Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Fuji X Series > Fuji Digital General Discussion

View Poll Results: X100s vs. M240/35/1.7 Ultron: which is which
First is the X100s, second the 240 20 50.00%
First is the 240, second the X100s 19 47.50%
They look too similar to me 1 2.50%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

X100s vs M240 color blind test
Old 12-30-2015   #1
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
X100s vs M240 color blind test

Same boring scene taken with X100s (1/500, f5.6) and M240 with VM Ultron 35/1.7 (1/250, f8), both at ASA 200. Naked Fuji (no filter), UV/IR filter on the Ultron - because this is how I shoot the two. I shot at different apertures to make the DOF equivalent. Focus is on the center fork of the tree.

Raw files imported into LR, exported as TIF without any changes. Then straightened the horizon, slight crop (my Ultron is actually a 37mm lens), and resized to 2000 pixel max. width.

Which is which ? (click on picture if you want to see enlarged)





Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #2
bob338
Registered User
 
bob338's Avatar
 
bob338 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sausalito, CA
Posts: 1,228
I don't have an M240, but the second one looks like the Fuji to me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #3
Hsg
who dares wins
 
Hsg is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 641
The first one is Leica M240.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #4
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,527
I voted for the 240 as the first. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if I was wrong. Thinking slightly better detail in the first as a result of full frame vs. Crop.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #5
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,366
How as WB set? If both are 'as shot' can you set them both to Daylight? Sorta looks like WB differed between the two (looking at cloud) which would also alter the colors somewhat.

Thanks,

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #6
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
I voted for the 240 as the first. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if I was wrong. Thinking slightly better detail in the first as a result of full frame vs. Crop.
It is always interesting to see everyones different interpretations on shots like these. To me the second looks sharper and more detailed.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #7
dotur
od karnevala
 
dotur's Avatar
 
dotur is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 872
Remembering the similar crazy yellow accent of my late M8, I'd say the second one is 240...
__________________
Ivan

dotur's photo albums
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #8
tomtofa
Registered User
 
tomtofa's Avatar
 
tomtofa is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,131
I voted #2 as the 240 because of the warmer color, but the field of view of #2 seems to be wider, which makes me think it could be the x100, which is a little wider than 35mm as I recall. Or am I thinking of the RX1?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #9
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,363
Well, what this is evaluating is essentially the difference in raw file format interpretation (and perhaps in scaling from 16MP or 24MP to 3MP). Not much of the cameras left there, apart from the variation in white balance bias.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #10
G Dogg
Registered User
 
G Dogg is offline
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 61
I have both of these cameras as well. What a testament to the progress the sensors have made, and the fuji as a cropped sensor compared to the full frame. You could have put either one up alone, and stated they were shot with....XXX...and without any comparator, we would appreciate the image.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #11
xenohip
Registered User
 
xenohip is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 69
Judging by the manner in which foliage turns to fuzz (left side of the picture), I'll say the first is the X100s.

The color representation in the second photograph is not appealing, IMHO, but what do I know-- I'm a B&W guy....
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #12
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
I'll go with the second image being the 240 because of the slightly warmer tones ... the 240's WB has this tendency IMO. And there is a little more detail in the second shot to my old eyes which indicates a slightly better lens and larger sensor.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #13
anerjee
Registered User
 
anerjee is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Singapore
Posts: 280
I voted that the second one is 240. To be clear, I have no idea why.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #14
mwooten
light user
 
mwooten's Avatar
 
mwooten is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: greenville sc, usa
Posts: 1,061
What kind of tree is that?
__________________
rff gallery

blog: atomicspa.com


  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #15
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
The second is definitely the superior image IMO and I will be mightily disappointed if that turns out to be the Fuji.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #16
Bille
Registered User
 
Bille's Avatar
 
Bille is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Age: 42
Posts: 761
Second looks better for sure. FWIW.
__________________
Your mom!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #17
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,918
Nbr 2 seems sharper in some fine detail (e.g. top of telephone pole, leaves in bottom right).

Don't have enough knowledge about either to say, but as it's caucus time here in Iowa, I'm going with Nbr 2 being the Leica/Ultron combo.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #18
shimokita
白黒
 
shimokita's Avatar
 
shimokita is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Japan, Tokyo
Posts: 860
My selection is that the Fuji X100s is number 01 and the Leica (Typ 240) is number 02... the Leica 240 as it's a bit darker directly out of the camera. I ignore the 1.4% difference in data size.

However it turns out, for anyone who only posts on the web, the Fuji may be a "good" choice.

Casey
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #19
Steveh
Registered User
 
Steveh is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 407
I'm guessing Fuji number 1, Leica number 2 as well, mainly from the warmer colours and greater (apparent?) sharpness in 2
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #20
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillBingham2 View Post
Don't have enough knowledge about either to say, but as it's caucus time here in Iowa, I'm going with Nbr 2 being the Leica/Ultron combo.
And just like it will happen in Iowa, it appears the vote is changing depending on who posts what in the thread, Bill (= exit poll)

Both cameras were shot with Auto WB. You all carry on ...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #21
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom.w.bn View Post
The first picture suffers from the XTrans mess in foliage and grass. You can see it in the tree on the right and in the green along the fence.
I don't really see that, just the general haze/lower sharpness of that shot. The watercolor foliage is (or mostly was) an Adobe issue. JPGs from the camera didn't have it and other raw developers (C2, Iridient, RPP64 and others) handled it better than Adobe's initial attempts.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #22
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Is this like the old joke?

'How do you keep a bunch of pixel peeping gear hounds in suspense?'

'I'll tell you later!'
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #23
edge100
-
 
edge100 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 757
Doesn't matter which is which; what is clear is that the Leica provides no compelling advantage to the X100S/T, for this particular use. There's very little between these.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #24
pechelman
resu deretsiger
 
pechelman is offline
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 291
i dont understand, is there a point to this comparison?

both cameras take nice pictures, just use the one you want to use and be done with it.

and really, who out there would simply take the raw files from either camera and hit export to use as a final product? this is just pointless imo.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #25
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by pechelman View Post
i dont understand, is there a point to this comparison?

both cameras take nice pictures, just use the one you want to use and be done with it.

and really, who out there would simply take the raw files from either camera and hit export to use as a final product? this is just pointless imo.
I personally agree with you. Others don't, see, for instance, http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=153700. Then there are those who use jpg straight out of the camera. A comparison like this allows you to separate raw performance from the jpg engine. Etc.

A picture says more than a thousand words and all that. Plus, it's a fun riddle, I think.

Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #26
pechelman
resu deretsiger
 
pechelman is offline
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 291
yea i figured that this was a result of that other thread

personally, I own both cameras just as you
I love both, but for very different and distinct reasons. If I could have only one, I know which I would sell tomorrow.

To my eye, there's something about the first image that reminds me of the "Adobe Standard" color palette on my fuji RAF's. I cant really tell otherwise with the detail in the images since it's at a lower resolution.

I think a slightly more interesting comparison might have been:
Fuji RAF exported as you did
Fuji RAF exported with one of the camera presets in LR
Fuji JPG using the same preset used above
Leica DNG exported as you did
Leica DNG tweaked to your standard preset
Leica JPG straight from camera using whatever you like best

To me the issue worth discussing here about these two cameras is the files and how long it takes to process to satisfaction. Of course, everyone is different, so not sure it's of much value but to each person individually. I know , for example, I struggle a bit with Fuji RAF's, and because of that, mostly shoot jgs which I always tweak on an individual basis. I feel like I spend a good amount of time on each.

With the M240, I have a preset I've been using from David Farkas that I really like. I do very minor adjustments after that, so as a result, I spend much less time in LR and am happier with my results.

Also, lately with the M240, I've been reveiwing my Fuji images and have been finding the colors a bit over the top in some scenarios.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #27
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,104
I'll say the m240 is the second one. Warmer tones and deeper darks.

Shoot the x100 in classic chrome and redo the test
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #28
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,053
My only response is that there isn't enough difference to matter. Clearly modern digital sensor design and computer-designed lenses has pretty much leveled the playing field.

Thanks for the comparison, Roland. It helps me to stop stressing about not being able to afford Leica. :-)
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-T3; X-Pro1; XF10

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #29
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Well, if you believe in democracy, the 240 is the less than clear winner!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #30
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by helenhill View Post
only for those that have Invested in One...

ooops did I say that.... you do know I am a Leica Fan Gurl


Invested is a banned word sorry .... please choose something else!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #31
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
Thank you Helen !

First is the Fuji, second is the Leica.

Here is something else that might be interesting: even though I cropped the same segment as best I could, the slightly different FOV gave different results. Also, both lenses have different distortion characteristics; you can click on the following link for an animated gif overlay of the two pictures:

https://ferider.smugmug.com/Technica...G/0/O/comp.gif

Hope that was fun !

Roland.

PS: as a side note, in camera color jpg for me is not an option as I generate B+W jpg in both cameras to help me preview exposure and composition.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #32
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Thank god I was correct Roland ... but I do think that anyone who owns and is familiar with the 240 output would pick the second as being the Leica. I find the Fuji image very clinical colour wise which was something I didn't like about the X100 when I had one.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #33
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
Very subtle differences, Keith, certainly not enough to pick one camera over the other. And - as mentioned above - straight raw camera output is not very meaningful in practice. Also resolution-wise the X100s is doing quite well, even though there are less MP.

In any case, I like the X100s, mostly for its size. Perfect carry-everywhere camera (meaning for me, that it has to fit in a handle-bar bag on the bike).

Thank you all for participating,

Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #34
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,780
ooh, upload the raw files! we can all fiddle around with post-processing.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #35
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by aizan View Post
ooh, upload the raw files! we can all fiddle around with post-processing.
I will if somebody can tell me where. (don't have the capability myself - 230 MB).
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #36
Filzkoeter
stray dog
 
Filzkoeter's Avatar
 
Filzkoeter is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin - Germany
Age: 33
Posts: 415
I suspected it, as LR from my experience is really bad with x-trans raws. It turns fine details into mush & artefacts.
I'd love to play with the raw a little bit in capture one
__________________
-Miko

- flickr -
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #37
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,366
If you create a dropbox account you can upload them there and share them.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #38
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
If you create a dropbox account you can upload them there and share them.

Shawn
Will do, Shawn.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #39
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,527
Well I'm glad there wasn't a wager on this....
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2015   #40
splitimageview
Registered User
 
splitimageview is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,230
I'd like to see an Aperture demosaic of the Fuji file.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:53.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.