ERROR - Fuji X100 - Low Light Various ISOs

[Laurence]

Please see my posting a few posts down this thread. I made a stupid
omission error. The images, EXCEPT for the second image of
the mossy log, and the third image of the flower petals, WERE run
through NeatImage, a new program that I downloaded. I'm sorry for
the mistake, but wanted to catch it before anyone thought I was a
total dumba**. I think that I need to quit trying to multi-task. So
as not to confuse you, the first and last images WERE run through the
new program Neat Image.

ISO 9200




ISO 6000 THIS IMAGE AND THE ONE BELOW WERE NOT
SMOOTHED WITH NEAT IMAGE.
THE REST OF THE IMAGES WERE SMOOTHED WITH NEAT IMAGE.




ISO 4000 THIS IMAGE AND THE ONE ABOVE WERE NOT SMOOTHED
WITH NEAT IMAGE.





ISO 5200
[b]

[berraneck]

wow! I can´t stop wondering, how beautiful photos are made with this camera!

[Jesito]

As much as you post, I feel more and more convinced that it's the way to go!.

I've been offered one by 1.300€ (three in stock). Still too high to me...
I expect going down in the next weeks, when production resumes.

Thanks for sharing!.

Regards.
Jes.

[cooltouch]

Hey Larry,

I'm looking at the noise in the OOF areas, and there doesn't seem to be much correlation between ISO and the amount of noise. In fact, even at ISO 9200, I would consider the noise I see to be equivalent to a fairly fine-grained film. Very usable.

Makes me envious. My cheezy Canon gets too noisy above ISO 400!

[rbelyell]

larry i simply cannot believe the quality of these photos at these ios's, simply amazing. btw i really love 3, just a wonderfully thought out shot and quite beautiful.

OT, did you get a chance to check out From The Edge?
tony

[Laurence]

I'm looking at my post this morning, and I mad a GLARING omission.

I write my posts on Word Pad, then transfer them to the text boxes here
on MFLenses.

In the transfer copy and paste, I missed the paragraph explaining that
these WERE run through NeatImage noise reduction program. I really
like the program so far, and it took existing "noise" and sort of smoothed
it out, which I imagine most programs like that do.

I just wanted to be sure to get that in, so no one thinks I'm trying to mislead you.

I will make sure to be more careful in my pasting from Word Pad.

[LucisPictor]

Thank God!
I already thought your cam had an ERROR!

Wonderful shots that really show the capability of this camera.
But of course there is more to it than just a good lens, a good sensor and some nice algorithms - Larry, you are an extremely talented photographer who knows how to shoot!
And that accounts for those images even more than the X100.

[ylyad]

Despite your "omission", I'm still impressed. And actually, Carsten got it right: these are really very good shots, whatever the cam.

On the sensor side, I'm still looking only slight differences between the ones using NeatImage and the others. And I think the green of the #2 are just impressive! I'm just a little annoyed with the blur on top and on right side, I (personally) think that closing a bit more to increase depth of field would have been better.

[berraneck]

for me the images are still stunning, even PPed - having in mind the size of the camera. it makes images as good as nikon d300 - which is one of the best aps-c cameras, but weighs 3 or 4times more. sadly the price is the same or more (including a 24mm lens for that nikon)

[rbelyell]

we all pp, just like ansel adams would spend hours in the darkroom. no difference, its now just more democratic!

ppd or not ppd, this low light performance makes my ep2 seem like a toy, and beats out my 5d as well...