Regardless, everyone should - and since Amazon provides for the rapid and generous customer returns processing to - test multiple combinations and various camera manufacturers at home and not let himself be persuaded by the marketing of the manufacturer or of specific professional sellers to a spontaneous purchase. The number of megapixels should not be the ostensible criteria for a purchase decision. A "round" image quality and the selection of optically very good and inexpensive (not cheap!) Lenses makes for me personally the difference.
I have chosen the cameras because they have approximately the same resolution (16 megapixels) and no low-pass filter in front of the sensor. The camera was on a tripod, the image stabilizer was at Fuji on the lens, Pentax in the Body of. Both cameras added to the focal length of 50mm with identical recording parameters (ISO3200 -> 1 / 15sec at f 4.0 and ISO6400 -> 1 / 25sec at f 4.0). The white balance was set at two to Auto. For the JPEG files I have each selected the highest quality. The files were opened in the latest Adobe's Lightroom 4.4 with default settings. The autofocus when recording was at 12 clock the darker side of the shell. I used these lenses:
- Fujifilm Fujinon XF18-55mm f2,8-4 R LM OIS at the Fuji X-E1
- Pentax SMC DA 16-50mm / F2.8 (IF) SDM in the Pentax K5 IIs
Incidentally, Fuji has problems, albeit more slowly than the Pentax found focus. The Pentax was faster in focus, but I had 2 attempts of 5 test focussing errors (despite visual and acoustic focus confirmation). In Fuji, the focus was always sitting 100% conditioned.
Here's what I've looked at:
In-camera JPEG Engine
In both ISO levels (3200 and 6400) had the in-camera JPEG images (both cameras were in the Standard RAW> JPEG manufacturer settings) the Fuji camera naturally, voted in much better with the original situation in line. The white balance was perfect. The images and colors of the Pentax looked like plastic were kept clearly too warm. White balance was made ill by the camera. The details were levels get much better at Fuji in two ISO. Also Fuji has the much better mix of noise reduction and simultaneous preservation of the details. Very clear victory for the Fuji RAW -> JPEG engine.
RAW files
Next, I looked at the RAW files. The first thing I did the miserable white balance of the Fujifilm Pentax and asked amazed values accurately. The Pentax images were unrecognizable. In ISO3200, the colors were slightly better contact Pentax than Fuji. With ISO6400, this advantage of the Pentax is even clearer.
As a firm Available Light User I looked at the noise performance, especially in the darker area of the images to. To my surprise I noticed more noise and luminance noise at coarser Fuji at ISO6400. Even I could see better minimal detail drawing in the shade at Pentax.
Next, I picked up in Lightroom the shadows at maximum (value +100). By raising the shade shaded image areas appeared at first glance at the Fuji brighter, but the details of Fuji pictures were the stronger and coarser noise more pixelated than Pentax. In the end can be in Pentax more details from the shadows rausholen than Fuji. Color noise have both cameras very well under control, since Nikon has with its implementation of the APS-C sensors worse (at least for D5000, D5100, D3200).
The nearest comparison consisted of detailed rescue from the very bright areas (around the burning candle wick). For this I lowered the lights in Lightroom (-100) to the minimum. This time I was surprised how much the Fuji topped the poll. While one could see the flame and the wax course clear in Fuji, so I could at Pentax only felt half of recognize.
In summary, at HighIso or available light shots the Pentax regarding color retention, shadow detail and luminance noise better. With lights rescue the Fuji is clearly better.
Fuji JPEG files vs. Fuji RAW files
When comparing the camera's internal Fuji JPEG files with the Fuji RAW files that Fuji Developers me immediately falls fantastic to like here have worked. While I practically all my pictures have taken in RAW with Nikon and had worked Conn. In Lightroom, not worth working at Fuji. Most of my final images straight from the camera. As for effective noise reduction and detail preservation I achieve manually to yield better results in Lightroom than in the camera's internal conversion. Only in shadows and lights raising rescue I access yet to Lightroom. The film simulation Provia provides the way, in my view the greatest dynamic range of the Fujifilm simulations. Will I mean JPEG's have really sharp, I reduce at low ISO speeds, the in-camera noise reduction to -2. Will I absolutely brutal sharpness I increase the sharpness in addition to +1 or +2. Amazingly, the color loss falls in ISO6400 not so serious from, as with the RAW files. The in-camera conversion seems the colors reawaken to life :).
Pentax JPEG files vs. Pentax RAW files
The in-camera RAW conversion with the default settings when Pentax has I did not like. I would keep this Pentax, I would just tackle each photo in Lightroom as Nikon. Unlike Fuji - where the automatic white balance works always and under all lighting tied or times of the day close to perfect - I would at the Pentax determined manually with the white balance gray card, or in Lightroom are trying to strike the right. Which would probably not correspond to the real motive for the time-delayed by hours or days post-processing in Lightroom.
Memory requirements for the Fuji and Pentax files
I noticed is the different file size at the same resolution. The Pentax produced an average of 10% smaller than the Fuji RAW files. However, the camera's internal JPEG files of Fuji were (which are much better) more than 50% smaller than the in-camera JPEG files of Pentax !? Both cameras highest JPEG quality was set.
An Example:
- Fuji RAW 25,534 KB
- Pentax RAW 22 778 KB
- Fuji JPEG 4,998 KB
- Pentax JPEG 11,287 KB
Conclusion
Contrary to my expectations, the Fuji X-Trans sensor technology not as groundbreaking as the Fuji advertising and the voices on the net suggest it. When it comes to the raw data and recordings from ISO3200, so I'm slightly rauszuholen able to more detail and color from the Pentax files. The noise is somewhat less destructive than at Fuji. In Fuji I get on the other hand get more details from the lights. Would I be a Detailpurist, and put a lot of time in the ready post the pictures, I'd give Pentax with their conventional Bayer sensor technology preference. Both cameras are certainly among the top candidates in the field of APS-C. The Pentax shows APS-C and RAW format an absolute top quality which image quality is concerned. That's why I forgive also a full recommendation for Pentax.
Nevertheless, I am still a fan of Fuji. Had the Pentax a mirrorless system camera and I would have to choose between Fuji and Pentax, I would choose nachwievor Fuji. Better white balance, much better camera RAW conversion, "Fuji Color" (film simulation), much less fummeliger post in Lightroom, more intense (35mm 1.4, this year 23mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.4) fixed focal length, visually better and significantly cheaper everyday zoom lens.
