Fujifilm X-T3 Image Quality

Above we compare the 26-megapixel X-T3 to its predecessor, the 24-megapixel X-T2. The X-T3 has a slightly lower base ISO of 160 which combined with its newer backside-illuminated sensor should perhaps yield lower noise despite marginally smaller photosites, however when examining the flatter or darker areas of the scene, we see the X-T3 image does contain slightly higher noise levels. This could be due to faster circuitry required for the X-T3's higher performance, or perhaps as a result from the vast increase in PDAF pixels and related circuitry over the X-T2. Whatever the reason, the X-T3 does look just a bit noisier. Deep shadows are however more detailed and not as crushed as from the X-T2, which is a nice improvement. The X-T2 appears to do slightly better with our red-leaf swatch, but the X-T3's slight increase in resolution is likely resolving a bit more of the individual thread pattern which tends to interfere with and break-up the leaf pattern somewhat. Micro contrast and sharpness are slightly better from the X-T3, but we upgraded lenses since the X-T2 was shot, from the Fujinon 60mm f/2.4 macro to the 56mm f/1.2, which is the main reason for the minor improvements in sharpness and contrast. Overall, though, very similar image quality here at base ISO with just slightly higher noise and resolution from the X-T3, along with an improved default tone curve that retains more visible detail in deep shadows.

Here we compare the Fuji X-T3 to the 20.7-megapixel APS-C Nikon D500 at base ISO. The 26-megapixel X-T3 does resolve more detail than the Nikon in most areas, while the D500 produces a slightly crisper image with higher contrast, which is especially noticeable in the red-leaf swatch. However, sharpening haloes are more evident from the Nikon. Noise levels are similar here at base ISO, with perhaps just slightly higher luma noise but lower chroma noise from the X-T3, however keep in mind the higher base ISO of the Fuji. Both cameras offer great color, though the Fuji's is more accurate overall.

Above we compare the Micro Four Thirds Olympus E-M1 Mark II to the APS-C X-T3. You would think the 26-megapixel X-T3 would have a noticeable resolution advantage over the 20-megapixel E-M1 II here, but both cameras have fairly similar resolutions on the vertical axis (4160 vs 3888 pixels) which is how this scene is framed, so the resolution difference is pretty minor and mostly boils down to different demosaicing algorithms and processing. Luminance noise appears higher from the Fuji, but chrominance noise is higher from the Olympus. The Olympus produces a crisper image with higher contrast, though default sharpening also appears to be higher. The X-T3 resolves more fine detail in our red-leaf swatch even though contrast is lower, while the E-M1 II renders it smoother but with less detail, however the Olympus does better with thread pattern in the pink fabric. Both cameras produce good color, though the Fuji's are a bit warmer and not quite as saturated.

Above we compare the X-T3 to another 20-megapixel Micro Four Thirds camera, the Panasonic G9. Again, you might expect the 26-megapixel X-T3 to have a noticeable resolution advantage over the 20-megapixel G9 here, but the resolution difference is minor. Luminance noise appears a little higher from the X-T3 in flatter areas, but the G9 produces a crisper image and does a better job rendering fine detail overall. The G9 does noticeably better in most of the fabrics, but it also shows more aliasing artifacts which the X-T3's X-Trans filter helps avoid. Both cameras produce pleasing colors though the Fuji's are warmer and a bit more accurate.

Here we compare the X-T3 to the 24-megapixel APS-C Sony A6500. The A6500 produces a much crisper and more detailed image, yet its sharpening algorithm produces less noticeable haloes around high-contrast edges. Contrast is also higher from the Sony, especially in the red-leaf swatch, however it does contain obvious moiré patterns while the Fuji image does not. Luma noise is a bit higher from the Fuji, but again, chroma noise is much lower. Color is generally more pleasing and accurate from the Fuji, with less orange to yellow and yellow to green shift, but the Sony preserves much of the subtle coloration caused by offset printing in the mosaic label while the Fuji preserves very little of the coloration.

Here at ISO 1600, we again see slightly higher contrast and sharpness from the X-T3 versus its older sibling, likely because of the better lens, but also slightly higher noise levels. Still, it's pretty close and both do extremely well for APS-C cameras.

Above at ISO 1600, the Nikon's rendering is much softer than it was at base ISO, while the X-T3's is only slightly softer, and the Fuji continues to resolve more detail in most areas. While contrast is still higher in the red-leaf swatch, the D500's default noise reduction has blurred away more fine detail than the X-T3. Luminance noise is however a bit higher from the X-T3, which is no surprise thanks to its smaller pixels.

The Fuji X-T3 starts to pull away from the Olympus E-M1 II here at ISO 1600, with much lower chroma noise and fewer noise reduction artifacts, though luma noise is higher and coarser. While contrast and sharpness are a bit better from the Olympus, the E-M1 II's default noise reduction starts to distort and smear subtle detail in the mosaic crop and especially in the red-leaf fabric.

The G9 continues to do a better job rendering fine detail than the X-T3 here at ISO 1600, while at the same time producing much lower luma noise. The Fuji however produces fewer aliasing artifacts and lower chroma noise. Again, colors are noticeably warmer from the Fuji but more pleasing.

The A6500 continues to produce a sharper, more detailed image at ISO 1600, but the offset printing coloration in the mosaic crop is no longer present, suppressed by the Sony's high ISO noise reduction. The Sony also appears to do better in the red-leaf swatch, however much of the fine detail is distorted and false. The A6500 definitely does better with detail in the pink fabric, though, however the X-T3 continues to deliver better overall color.

Once again, very similar image quality from the two siblings here at ISO 3200, with just slightly higher noise levels from the X-T3.

Once again, we see the Fuji X-T3 hold onto more detail than the Nikon D500 here at ISO 3200, though the D500 continues to produce higher contrast with more obvious sharpening haloes. Luma noise levels are again a bit higher from the X-T3 but chroma noise is lower, and overall the X-T3 produces the better image here.

The Fuji X-T3 is the overall winner here at ISO 3200, with better detail and fewer noise reduction artifacts than the Olympus E-M1 II. Luminance noise from the X-T3 does appear a little higher, but chrominance noise is lower, and the Fuji hangs on to more fine detail in most areas.

At ISO 3200, the G9 image appears sharper, a little contrastier and cleaner, but with more noticeable sharpening haloes. Fine detail is a little better from the X-T3 in our troublesome red-leaf fabric, though both cameras blur it significantly at this ISO. Colors are still warmer and more pleasing from the Fuji.

The Sony A6500 still produces a crisper, contrastier image with more punch here at ISO 3200, however noise levels in flatter areas are higher. Again, the red-leaf pattern may look more detailed from the Sony, but much of that detail is false, and the Fuji still produces more pleasing colors.