T1 is larger and softer in
character, producing images with a less grainy appearance but also slightly less
apparent sharpness.
FZ1000 Chart center |
X-T1 Chart center. Lower resolution than FZ1000 with JPG like appearance in fine detail of RAW files |
Resolution/sharpness (low
ISO sensitivity)
I tested this by photographing subjects with fine
foliage outdoors, several subjects indoors and also my standard test chart
which consists of pages of classified newspaper advertisements on a flat board.
For the test photos I had the camera on a tripod, used
2 second timer delay and directly controlled aperture, shutter speed or sensitivity depending on the
requirements of each test run. I did runs with autofocus, manual focus, mechanical
shutter and E-shutter. I used RAW
capture converted in Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw.
I got some unexpected and puzzling results, some of
which I cannot explain.
* On the test chart
at the same aperture (f3.1) and equivalent focal length the FZ1000 out resolved the X-T1, even at the
edges and corners.
On the chart I have several strips of woven cloth. The
FZ1000 resolved the weave detail clearly but the X-T1 did not.
Considering the FZ1000 has a 16x superzoom lens and
the X-T1 had one of Fuji’s best primes mounted, that was a surprise. The FZ1000
has more pixels of course, which helps, but in the past I have tested 16Mpx
micro four thirds camera/lens combinations which produced better
sharpness/resolution than the Fuji.
Outdoors in general photography the X-T1 delivered
sharper edges and corners. I can’t explain this unless the 23mm f1.4 has a
problem with curvature of the focal plane. But that is not a convincing notion
either because in several frames of the test chart the Fuji images were sharper
in the corners than the edges, presumably due to optical correction of the
curved focal plane.
* In the fine foliage outdoors and in the center of
the test chart the X-T1 files exhibit an odd appearance of fine details. They
are RAW files but they look like oversharpened JPGs, with little double lines
at fine detail edges. Strangely the
edges of the test chart did not show this effect.
* In the outdoor photos with the X-T1 some areas of
green foliage had smeared or smudged details while the same areas from the
FZ1000 held detail. This issue has been
reported elsewhere and is I believe, a
well known problem with Fuji X-Trans files converted in Photoshop (or
Lightroom).
* I have 9 pages of text on my test chart. In several
frames I found that just the bottom row of the pages showed marked unsharpness
with double imaging effect. With other mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras
(MILC) this doubling may be a sign of
shutter shock. But in my experience the
doubling caused by shutter shock affects the whole frame, as you would expect.
I have no idea what might cause the phenomenon to be
confined to just one sector of the image. It was most marked at shutter speeds from 1/10 to ¼ second and was not evident when I used the
E-shutter.
Neither camera nor lens has an image stabiliser.
I did not have the opportunity to pursue this matter
further.
FZ1000 sharp lower section |
X-T1 blurring with doubling of lower section at 1/10 sec, cause not determined by me. |
All I can say is that
1. There are some issues, some of which have been
reported elsewhere, with Fuji X-Trans .RAF files converted by Photoshop Camera RAW and presumably
Lightroom which uses the same process.
2. I saw mysterious local unsharpness in test chart frames
the cause of which I know not. I don’t
even have a hypothesis about it.
Autofocus
Performance It
seems that the arrival of every new camera these days is accompanied by claims
that is has ‘the fastest autofocus in the world’. That was Fuji’s claim when
the X-T1 was released.
Presumably some of the zoom lenses focus more quickly
but with the 23mm f1.4 lens mounted, auto
focus speed is quite pedestrian and
slower than other cameras which I have tested recently.
In addition the AF action is accompanied by a fair bit
of whirring and clunking in the mechanism.
By comparison the FZ1000 focusses so fast and quiet
one is hardly aware that any focus action has taken place. In
most conditions the focus box confirms ‘in focus’ instantly with half press of
the shutter button.
I found (single) autofocus in the X-T1 to be mostly
accurate however I did notice a few ‘just out of focus’ frames indoors and even
outdoors at f5.6.
I did not have a suitable lens with which to test
AF-Continuous performance.
Manual
focus This works
very well with the 23mm f1.4 lens on the X-T1. The manual focus ring on the
lens is smooth and precise.
Fuji’s implementation of peaking is the best I have
yet seen on any camera and with the
Focus Assist button fast, accurate manual focus is possible.
The family member from whom I borrowed the camera has
it set up for manual focus as a first preference for photographing children and
other family members. It works well.
However to note an ergonomic issue I would point out
that holding the camera, rotating the focus ring, looking in the viewfinder (or
at the monitor) then pressing the Focus Assist button while keeping the subject
in frame, requires a bit of juggling.
The problem is that to get onto the Focus Assist
button the right thumb must drop away from the thumb support. This might not
sound like any kind of big deal to read about but in practice the action of
lowering the thumb causes complete release of the hold which the right hand had
on the camera.
This in turn requires the left hand to support
virtually all the mass of the camera and lens while continuing to rotate the
focus ring accurately.
This is not impossible but there are other camera
designs which allow the user to do the job more smoothly, with better control
and without having to juggle the mass of the camera from one hand to the other.
Shot
to shot times
With ‘Image Disp’ in the ‘Screen Setup’ tab in the Setup Menu set to OFF (it took me three days to find that, by the
way) RAW capture and refocussing with AF on every frame, the X-T1 with 23mm
f1.4 shot 10 frames in 7 seconds, giving a shot to shot time of 0.7 seconds.
The FZ1000 made 0.3 seconds shot to shot time in the
same conditions.
Summary
Image quality is generally in line with other current cameras having a 28mm diagonal (APS-C) sensor and is particularly good at high ISO sensitivity settings.
Resolution and detail from RAW files converted with Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw is not outstanding. I read elsewhere that other Raw converters do a better job.
Performance is also generally in line with the
camera’s peers.
Given this good but not remarkable performance what
can account for the numerous rave reviews which the camera has enjoyed ?
Maybe Andy Westlake’s comments in the Digital
Photography Review ‘Shooter’s Experience’ report of April 2014 sum up the
X-T1’s appeal:
There's no doubt that the
X-T1 is a camera that will make many photographers drool. With dials and
switches to operate almost every conceivable setting, it's almost the
antithesis of the typical modern press-button-spin-dial interface (which
arguably finds its apogee in the X-T1's most direct competitor - the Olympus
OM-D E-M1). Match it up with one of Fujifilm's truly excellent primes like the
XF 23mm F1.4R and you get an exceptional image making tool.
I hear two things here:
1. The dials and switches are to drool over. Lucky the
thing is weather sealed.
2. It is the antithesis to the modern camera user
interface. For every technology advance, there is a counter-movement. Some
people just lurrve their vinyl records, or say they do.
In the next post I will discuss whether those dials
and switches are useful for something more photographic than resisting drool.
Post
Script: As I was
writing this Digital Photography Review published on 28 February, an interview with Mr Toshihisa Iida, Senior
Manager, Sales and Marketing for Fujifilm.
I thought some of his responses to questions from DPR
staff were unusually candid.
Mr Iida said that consumer feedback revealed three positive things about the X-T1 (then
listed four) namely lenses, color, portability and viewfinder. Nothing here about image quality, performance
or ergonomics which are the three cardinal qualities by which I evaluate a
camera.
He also said that Fuji wanted to improve ‘…operation,
in terms of button layout and so on, autofocus performance and movie image
quality’.
I did not evaluate movie performance but I did find
that various aspects of operation and autofocus performance could be
improved. Read more about ‘operation’ in
the next post.
The next post: is about ergonomics of the X-T1.
The next post: is about ergonomics of the X-T1.
No comments:
Post a Comment