Does the Fuji X-Pro1 X-Trans CMOS sensor perform better than the Nikon D7000 and Canon 5D Mark II?

The Italian website dday posted an interesting slide about the performance of the X-Trans sensor inside the X-Pro1 mirrorless camera. The graph, provided by Fujifilm, shows that the X-Pro1 has better resolution and signal/noise ratio than the Nikon D7000 and performs even better than the full frame Canon EOS 5D Mark II (only in terms of resolution, not noise). The article contains also several high ISO samples from the X-Pro1.

This entry was posted in Fuji and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Ken Elliott

    With no description of the unit of measure and no values on the X-axis, I’d say this is something that the marketing department dreamed up. Let’s wait and see.

    • Bjrichus

      I was thinking exactly the same thing myself.

      It’s also misleading not to include an indication of the prices involved; $2100+ for the Canon body, $1700+ for the Fuji body and only $1100 or so for the Nikon.

      I’d also be more interested in a direct comparison to the 2012 Nikon FX bodies, not a relatively old Canon design.

    • Exactly as Ken stated. A graph with no values on the vertical axis… totally worthless. We don’t even know if the X axis is linear. Too, owners of the D7000 should love having their camera compared at all to camera bodies that are so much more costly.

    • Harold Ellis

      mark II was probably tested with lens cap on and kit lens
      but whatever. nice try, but i will not buy this not finished camera for same price as markII.

  • Camaman

    I am sure at some point, at some time, in some scenario, in some measurement it does do better than FF and that is what Fuji used and base their claim on. It doesn’t take much for it to be true. 🙂

  • When looking at the X-Trans colour filter array, the colour sensitivity and colour balance on this sensor becomes questionable.

    In a Bayer sensor there’s 50% green, 25% red and 25% blue. The red channel is almost always pushed under most white balance conditions, making it the noisiest channel.

    In this X-Trans design, there’s 55.55% green, 22.22% red and, 22.22% blue. So the red channel needs to be pushed even further and the green channel will be even more (unnecessarily) sensitive to green.

    So while they may have worked around the demosaicing pattern problem of the conventional Bayer CFAs, to obtain colour accuracy, this camera needs to manipulate (push/pull) channels quite a lot… making it lose DR and increase noise in some cases.

    I hope I’m missing something because Fuji’s not a company that lies to people about things like noise and DR.

  • Assuming AF isn’t borked, I will be buying the system and all available lenses.

    Why? Mostly for the sensor and in camera post processing. I bought the X100 for the hybrid OEVF that I hardly use and fell in love with the sensor and JPG processing. Now I have the X100, X10, F300EXR, two F200EXR’s (one for scuba), F11, F31FD and most recently an S5 Pro. Even the S5 is a revelation compared to my 5DII and the X100 is the camera I reach for when the 5DII plays up in WB or exposure, or can’t handle the dynamic range. The X100 always delivers when I shoot bands in dark clubs, or I have a bride and groom in white lace and a black tux leaving a church into the midday sun.

    Nowadays if you are willing to spend on a pro, or prosumer body, anyone can shoot really high ISOs with negligible or acceptable noise. Even the consumer DSLRs and CSCs are fine. My point is they have all reached a sufficient standard for all practical purposes (i.e. not extreme applications like starlight nature photography, but everything I need).

    The true edge that Fuji has is their EXR DR400, binning (if applicable) and lack of AA blurring, not to mention the better WB and exposure. The disadvantage is questionable AF performance and slow write speed. The X1 Pro has licked the problem of lack of interchangeable lenses and poorly coupled electronic MF, but has sacrificed pocketability and the silent shutter. It’s a different camera and for me, worth the expenditure.

    I see it like this: the X100 is analogous to my Konica AF classic, the X100 is like bit a Minilux Zoom and the X1 Pro is a Contax G2. None really replace the high end DSLR, but they are a great complement and an awesome inventory list for any dry box.

  • photonut

    Useless chart!

    I’d like to see a D700 in that chart.

    (And I knew the D7000 doesn’t perform good in high ISO, but I didn’t know it sucks that much)

    • jodjac

      It doesn’t suck. Get real.

      • jodjac

        I see the chart as a useful, relative expression of SN and image resolution. I’m wondering how well the sensor will render colors as a function of this new sensor design. Doing away with the AA bypass filtshashlik have a positive effect on image sharpness.
        I want one badly. I love Fuji lenses and their medium format cameras. I’m hoping the manual focus works well. I wish they would put a version of their lenses out in a helicoid type manual focus. I’d buy that for sure.
        The D800 is right around the corner… so many cameras, so little time ( time is money and i dont have any). Still, so tempting.
        Since when does not having any money deter one from making a purchase?

    • E

      D7000 is still one of the best performing cropped sensors out there…. So close to my d700. Only at 6400 is there a big difference….color noise is slightly worse too in its attractiveness.

  • Charlie

    Where’s the comparison to the $1,000 less expensive NEX 5N ….. ???

    Yep. Didn’t think so.

  • holly_cow

    What’ve you being smoking out there, mates?!

  • Shamael

    probably smokin’ too much of the carpet edge!!!
    Fuji’s water color sensor, should I laugh or should I cry?

  • Back to top