[Steinar1]

All is in the title. Check out the link [url="http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/iso-test-fuji-x-pro-compared-with-the-canon-5d-markii/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter"]http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/iso-test-fuji-x-pro-compared-with-the-canon-5d-markii/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter[/url]

I think the X Pro 1 is defending itself remarkably well gainst the 5D MK II §

[arvydas]

I vote for Canon <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. IMO looks much better.



A.

[Steinar1]

Really! To me it seems that the Fuji has less noice at 6400, but slightly less detail as well. Not bad from a APS-C vs FF and especially since this may still not be production line camera. I think the X Pro 1 defends itself remarkably well.

[Brightcolours]

To me too, the 5D mk II crops look better. The JPEG ones have more detail left.



Two points:

The Fuji images seem a bit darker. This then gives an advantage to the 5D mk II. Also, silkypix clearly does not give both conversion sets the same treatment here. The Fuji ones have the softer look with big weak colour blodges which are tell tale signs for quite heavy NR, the 5D mk II shows little NR.



Still, not bad for the Fuji at all.