Fujifilm X-e2 and its 16Mp revolutionary image sensor

jogiba · 12-14-2013, 05:58 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Noise on the K3 is equivalent to the K5/K5 II, not better or worse. DXO Mark gave the K3 a sports iso score of 1216 and the K5 II one of 1235. That's the same score. And if you look at the SNR curves, they lie right on top of each other. I own both cameras and it feels like that is right. I will shoot both up to iso 3200 standardly and 6400 in a pinch.

The K-3 looks to have more noise than the entry level Sony A3000 at high iso.
K-3 vs 20mp Sony A3000 @ 25600 iso

**Rondec** · 12-14-2013, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by jogiba

The K-3 looks to have more noise than the entry level Sony A3000 at high iso.
K-3 vs 20mp Sony A3000 @ 25600 iso

Pretty heavy handed noise reduction in the A3000 photo, eh?

jogiba · 12-14-2013, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Pretty heavy handed noise reduction in the A3000 photo, eh?

K-3 vs A3000 @3200 iso

vonBaloney · 12-14-2013, 10:29 AM

Getting back to the Fuji sensor, randomizing the pattern does seem like a good idea, the only downside being it makes post-processing support more complex. One of those cases where standardization holds back the innovations...

Rupert · 12-14-2013, 11:10 AM

I have an interest in the X-E2 myself, the images in that link are excellent, and typical of what I see from the top XFuji cameras. The X-E2 has greatly improved AF, supposedly as good or better than my X20, which can focus faster and more accurate than my K5 by a mile.

There are some drawbacks, but every camera has some. The size, shape, and superb build quality of the X cameras make them a delight to hold in your hands. They do feel like "real cameras", not like a piece of molded plastic. That counts for a lot to me, since I am not the best photographer......it makes me feel a little closer to being one!

Regards!

QCdude · 12-16-2013, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Byrd-2020

QCdude: First, congratulations on scoring a K-5iis at $799. (An incredible bargain!) Second, I think you are correct about the inherent noise problem that accompanies the pixel density of the 24mp APSC sensor (at least with the current state of sensor technology). Advances are being made in image processors that mitigates some of this. But I too have been less than impressed with the sample images coming out of the K-3. (My choice would still be for the K-5iis over the K-3.)

I

thanks mate.
yeah K-5 IIs is great camera, I don't see why would I need K-3 right now.
Let me watch the evolution of APS-C 24Mp sensors.

**Rondec** · 12-16-2013, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by QCdude

thanks mate.
yeah K-5 IIs is great camera, I don't see why would I need K-3 right now.
Let me watch the evolution of APS-C 24Mp sensors.

The big thing that is coming is non-Bayer sensors. Foveon definitely has more resolution at low iso and is pretty impressive -- if there was just a nicer camera that had such a sensor.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
64MP from a 16MP Sensor?	bossa	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	20	04-30-2013 07:13 AM
Fujifilm X-E1, the little brother of X-Pro1	Mistral75	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	48	09-08-2012 09:28 AM
Fujifilm provides modified-sensor X10 to address white-orb issue	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	6	04-29-2012 01:06 PM
Fujifilm devoloping modified sensor to fix X10 and X-S1 white orbs	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	03-12-2012 08:45 PM
GPS for image id and its operation	danielchtong	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	29	02-15-2009 09:29 AM

12-14-2013, 05:58 AM	#16
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by Rondec Noise on the K3 is equivalent to the K5/K5 II, not better or worse. DXO Mark gave the K3 a sports iso score of 1216 and the K5 II one of 1235. That's the same score. And if you look at the SNR curves, they lie right on top of each other. I own both cameras and it feels like that is right. I will shoot both up to iso 3200 standardly and 6400 in a pinch. The K-3 looks to have more noise than the entry level Sony A3000 at high iso. K-3 vs 20mp Sony A3000 @ 25600 iso

12-14-2013, 07:59 AM	#17
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by jogiba The K-3 looks to have more noise than the entry level Sony A3000 at high iso. K-3 vs 20mp Sony A3000 @ 25600 iso Pretty heavy handed noise reduction in the A3000 photo, eh?

12-14-2013, 08:15 AM	#18
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by Rondec Pretty heavy handed noise reduction in the A3000 photo, eh? K-3 vs A3000 @3200 iso

12-14-2013, 10:29 AM	#19
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Getting back to the Fuji sensor, randomizing the pattern does seem like a good idea, the only downside being it makes post-processing support more complex. One of those cases where standardization holds back the innovations...

12-14-2013, 11:10 AM	#20
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	I have an interest in the X-E2 myself, the images in that link are excellent, and typical of what I see from the top XFuji cameras. The X-E2 has greatly improved AF, supposedly as good or better than my X20, which can focus faster and more accurate than my K5 by a mile. There are some drawbacks, but every camera has some. The size, shape, and superb build quality of the X cameras make them a delight to hold in your hands. They do feel like "real cameras", not like a piece of molded plastic. That counts for a lot to me, since I am not the best photographer......it makes me feel a little closer to being one! Regards!

12-16-2013, 08:26 AM	#21
QCdude Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 87 Original Poster	Originally posted by Byrd-2020 QCdude: First, congratulations on scoring a K-5iis at $799. (An incredible bargain!) Second, I think you are correct about the inherent noise problem that accompanies the pixel density of the 24mp APSC sensor (at least with the current state of sensor technology). Advances are being made in image processors that mitigates some of this. But I too have been less than impressed with the sample images coming out of the K-3. (My choice would still be for the K-5iis over the K-3.) I thanks mate. yeah K-5 IIs is great camera, I don't see why would I need K-3 right now. Let me watch the evolution of APS-C 24Mp sensors.

12-16-2013, 08:29 AM	#22
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by QCdude thanks mate. yeah K-5 IIs is great camera, I don't see why would I need K-3 right now. Let me watch the evolution of APS-C 24Mp sensors. The big thing that is coming is non-Bayer sensors. Foveon definitely has more resolution at low iso and is pretty impressive -- if there was just a nicer camera that had such a sensor.