6D image quality compared with Fuji X-E2

<p>Am looking at a new body and have an opportunity of the Fuji at a great price - trade for older stuff I have not touched for a couple years. But, some of it could be sold and the dollars go to a 6D body.<br>

Anyone know of direct image comparisons of the new Fuji and the 6D? Low light performance and images up to 20x30?<br>

Am seriously considering the Fuji but if someone has actually done this I would like to know results.</p>

<p>Go to DPReview.com and compare for yourself. The 6D looks clearly superior to me:</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d/24</p>

 

<p>David, DPReview doesn't have the X-E2 in their test comparison. Where did you see it?</p>

<p>Using David's link, compare the image quality of the 6D to the Fuji X100S as it uses the same sensor as the X-E2. That will give you a rough idea.</p>

<p>As far as low light performance is concerned, I would say the 6D is about the best camera available for that purpose at the moment (unless you want to sell your soul for a Canon 1Dx). It's better than the Canon 5D MkIII and the Nikon D800 from what I can see. You will also have to weigh up what Fuji lenses are on offer with wide enough apertures to compare with Canon's offerings. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have a 5D2 and the X-E1 - not exactly your question, but a valid comparison I think. (I also have written an <a href="http://www.gdanmitchell.com/2013/08/24/taking-stock-of-the-fujifilm-x-e1-mirrorless-camera">extensive review of the X-E1 system</a> that you might find useful.)</p>

<p>The image quality from the X-E2 and X-E1 is reportedly almost identical in most ways. The jpg quality of the X-E2 may be a bit better at high ISOs and the new camera does compensate for optical aberrations in-camera in ways that you might have reserved for post processing with the X-E1. The sensor is essentially the same in both cameras, and you will, of course, be using the same lenses. </p>

<p>The 16MP X-series cameras can produce very fine image quality. I recently made a 15" x 20" print of one shot from mine that you would likely be unable to distinguish from a similar 5D2 shot. The lenses are top-notch - in fact, I was surprised by the excellent quality of several of them, notably the 35mm f/1.4 and the 14mm f/2.8. The sensor can produce slightly better initial resolution than some other 1.5x cropped sensor bodies at 16MP because it does away with the AA filter. (In my view, this is probably not a big deal, in that you can simply do different sharpening in post and your results will be very similar.)</p>

<p>A full frame 20+MP DSLR is still capable of higher overall image resolution, as much because of the larger sensor as due to the slightly larger number of photo sites. There are simply optical issues that render a larger sensor capable of higher system resolution. But the 1.5x cropped sensor body is a very, very fine performer. For most photographers using a cropped sensor DSLR, a cropped sensor APS-C body like the Fujifilm models will produce essentially the same image quality. And for most photographers, this level of image quality is not only fine, it is more than they need.</p>

<p>The main advantages of the Fujifilm system by comparison to the DSLR system come down to size and weight. As an example, I traveled in the UK and Europe for three weeks last summer and used carry-on luggage for the entire trip. My camera kit consisted of the X-E1, the 35mm f/1.4, the 14mm f/2.8, and the 55-200mm zoom. The whole thing - plus my Macbook Air, cell phone, and a few other assorted things - fit in a small messenger bag. The camera gear I would have had to carry for similar functionality with my 5D2 would not have fit. In addition, you can shoot much more unobtrusively with the smaller camera. With my DSLR rig it is very difficult to escape attention when shooting in urban settings. Most people barely notice me shooting with the Fuji.</p>

<p>Interestingly, and a bit surprising to me, the X-E1 (and, no doubt, the X-E2) is a very good low light performer. I'm actually comfortable shooting it at one stop higher ISO than that 5D2, as odd as that sounds. (For a project I'm currently working on, which has me photographing classical musicians backstage, I often shoot the X-E1 with the 35mm prime <em>and </em>the 5D2 with a large aperture IS zoom at the same time.)</p>

<p>In my photography, the X-E1 is an <em>adjunct </em>to my full frame DSLR. The DSLR can do things that the smaller camera cannot do that are important to me - work with wildlife and sports subjects, provide greater lens flexibility, eke out slightly better image quality for extremely large prints. But the X-E1 does things that the DSLR cannot do as well, especially when it comes to shooting fast and light.</p>

<p>I'm not "most photographers," though. When I'm out and about doing photography and I look around at the many people shooting entry-level DSLRs like the Rebel series and even others, I realize that the <em>majority of them </em>would likely be better served by a smaller, lighter mirror less system like the X-E1.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>The X-E1 is a nice camera but I think most folks with entry-level DSLRs like the Rebel voted with their wallet. The T3i kit is $500 less and widely available at Walmart, Costco, Best Buy, etc. The Fuji, like M43, is difficult to find unless you look really hard.</p>

<p>It is true that the current Canon DSLR "Rebel" kits with the kit lens are less expensive than the Fujifilm with a comparable (but better) lens. Either could work well for lots of folks and either could have advantages for their particular shooting needs. (The current "Rebel" is the t5i, not the t3i, by the way. Older models of cameras can be fine, but do compare horses to horses!)</p>

<p>The Fujifilm cameras are actually quite readily available as are comparable alternatives from other manufacturers. If you happen to hit my article mentioned in my previous post, you can find out more.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>If I wanted a wee DSLR, I'd pay a little more and buy a SL1 for $550. The 18MP CMOS is pretty similar in the EOS M, SL1, T3i, T5i, etc. Most weekend warriors won't care too much about minor tweaks but will buy based on price given similar features and CMOS size. A fist full of benjamins is a big deal to most families looking to upgrade beyond their P&S or phone. The T3i and T4i are still widely available on Amazon and big box chains and that's where America shops. I was at Costco this morning and the camera section was packed with kits and people were grabbing Rebel kits like they were giving them away! They also had white Nikon V series kits but they cost a lot more than the Rebels and were sitting alone on their pallet board. No Fujifilm in sight other than bulk packs of the single-use film cameras.</p>

<p>Either something like the txi series (which I recommend to lots of folks looking for a first DSLR) or one of the small mirror less bodies like the X-E1/2 could be right for various users. </p>

<p>If you don't value the smaller size and weight - and that is a valid perspective - then the tXi body plus the kit lens can be fine. If size/weight do matter to you - and they do to many such users - then not only is the Fujifilm camera smaller, but due to the non-DSLR lens design the lenses are also quite a bit smaller. </p>

<p>I'm partial to the Fujifilm cameras after using the X-E1 extensively, and that is the brand that the OP asked about, but I know a number of people who are very happy with high quality small mirror less cameras like Sony, Olympus, Lumix, and others. There are also some fine deals on slightly older models in that market, too.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>From an image quality perspective, most people don't need the latest, greatest, and most expensive. But, some cameras work better for some people. After that it's just money. In the end you just have to try it and see if it works for you. </p>

<p>I had the same dilemma about a month ago and decided to go with the Canon 6D. I like using primes as well and bought the 6D with the 40mm STM pancake which is absolutely great all purpose lens and cheap. The camera is light and with a normal prime is relatively small, almost like a crop entry level DSLR.<br>

The jpeg quality is supered, compared to my previous 7D.<br>

The reason I did not go with Fuji (as much as I wanted) is the EVF, small ergonomics and future add-ons. Having a much better video option and using Canon's Speedlite's is another reason to use Canon.</p>