Fujifilm X-T1 Image Quality

The Canon 70D has roughly four megapixels greater resolution than the X-T1 and is also currently the most affordable of the bunch other than the X-E2. Even though the resolution is different, each appear to have similar sharpness and detail in the first two crops, but the fabric comparisons are interesting. The 70D clearly out-resolves the X-T1 in the pink fabric swatch, and while the red fabric shows more contrast, the X-T1 actually renders the red fabric closer to the way that it appears to the eye. In the first two crops, it's also interesting to note that the 70D is applying a good bit more sharpening than the X-T1 does (note the slight halos around the printed lines in the top crops). This has the effect of significantly increasing the contrast in the details of the figure's robe in the second set of crops, but it's artificial, not representing actual subject detail.

As expected, these two 16-megapixel cameras from Fuji appear virtually identical here, although the X-T1 seems to pull just a bit more detail out of the red fabric.

At 24 megapixels, the D7100 is roughly eight megapixels greater in resolution, and the images look so much larger that it's tough making accurate comparisons at base ISO. The mosaic tile image in the D7100 looks quite good, and it certainly does a good job resolving the fabric swatches as well. The X-T1 is perhaps still a bit more natural in the red fabric (reality is somewhere between the two), but loses much detail in the pink swatch. Overall, we have to give the nod to the higher-resolution D7100 here at base ISO.

The K-3 clearly dominates the fine detail landscape here, with an even sharper rendering of the mosaic tile than the D7100, and far more detail than the X-T1. The K-3 has 24-megapixel resolution and simply outmatches the X-T1 in most respects. As you'll see with virtually all Pentax cameras, they tend to render the pink fabric swatch as appearing too magenta, but the rendering of the red fabric swatch is the best of all six cameras in this comparison, so there's only that one minor issue with the pink rendering from the K-3.

The A7 showcases what you get from a full-frame camera sporting 24-megapixel resolution, and that's a smoking amount of fine detail. You'll seldom see our mosaic tile crop look like this without going to medium format, nor the incredible detail in the pink fabric swatch, which is clearly in a different class than the X-T1 for those areas. It costs a few hundred dollars more, has a more limited lens selection and its relatively weak low pass filter means you may also suffer from moiré in certain instances like the red fabric swatch above, so there are still trade-offs.

This is where things really get interesting. The X-T1 clearly handles noise better in the shadows behind the top bottle crop, while the 70D has noticeable smudging apparent in the mosaic tiles. A definite nod to the X-T1 on this one.

Yet again as with base ISO we see virtually identical performance between these two 16-megapixel APS-C cousins. Not much else to report on here, other than a barely perceptible increase in fine detail from the X-T1 in the tiles and fabric areas.

Similar to the 70D comparison, the X-T1 does a better job than the D7100 at controlling noise. The D7100 doesn't smudge the images like the 70D, but certainly begins to lose some critical detail.

Very interesting here as well, because where the K-3 clearly out-resolved the X-T1 at base ISO, the advantages virtually disappear here at ISO 1600. The X-T1 crops appear even-handed and natural, while the K3 exhibits more noise in the first crop, less sharpness in the tiles crop and loses all contrast detail in our red fabric swatch.

I had to double-check to make sure the A7 crops were actually ISO 1600! Once again, it simply outmatches the X-T1 in virtually all areas, including fine detail, less noise, etc. There is still a trace of moiré in the red fabric swatch, but it won't likely be a factor in the majority of real world images. A stunning performance for ISO 1600. The A7 is of course a full-frame camera, with its much larger sensor area, but it clearly belongs in this comparison, given the relatively small price difference between it and the X-T1.

Similar to the ISO 1600 comparison, the 70D suffers from more noise in the shadow areas behind the bottle crop and a good deal of smudging artifacts in the mosaic tiles. The fabric swatches have differing issues with each camera, but are roughly a draw. In general, it's advantage: X-T1 here.

And, once again, virtually identical images between these two as we would expect.

Nikon cameras aimed at the enthusiast market tend to have noise that appears more like film grain as ISO rises than we see with most competing models, and that can sometimes be a good thing. In this case, however, there's just too much of it in comparison to the more even-handed rendering from Fuji.

As with ISO 1600, the X-T1 pulls ahead of the K-3 for overall image quality, as the K-3 has too much noise in certain areas and too little detail in others. Low light shooters comparing these two models will certainly want to take note here.

We finally begin to see noise processing artifacts in the A7 here, which were virtually nonexistent at ISO 1600, but they're not bad at all. These are at default JPEG noise reduction and sharpening settings, so your output shooting in RAW will certainly vary, depending on the RAW converter you use, and the choices you make for noise reduction and sharpening. Either way, as you'd expect from a full-frame sensor, the A7 appears far superior as a high-ISO performer than the X-T1 in most regards.