First real Fuji X PRO 1 ISO test and comparison with Nikon D700.
Finally you can see a first ISO and sharpness test at vladdodan.ro (Click here / via Fujirumors). The image-crop you see on top (Click on it to enlarge) compares the Fuji X PRO 1 (35mm @ f/1.4) sharpness with the Nikon D700 (AF-S @ f/1.4) sharpness. At a first glance the Fuji looks a tack sharper. But please keep in mind that we need more tests to be sure of that. The sharpness also depends from other factors like lens and image processor. But it’s so great to see an APS-C sensor beat the quality of a Full Frame sensor! Really makes me wonder what a Full Frame Fuji could do!
Here are the direct links to the images:
X PRO 1 versus D700 (Nikon on the right)
X PRO 1 ISO table (ISO 100 up to 25.800)
35mm lens center sharpness (at different apertures)
35mm lens corner sharpness (at different apertures)
I want to thank Vlad for the great test! He did what big websites didn’t do! Will bookmark your website now 
P.S.: You can preordet the Fuji X PRO 1 at Expansys USA (Click here), Expansys Canada (Click here) and Expansys UK (Click here). You can get notification at Amazon US (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Micah: BWAHAHAHAH! You so funny! Of course "d...
Comment from J. Bilowski: It is meaningless to use scaled down ima...
Comment from Rockstar: Even on a production model of the Fuji X...
Comment from Dougbm: Cameraman says "nice camera that Fuji..p...
emopunk
5 months ago |We need to know about AF qualities of this cam, before being to enthusiast. Who would want a MF camera for 1700 dollars?
DaStar
5 months ago |Most of the people who would cash out like $8000 for a Leica?
tobiasNEX7n
5 months ago |you meant to say who would want a manual focus camera thats absolutely useless when it comes to manual focus
inteliboy
5 months ago |I would.
Why everyone is hung up on the AF is beyond me… you already have countless options on the market. There are many many many other cameras out there that can handle AF adequately. A camera in this form factor should operate 100% manually, rather then the poor manual focus that the x100 has. This to me is the single point that I hope fuji address.
Don Pope
5 months ago |Well, yes. It should have excellent autofocus AND/OR excellent manual focus.
Unfortunately, this one seems to have neither.
Matthew
5 months ago |Exactly. Focusing/aperture/etc by wire is not the right idea. I wonder if the X-Pro 1 has focus peaking?
DaStar
5 months ago |Wow…
Don Pope
5 months ago |Wrong thread, please ignore.
Andi
5 months ago |A fullframe lense @ 1,4=not that fuckin sharp;)
Jorge
5 months ago |And a 12 megapixel FF camera introduced in 2008 that is about to be replaced. That’s a fair comparison
Nico
5 months ago |+1
Matthew
5 months ago |+2
I forgot about that.
Gabriel
5 months ago |That depend too on the sharpening level applied. On this shot, you can also see the difference in bokeh between the too system APS-C vs FF. I love to see such comparisons with the additions of the x10 and a m4/3 camera.
Snake
5 months ago |Why oh why is people so hung up on the Fullframe myth giving shallower DOF??
Get your fact’s straight on this. First these 2 photo’s have different focal length’s , but given the same focal length you will have SAME DOF on a crop compared to FF, but FF will give wider Field of view.
It’s simple math people!
Chris
5 months ago |35mm f1.4 apcs = 50mm f2.0 fullframe
thats all there is to it. keep the 1.5 multiplier in mind and shoot the fullframe on stop down and it will be the same
if you compare 35m f1.4 apcs and 50mm f1.4 fullframe of course the fullframe camera will have a shallower depth of field.
Jean-Michel
5 months ago |The aperture is the relation between the focal lenth and the max. diameter of the lens. From the point of view of the quantity of light entering in the lens, a 35mm f:1,4 is always f:1,4, even it gives the angle of view of a 52mm.
But, in a DOF point of view, the DOF being a relation with the magnification, an APSC being smaller than a FF, the magnification given by the lens is less, then at f:1,4, we will obtain a DOF equivalent to f:2,0 on a FF. It’s why smaller the sensor is, larger the DOF is. It’s hardly impossible to isolate a subject from its background on a very small sensor camera.
Undertaker
5 months ago |It’s all true, but what Snake says: Same Focal length and distance from subject gives same DOF, but if you change the Distance/aperture to match Field of view, of course you get shallower DOF, but there seem to be a common misconception about this and people just saying FF has shallower DOF. It hasn´t
In the 2 photo’s in this example, they have different focal lenght’s and aperture to match Field of view, and this fact doesn´t mean an FF sensor has shallower DOF.
In this case, fact and math are both right
Vlad Dodan
5 months ago |The AF should be tested thoroughly on a production model. The one I have tested (release candidate) wasn`t mindblowing impressive.
AF speed was good (not as fast as Nikon 1 V1, but good enough for the majority of potential customers).
On the other hand, the AF accuracy is something that still needs some polishing, and given the fact that this issue is mostly software-related, I bet they can improve on it.
As I said in the preview, my hunch is that the X-system Fuji will be putting out this year and 2-3 years from now is a clear winner. (just check out the ISO samples!
)
The X-Pro 1 vs D700 test is something I did for fun, and people shouldn`t stress about it; mainly because both cameras were shot handheld and if I recall there was a shorter shutter-speed on the X-Pro 1. The information was mostly to contradict the people who think “same coverage angle = same bokeh” or “same focal distance 35mmx1.5 =50mm vs 50mm on FF should have the same bokeh”
DaStar
5 months ago |Is the MF on the X-Pro 1 better handled than on the X100?
tobiasNEX7n
5 months ago |quote>>So manual focus is a something I wouldn`t try with this camera and lenses. It can be done, but that`s just about it. Nothing to brag about here.<<
DaStar
5 months ago |I at least then hope it isn’t worse then on the x100 which i found “acceptable”.
Vlad Dodan
5 months ago |It should be easier to MF on X-Pro 1. Left hand position is more natural / comfortable.
I don`t MF unless I use a rangefinder so maybe I`m not the best judge here. MF by wire is also something I`m not a fan of, because you can`t really feel when you`ve reached min.focus distance or infinity, unless you check the distance scale in the viewfinder or LCD.
If people managed to focus the X100, there`s a big chance they will like the MF on the X-Pro 1.
Dummy00001
5 months ago |Thanks for the explanation and hands-on comments!!
How the VF compares?
hexx
5 months ago |I think the question was more like ‘how many turns does one need to focus from closest to infinity’ because on X100 this is around 30 turns
Undertaker
5 months ago |–
Will
5 months ago |Why oh why do you try to explain that FF has the same DOF, this is the real world, and yes you are technically correct but for all intents and purposes it’s just so pedantic.
If someone wants the 50mm angle of view, the DOF changes from sensor size, that’s the easiest way to explain it because guess what, there’s no such thing as centrifugal force either, but instead of needing a physics PhD they explain it this way.
Who says to themselves “Right I want shallow depth of field, doesn’t matter what focal length” right well slap on that 1000mm lens and you’re good..
Nitpicking
Ben
5 months ago |I am rather impressed
Miroslav
5 months ago |Great job, Vlad, thanks.
Fuji looks really impressive, excellent at ISO 3200, pretty usable at ISO 6400 – I didn’t think I’d be able to say that about any camera in 2012! What’s really putting me off is the sheer size of the camera and the lack of any IS. But with such high ISO capabilities, it’s not really needed ( although, I’d still prefer to use lower ISO ).
That sensor is more than two stops ahead of current 4/3 sensors. I’d really like to see a cropped version (~10 Mpx) in the new Olympus…
TomR
5 months ago |Vlad, how would you manual focus on this if you were using M glass? It it by magnification? Can you set that up so that it is within one or two button presses? Thanks.
Vlad Dodan
5 months ago |Any answer would be pure speculation. Until we get a M-Mount converter it`s hard to tell. LCD magnification would be a pain in the a$$. I`m hoping for a contrast detection method like the one on the Nex 5N / Nex 7.
Fingers crossed until the next firmware…
TomR
5 months ago |Thank you. Yes, I hope for a contrast detection method. This would be a sell-point for me.
pancanikonpusamy
5 months ago |Wow! but the price still stun me down @@
TomR
5 months ago |One more question. which lens is used for the shot DSCF3708, image 16, the one with the buildings and steps? Is that ISO 200? for me that is the shat that really shows what this camera can do. thanks.
Vlad Dodan
5 months ago |35mm @ f/5.6 @ iso 200
I left the EXIF info. on the files, so anyone can access it via browser (or browser extensions).
TomR
5 months ago |Thanks again.
Asasino
5 months ago |What is clear to me from X-PRO1-D700 comparison is that the latter has much more control over DOF (depth of field), that was exactly (one of) the reason why a FF camera will always blast away every APS-C one.
That said, sharpness depends more on the lens rather than the sensor and, as someone already stated, the Nikon 50mm F1.4 is not the sharpest lens here (nor the more expensive either)…
Anyway, with the amount of money required by an X-PRO 1 + 35mm lens, you (probably) will buy a FF camera (5D or D700) with a decent piece of glass.
To me this camera is meaningless (but, fortunately for Fuji, the world is broad and various)…
Best regards.
M. Costa
Kylberg
5 months ago |Promising on the IQ side! Even the two highest ISO fully usable after processing in Topaz Denoice f.i. – and some spost-processing. To me files look smooth and natural (opposed to digital)
Concerning MF, no focus peaking here.
Concerning the hybrid vieiwfinder: As I understood many of those who wrote about X100 on the internet turned out to mostly use the EVF – and AF rather than MF.
Not as many boxes in the requirements list checked as with NEX-7, but the lenses for NEX-7 are really not good at all. Looked other Sony lenses for APS-C, they are similarily very poor. With a Sony camera it seems you must use the expensive Zeiss lenses otherwise you cannot utilize the full sensor potential.
Hope that Fuji manages to balance sensor vs lenses in a better way.
Savic
5 months ago |Sony APS-C lens very poor? Did you ever try some? Sony 70-400 G is best zoom in that rage for all DSLR to date. Try new DT SAM lenses they are very good.
ShakyA77
5 months ago |totally agree with your observation on depth of field
quidam
5 months ago |You must have very strange ideas about what is and what isn’t a good lens. Sony Nex lenses are generally very good and very-very good considering how cheap they are (unless there’s some sample variation I don’t know about).
Vivek
5 months ago |It is not just DR and sharpness but the color fidelity (of X Pro 1) appears much better than that of the D700.
Savic
5 months ago |+1
mervis
5 months ago |Why use a washed-out image with lens flare for your comparison?
WHY?
Vivek
5 months ago |Good Q! Have you seen any good image that fits Fuji’s hype?
Jean-Michel
5 months ago |Do you remember, Rob, on http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/6231919025/in/photostream/ compared different lenses on Nex-7.
Now we can compare the FUJI XP1 with its native lenses with the Nex-7 with its ones. FUJI XP1 is much much much better. But NEX-7 with Zeiss 24mm is a bit more (and not sure). However, there would be just the 24mm Zeiss for the NEX-7 to bit the XP1.
XP1 with its 600$ native lenses is even much better than NEX-7 with any ZM lenses (watch corners). I now want to see what we will get with XP1 + ZM or CV lenses.
FUJI XP1 seems to be a really good choice.
hexx
5 months ago |I think the best would be to compare NEX vs Fuji with Leica lenses since there is(will be) M adapter for both.
Wificor27
5 months ago |I do not think this camera Fuji Sony expires when the evidence is neutral will be the best compact camera with large sensor is the Nex-7, then the second position will be occupied by the X-pro 1 provided that gets to be better than the Nex-5n has already proven to be even better than her older sister as ISO refers to the handling and manual Leica lens. Honestly I have sold my 7D it did not use (size), I had an Epson Rd-1s and the truth is that memories do I almost decided by the X-pro 1 (the colors do not need them because I have two cameras and Foveon, DP1 and DP2, incredible!), but am willing to pay bo € 2000 for any such camera with a lens. I bought the Nex-5n with the viewer and the 18-55mm for 600 € and buy manipulatives “Super Takuma, leica, CZ” is the best option for the price.
X-Pro 1 and Nex-7 is better? sure. But 4x more expensive.
A greeting.
John
5 months ago |The D700 is known for having a rather strong AA filter, so it should not be hard to produce a sharper image if you don’t have an AA filter on this new sensor.
Vivek
5 months ago |What has stopped Nikon from issuing the D700 without an AA?
ken popwell
5 months ago |Fuji will beat up that crap sony in a year o 2, go fuji go and sink the plastic sony!
quidam
5 months ago |Very thoughtful and useful comment. Thanks man.
nugat
5 months ago |FUJI vs NIKON
PIXEL: ca 3.6 micrometer vs 8.45 micrometer
AA filter: none vs strong
All other things being equal , wchich system will deliver a higher resolution?
E5 (12 mpix 4/3 sensor) +Zuiko 12-60 beats the D700 with nikkor 24-120, why an APS-C modern 16Mpix sensor plus decent glass should not??
Fuji claim is that X1pro beats the 21Mpix Canon 5Dm2.
Not that’s something to verify.
Mccurry
5 months ago |McCurry and many pros continue having the great d700 or simply a great canon instead of fuji sony or all other crap plastic… probably because those are really crap plastic
hexx
5 months ago |well, 5DMK2 is also known to perform worse in high ISO than D700
nugat
5 months ago |It is generally true that for a magazine 2 page spread 12 Mpix is enough. Any increase in resolution is basically wasted. So in this area other things count (DR, noise, color). D4 is 16 mpix, not the rumored +30 mpix. My D700 will serve me another several years.
quidam
5 months ago |I really like the de esign of thFuji. But anyone who says that it has better IQ than the Sony Nex 7 based on the pictures linked above MUST BE SMOKING SOCKS!! Or has never seen a raw image from the Nex 7.
hexx
5 months ago |well, those are JPGs not RAW conversions – there’s no RAW support in well known SW packages. High ISO does look cleaner than NEX-7 but NEX-5N is better than NEX-7 – at least according to various magazines. There’s no NEX-7 here in the UK yet so I can’t comment from my own experience.