Fuji X70 Image Quality Comparison

Below are crops from our laboratory Still Life target comparing Fuji X70 image quality to its larger, more expensive X-Trans II sensor-equipped sibling, the X100T, well as against several competing fixed-lens models at similar price points or in similar categories: the Nikon Coolpix A, Panasonic LX100, Ricoh GR II and Sigma dp2 Quattro.

NOTE: These images are from best quality JPEGs straight out of the camera, at default settings including noise reduction and using the camera's actual base ISO (not extended ISO settings). Clicking any crop will take you to a carrier page where you can click once again to access the full resolution image as delivered straight from the camera. For those interested in working with the RAW files involved, click these links to visit each camera's respective sample image thumbnail page: Fuji X70, Fuji X100T, Nikon Coolpix A, Panasonic LX100, Ricoh GR II and Sigma dp2 Quattro -- links to the RAW files appear beneath those for the JPEG images, wherever we have them. And remember, you can always go to our world-renowned Comparometer to compare the Fuji X70 to any camera we've ever tested!

Fujifilm X70 vs Fujifilm X100T at Base ISO

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 200
Fujifilm X100T at ISO 200

Here, we compare the Fuji X70 to its larger and more expensive sibling, the X100T. Both share the same 16-megapixel X-Trans CMOS II APS-C sensor, but the X100T features a 35mm equivalent f/2.0 lens instead of a 28mm eq. f/2.8 optic, and includes a hybrid viewfinder among other differences. As you'd expect, image quality is very similar from the two closely related models, however the X100T's image is a touch crisper, likely because of a slightly sharper lens. Colors are however a bit warmer from the X70.

Fujifilm X70 vs Nikon Coolpix A at Base ISO

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 100
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 200
Nikon Coolpix A at ISO 100

Here at base ISO, the 16-megapixel APS-C-sensored Nikon Coolpix A produces a cleaner image, but notice its base ISO is one stop lower than the X70's. The Nikon also captures a bit more detail while generating fewer demosaicing artifacts than the X70, but its image looks a bit soft by comparison, with pretty conservative sharpening. The Nikon produces noticeably higher contrast in our tricky red-leaf fabric, however the X70 renders fine detail in said fabric a little better.

Fujifilm X70 vs Panasonic LX100 at Base ISO

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 200
Panasonic LX100 at ISO 200

The 12.7-megapixel Panasonic LX100's image is a bit noisier than the X70 at base ISO, with noticeably higher chroma noise in the shadows. And the LX100's image appears darker overall even though middle gray is closely matched between the two cameras, thanks to different tone curves, etc. Colors are not as accurate or pleasing from the LX100 and the camera also shows slightly higher aliasing artifacts, however it manages to capture similar levels of detail despite its lower resolution.

Fujifilm X70 vs Ricoh GR II at Base ISO

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 100
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 200
Ricoh GR II at ISO 100

Here we compare the X70 to the 16-megapixel Ricoh GR II with its traditional Bayer-filtered APS-C sensor. Both produce excellent quality images at base ISO, but there are obvious differences (and be aware that the Fuji's base ISO is higher). The Ricoh does a little better with fine detail in the mosaic crop as well as in the pink fabric, while the Fuji does better with fine detail in the red-leaf fabric and produces less obvious sharpening halos around high-contrast edges. Colors are also warmer and brighter from the Fuji X70.

Fujifilm X70 vs Sigma dp2 Quattro at Base ISO

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 100
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 200
Sigma dp2 Quattro at ISO 100

Apart from missing detail in the red-leaf fabric, the Sigma dp2 Quattro's image is far more detailed than the X70's, and contains no color interpolation artifacts thanks to its full-color Foveon sensor. The Sigma's image is also incredibly crisp but it does however look somewhat oversharpened. Luminance noise is higher from the Sigma, and and colors aren't as pleasing as the Fuji's. (Sigma cameras in particular really benefit from shooting in RAW mode, as Sigma's Photo Pro software does a much better job than the camera's JPEG engine, particularly as ISO rises.)

Fujifilm X70 vs Fujifilm X100T at ISO 1600

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 1600
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 1600
Fujifilm X100T at ISO 1600

Again, as expected, very similar images from these two siblings at ISO 1600 with just slight differences in sharpness and color.

Fujifilm X70 vs Nikon Coolpix A at ISO 1600

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 1600
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 1600
Nikon Coolpix A at ISO 1600

Here at ISO 1600, the Nikon's image is noticeably grainier in flatter areas, and it looks fuzzy compared to the X70's image. The Nikon continues to produce better contrast in our tricky red-leaf fabric, but fine detail is still better from the Fuji.

Fujifilm X70 vs Panasonic LX100 at ISO 1600

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 1600
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX100 at ISO 1600

The Fuji X70 is the clear winner here at ISO 1600, with a cleaner, brighter more vibrant looking image with more pleasing color.

Fujifilm X70 vs Ricoh GR II at ISO 1600

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 1600
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 1600
Ricoh GR II at ISO 1600

At ISO 1600, the Fuji X70 produces slightly higher luminance noise but lower chrominance noise, yet it still manages to reproduce much better detail in our red-leaf fabric. The Fuji image is also brighter and crisper looking, with more "pop".

Fujifilm X70 vs Sigma dp2 Quattro at ISO 1600

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 1600
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 1600
Sigma dp2 Quattro at ISO 1600

There's no contest here at ISO 1600, as the Sigma has to work very hard at separating colors polluted by noise from its full-color sensor, leading to a tremendous loss of fine detail, a lot of noise, and very poor color in its JPEG images.

Fujifilm X70 vs Fujifilm X100T at ISO 3200

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 3200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 3200
Fujifilm X100T at ISO 3200

Once again, very similar image quality from the two Fujis at ISO 3200, though the X100T continues to capture a bit more detail while the X70 continues to produce slightly better color.

Fujifilm X70 vs Nikon Coolpix A at ISO 3200

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 3200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 3200
Nikon Coolpix A at ISO 3200

Similar to the differences we saw at ISO 1600, the Fuji X70 delivers a cleaner, clearer, sharper image with better color at ISO 3200. The Nikon continues to produce much higher contrast in our red-leaf swatch, but the Fuji is better at retaining fine detail.

Fujifilm X70 vs Panasonic LX100 at ISO 3200

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX100 at ISO 3200

Stronger default noise reduction from the Panasonic produces a slightly cleaner image here at 3200, but fine detail suffers more than from the X70 especially in the red-leaf fabric, and the Fuji still delivers a brighter image with better color.

Fujifilm X70 vs Ricoh GR II at ISO 3200

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 3200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 3200
Ricoh GR II at ISO 3200

The Fuji X70 produces a slightly cleaner image with brighter colors and much better detail in the red-leaf fabric, though the GR II arguably does a bit better with fine detail in the mosaic, while producing fewer demosaicing artifacts.

Fujifilm X70 vs Sigma dp2 Quattro at ISO 3200

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 3200
Fujifilm X70 at ISO 3200
Sigma dp2 Quattro at ISO 3200

Once again, the Sigma dp2 Quattro's image quality doesn't even come close to the Fuji X70's at ISO 3200, with very high noise, smudged details and very poor color.

Fujifilm X70 vs. Fujifilm X100T, Nikon Coolpix A, Panasonic LX100, Ricoh GR II, Sigma dp2 Quattro

100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 100100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 100100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 100
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Fujifilm X70 test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Fujifilm X100T test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Nikon Coolpix A test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Ricoh GR II test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Sigma dp2 Quattro test image taken at ISO 6400
Fujifilm
X70
ISO 200
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Fujifilm
X100T
ISO 200
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Nikon
Coolpix A
ISO 100
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Panasonic
LX100
ISO 200
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Ricoh
GR II
ISO 100
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Sigma
dp2 Quattro
ISO 100
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Detail comparison. High-contrast detail is also important, pushing the camera in different ways, so we like to look at it, too. Here we can see the Fuji X70 doesn't do quite as well as the X100T with high-contrast detail, likely due to differences in optics, but it performs reasonably well compared to Bayer-filtered competition, except in the small red lettering which tend to show more demosaicing errors. At base ISO the Sigma is the clear winner but perhaps even a bit too sharp, however its image quality degrades very rapidly as ISO sensitivity climbs.

 

Fuji X70 Print Quality Analysis

A superb 24 x 36 inch print at ISO 100/200; a good 16 x 20 inch print at ISO 1600 and a nice 5 x 7 at ISO 12,800.

Canon PRO-1000 Printer ImageISO 100 and 200 prints look quite impressive at 24 x 36 inches, with excellent fine detail and great looking colors. This print has quite a lot of "pop" to it. Wall display prints are certainly fine at 30 x 40 inches, depending on your viewing distance, but for critical applications the 16-megapixel X70 performs best at 24 x 36 inches as a maximum print size. Note that the native ISO for the X70 is 200, with ISO 100 being an expanded setting.

ISO 400 also delivers a solid 24 x 36 inch print. While not quite as critically sharp as the print at the native and expanded settings above, and with just a subtle hint of noise in a few flatter areas of our test target, this size still easily passes our "good" grade for print quality. Of note, the 20 x 30 inch print here looks superb.

ISO 800 yields a 20 x 30 inch print that most definitely passes the test. As with the 24 x 36 inch print at ISO 400 there is the slightest trace of noise apparent in a few flatter areas like shadows, but not enough to suggest a reduction in print size. Fine detail is still quite good at this size as well.

ISO 1600 produces a solid 16 x 20 inch print, which is quite a large size for this sensitivity. Contrast detail is now beginning to fade in our tricky red-leaf swatch, and there's a subtle trace of noise in flatter areas of our target similar to the issues mentioned above, but still a good print for ISO 1600 with nice fine detail and good color reproduction.

ISO 3200 prints a 13 x 19 inch print that almost passes our good grade, and is certainly usable for less critical applications. The 11 x 14 inch print here is quite nice however, and warrants our full seal of approval. Contrast detail is now gone in our tricky red-leaf fabric swatch, but this is common among most all cameras by this ISO save for a few with larger sensors.

ISO 6400 delivers an 8 x 10 inch print similar to the 11 x 14 at ISO 3200, with good fine detail and full color reproduction. Other than the common issue with our red fabric swatch, there are really no other apparent issues and the print is quite nice for this gain setting.

ISO 12,800 allows for a good 5 x 7 inch print, which yet again is an impressive feat for this ISO sensitivity and sensor size. At this time, larger sizes are generally only found at this ISO on some full-frame and medium format cameras. There's nice color reproduction still being output, and very little in the way of noise or noise-reduction artifacts.

ISO 25,600 yields a 4 x 6 inch print similar to the 5 x 7 at ISO 12,800. While not a large print, there aren't that many APS-C sensored cameras that can deliver a worthwhile print at this ISO as of this writing, so a noteworthy achievement for the X70.

ISO 51,200 allows for a 4 x 6 inch print that's not too bad, and usable for less critical applications, but there's a bit too much noise to pass our good rating. As such, this setting is best avoided for printing purposes.

The Fuji X70 excels in the print quality department, no question about it. From a superb 24 x 36 inch print at native and expanded low all the way up to a good 4 x 6 inch print at the lofty ISO 25,600, your printer will thank you for images from the X70 even as ISO begins to rise. It's not a surprise that the highest ISO of 51,200 isn't capable of a good print, as not many cameras can yet pull that off without a full frame or larger sensor. However, knowing that you can count on good 8 x 10s all the way up to ISO 6400 from a camera as compact as the Fuji X70 is certainly reassuring while you're out in the field shooting.

About our print-quality testing: Our "Reference Printer"

Canon PRO-1000 Printer ImageTesting hundreds of digital cameras, we've found that you can only tell so much about a camera's image quality by viewing its images on-screen. Ultimately, there's no substitute for printing a lot of images and examining them closely. For this reason, we routinely print sample images from the cameras we test on our Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 printer, which we named our "Printer of the Year" in our 2015 COTY awards.

The Canon PRO-1000 has a lot of characteristics that make it a natural to use for our "reference printer." When it comes to judging how well a camera's photos print, resolution and precise rendering are paramount. The PRO-1000's more than 18,000 individual nozzles combine with an air feeding system that provides exceptional droplet-placement accuracy. Its 11-color LUCIA PRO ink system delivers a wide color gamut and dense blacks, giving us a true sense of the cameras' image quality. To best see fine details, we've always printed on glossy paper, so the PRO-1000's "Chroma Optimizer" overcoat that minimizes "bronzing" or gloss differential is important to us. (Prior to the PRO-1000, we've always used dye-based printers, in part to avoid the bronzing problems with pigment-based inks.) Finally, we just don't have time to deal with clogged inkjet heads, and the PRO-1000 does better in that respect than any printer we've ever used. If you don't run them every day or two, inkjet printers tend to clog. Canon's thermal-inkjet technology is inherently less clog-prone than other approaches, but the PRO-1000 takes this a step further, with sensors that monitor every inkjet nozzle. If one clogs, it will assign another to take over its duties. In exchange for a tiny amount of print speed, this lets you defer cleaning cycles, which translates into significant ink savings. In our normal workflow, we'll often crank out a hundred or more letter-size prints in a session, but then leave the printer to sit for anywhere from days to weeks before the next camera comes along. In over a year of use, we've never had to run a nozzle-cleaning cycle on our PRO-1000.

See our Canon PRO-1000 review for a full overview of the printer from the viewpoint of a fine-art photographer.

*Disclosure: Canon provided us with the PRO-1000 and a supply of ink to use in our testing, and we receive advertising consideration for including this mention when we talk about camera print quality. Our decision to use the PRO-1000 was driven by the printer itself, though, prior to any discussion with Canon on the topic. (We'd actually been using an old Pixma PRO 9500II dye-based printer for years previously, and paying for our own ink, until we decided that the PRO-1000 was the next-generation printer we'd been waiting for.)

 



Enter this month to win:

1 $300 Adorama Gift Certificate

2 $200 Adorama Gift Certificate

3 $100 Adorama Gift Certificate