Fujifilm X100 Noise Head-to-Head

March 23, 2011 | Mark Goldstein | Digital | 17 Comments | |
Fujifilm X100 Noise Head-to-Head Image

Fujifilm X100 vs Panasonic GH2

A comparison of the JPEG noise performance between the Fujifilm Finepix X100 and the Panasonic Lumix GH2.

Note that the ISO samples were shot using each camera's default JPEG settings, and there are some variances in the focal length and the white balance between the two cameras.

Fujifilm X100 Panasonic GH2

ISO 100 (100% Crop)

ISO 160 (100% Crop)


ISO 200 (100% Crop)

ISO 200 (100% Crop)


ISO 400 (100% Crop)

ISO 400 (100% Crop)


ISO 800 (100% Crop)

ISO 800 (100% Crop)


ISO 1600 (100% Crop)

ISO 1600 (100% Crop)


ISO 3200 (100% Crop)

ISO 3200 (100% Crop)


ISO 6400 (100% Crop)

ISO 6400 (100% Crop)


ISO 12800 (100% Crop)

ISO 12800 (100% Crop)

Entry Tags

test, noise, comparison, compare, ISO, panasonic gh2, fujfilm x100, iso 100-12800, ISO range, head-to-head, leica x1, canon 600

Your Comments

17 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#1 GaGa

Ghosting/Smearing/Streaking/Banding - what is THAT you can see from the ISO200 on the Fuji shots?  The noise control is superb, but that weird line of banding or whatever it is you can see is disturbing.

5:46 pm - Wednesday, March 23, 2011

#2 robenroute

What can I say? Impressive…

5:46 pm - Wednesday, March 23, 2011

#3 zebarnabe

There is only one issue with this comparison…

What were the picked values for aperture and shutter exposure time, I ask about this because Canon ISO 1600 it’s in reality a real ISO 1200 value, that is, you require to expose for more time or with bigger aperture to be properly exposed.

Panasonic GH2 stated ISOs are mostly true (where in old GH1 ISO 800 was more like real ISO 1200)

I don’t know about Fujifilm X100, but even if it has the same pushed ISO that Canon has, it’s performance it’s quite impressive…

The ‘banding’ on ISO 200 looks the an over-sharpening of the glossy reflection on the book side… It’s noticeable in all samples of all cameras, Leica X1 exhibits this effect quite nicely as it has a strong unsharp mask by default… Not something to worry about ...

6:17 pm - Wednesday, March 23, 2011

#4 Ranger 9

The X100 produces 12.3 mpixels and the GH2 produces 16.2 effective mpixels.

So how is it that the “100% crop” images show details at exactly the same size?

10:02 pm - Wednesday, March 23, 2011

#5 Richard

At higher ISO settings the Fuji is king, but at the cost of the lowest ISO’s, when the advantage is clearly with the Lumix GH2.

As GaGa says, whats that all about because it looks dreadful when the camera should be producing its best results.

Fuji seem to have scored an own goal. Bad Fuji.

11:37 pm - Wednesday, March 23, 2011

#6 Mark Goldstein

The aperture was f/8 for all 3 cameras, with varying shutter speeds.

As zebarnabe has pointed out, the “weird line of banding” is actually a reflection in the spine of the book, which the X100 has recorded in finer detail at the lower ISO settings.

Ranger 9, as stated there are some variances in the focal length used.

9:30 am - Thursday, March 24, 2011

#7 anthony morrison

Well i am not that good with these machines but yes i understand what you want us to show and that is very interesting.So yes i must say Fuji innovations are at there best.

11:56 am - Thursday, March 24, 2011

#8 Mike

Wow. That 12.3mpxl sensor is pretty impressive. It seems that all this hype and lack of pro users has really put a damper on this niche market camera. Digital Rev and a few other sites praise this camera. Can’t wait till they arrive in Canada and they call me to pick mine up… :-)

5:53 pm - Thursday, March 24, 2011

#9 Fair test?

Comparing an APS against a Four Thirds sensor is not exactly an even playing field, is it? Sensor size will affect results especially when it’s a smaller sensor w/more pixels vs. a larger sensor with fewer pixels. :-) That said, the X100 image quality in the samples is impressive for any APS camera. I’d love to see how it compares with the Sony backside-illuminated sensor found on the Nikon D7000 and Pentax K5.

7:35 pm - Thursday, March 24, 2011

#10 Mark Goldstein

We included the GH2 because many people will be comparing the X100 with Micro Four Thirds from a size and handling point of view.

8:52 pm - Thursday, March 24, 2011

#11 Jerodequin

How about some raw comparisons? JPEG is just showing us how each manufacturer decides to process their raw files.

5:56 pm - Friday, March 25, 2011

#12 MSL

Hard to say from jpegs, but that seems to me to be about a 2-stop advantage to the X100. Out of that, if I have my calculations right, a bit over 2/3 of a stop is the sensor size (from the 2/1.5=1.33 ratio of crop factors), and a bit over 1/3 of a stop is from the different pixel counts (sqrt(16/12)=1.15). The 1/3 stop is not really an advantage from the user’s point of view, since it has no impact on total image noise (the higher pixel count means some noise gets averaged-out for a print the same size). That leaves almost 1 and 2/3 stop advantage from a user’s point of view, of which almost 1 stop is technology advantage. I haven’t read much about the X100, but this would lead me to guess it uses a Sony sensor?

1:11 pm - Saturday, March 26, 2011

#13 farhana

wow i like it.this is best

4:41 pm - Saturday, March 26, 2011

#14 Ivo

Hi Mark,

Again an outstanding test. I have two camera’s. A Pentax K-r instaed of my old eos 40D and I like it much better than the canon. But besides that, I own an old Fuji S3 pro and it is still phantastic (with the Sigma 2.8/24-60mm).
I agree that the Leica X1 is more impressive up to ISO 1600. But I think (did not see it until now)that the dynamic range of the Fuji X100 will be outstanding and beat most of its competors, including a lot of dSLR’s. My old S3 is still in DR a winner.
Thank you so much for sharring this topic.

Kind regards, Ivo
(the Netherlands)

2:28 pm - Wednesday, March 30, 2011

#15 Siggy

“A Pentax K-r instaed of my old eos 40D and I like it much better than the canon.”

Stupid Dutch.

11:42 am - Monday, April 4, 2011

#16 inevitablecraftsstudio

i dont know why its a problem that one camera has a bigger sensor and one hase more resolution.
the point why these two are compared is because of their formfactor and the potentional customers they attract.

the point that fuji chose a bigger sensor and lower resolution is a plus for fuji, but that doesnt mean that the test is unfair.

the test simply shows us that fuji made a good decision :)

also 1:1 vs 100%
what really counts in photography is the object i took a photo of. so when cropping, its ok to crop to the same part of the picture.

also it shows that despite of the µFT having more resolution in the testcrop, it looks less detailed in all shots.
the lightreflexions on the books are not even present in the µFT picture ^^

12:15 pm - Wednesday, June 1, 2011

#17 gourmetguy

I don’t see the lens you are using

essentially it will have to be an F2 prime for fair results.

If your using the kit lens then this test is void

6:33 pm - Friday, April 6, 2012