|
Equality do not give you fools: There is essentially no overlap between the offering of X100 and X half cameras. Photo: Richard Butler |
Fujifilm X Half is not a camera where Absolute Image quality is fundamental for its appeal. And if that idea thinks of you anteenma – ‘A camera? Where image quality is not neccessly paramount? ‘ – I suggest that you do not read further.
To some extent, it is not really understood to subdue to our standard testing X: It is like analyzing the nutritional price data of cotton candy / candyfloss / fairy Floss.
However, X Half is used by a sensor that is several times larger than those used in the choice of Yashika Y35 – and other cameras designed for fun, as photographic qualifications – we thought it was worth seeing how it performed. Especially it also spends an appropriate bit compared to other ‘fun’ cameras on the market.
This is like analyzing the data of the nutritional value of the Candefloss
Furthermore, given its stylistic equality with large, very serious X100 cameras, we wanted to be able to clarify how big the difference is.
Therefore, despite being aware of the stupidity of the work, we committed to align and try to shoot a camera, which meant short, low-rage screen and custom white balance settings meant that it was likely to be a handful. And whose images come out incorrectly.
In practice we were pleasant surprised: quickly discovering a Calvin White Balance Settings that gave a close neutral result, and vice versa gave very consistent consequences, shot-to-shot to find the vice versa. A quick eye on exif data allowed us to over–height the Orientation Matadata tag and presented images in landscape format without re-encouraging the risk of recurring images or changing the quality of the image.
Studio test scene
In the center of the chart, the images of X Half look roughly comparable to those of the RX100 series, its similar size sensor and pixel count (X Half uses 4: 3 crops from a 3: 2 sensor), behind the very large X100VI sensor, but beyond the traditional type 1/2.3 compact.
As you move from the center of the image, the performance goes away, not showing the level of fine expansion with the phujifilm that does RX100.
The difference decreases because the light level falls and the ISO increases, and the type 1 sensor increases the difference between fuzifilm and Sony and small sensor compact.
The X Half’s sensor is about 4x larger in Panasonic FZ80 (and in the choice of Yashika FX-D100, Kodak C10 and Minolta MND 23, the size 1/3 sensor of 1/3 sensor), and as a result it gives a small sensor camera (and two stops in the field of two stops.
Summary
Results broadly in terms of noise and image quality, what we will expect. Despite the use of a prime lens, the X Half RX 100 is not drawing almost as much detail from its capture. But it is appropriate to say that pixel-pipeings with cameras like X Half are not a rational way to spend anyone’s time. After all, this is a camera that does not pretend to take itself seriously (we almost wonder if its lack of raw recording to avoid giving mixed messages about its intentions, instead as prosecution as a lack of processic power of some).
A more relevant line of investigation may be how X Half images appear compared to the RX100, once tried in size and re -introduced to social media platforms that they are designed to share. Because if you are planning to print its images on anything other than INSTAX (or, more, 6 x 4), then you are also making stranger options with your life.
