CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

I think that is what everyone who has Fujis likes about them, - the JPEG color is so beautiful - especially the skin tones. Most people shooting Fujis don't bother with raw - the JPEGS are so good.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Kind of depends on what pictures you want to take. Last year I was teaching part-time at a local college when I saw a maintenance man taking a picture of a local tree with his phone. When I discovered there was a hawk hunting down {but ultimately failing} a squirrel, I pulled my phone out also. My pictures were extremely disappointing, so I started keeping my Pentax Q-7 kit in my book bag. Right now phones are good choices for snap shots, but generally lack the flexibility most of us expect from cameras in this thread.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yes, and the film simulations are great! You can't find those in raw mode.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

IT AIN'T SO CHOLLY!!!

dhelix33 Loc: Live in Raleigh, NC - Grew up in Teaneck, NJ

In reference to actually answering your original question: "... looking at the nikon j5 and Ideas how it shoots..." - I own Nikon 1 J1 and J5 mirrorless cameras. The cameras get limited use - such as when I capture images ‘on-the-fly’ at family gatherings or when traveling. However, I never use them in my studio or for services provided to clients. I especially like these smaller designed Nikon mirrorless devices because they have the capability for - decent - image quality captures, and they are so light! I do prefer to shoot in RAW format with my FX and DX Nikon dSLRs. However, I discovered images have better noise reduction when captured in JPEG format on these small sensor mirrorless cameras. Have attached a few of Nikon 1 J1 and J5 images samples from my database.

Cheers!
Greg

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor (full frame) 14-24mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Sigma (full frame) 12-24mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

Nikon 1 J1 and Nikkor 10-30mm

(Download)

rossk Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Agree. The XT2 is great. So too are the XT1 and the new Fujifilm X100F. Fantastic walk around cameras - lenses are of excellent quality.

jsenear Loc: Hopkins, MN.

Nice shots. I get comparable quality with my Nikon V1 and my Son's Nikon S1 camera. I belong to a local camera group. Many of the members have tried shooting with my V1 and come away surprised. A few have told me they have followed the reviews on the V series cameras and thought they all were crap. 15 minutes using one of these cameras will dispel those notions for good.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

My experience with my Pentax Q-7 has confirmed my earlier concerns; I will not buy another MILC without an EVF - and, yes, I know about Hoodman {and have one}, but that adds bother I don't need.

dhelix33 Loc: Live in Raleigh, NC - Grew up in Teaneck, NJ

CORRECTION! THE LAST THREE IMAGES POSTED WERE CAPTURED WITH THE "Nikon 1 J5 and Nikkor 10-30mm"

Greg

nanakristine

So is the quality of photos the censor or the pixels?

dhelix33 Loc: Live in Raleigh, NC - Grew up in Teaneck, NJ

??

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Please use "Quote Reply" so we have context for the comment/question.

You do know that a sensor contains picture elements {aka pixels}, don't you?

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

^^^ Like this: vvv



Depends.

Image Quality is a complex and complicated issue with lots of variables of which Sensor and resolution (megapixels) are only part.
You will also need a fast image processor with well-written algorithms, a good lens and sound photographic technique on the part of the photographer.

All other things being equal, larger sensors tend to be found in more expensive cameras which tend to have a combination of all the equipment related variables covered. That is not to say that a 36 megapixel camera won't produce the SAME image quality as a 42 megapixel camera; it CAN. The more megapixels you have, the larger you can reproduce that image.

But will a 36 or 42 megapixel Full Frame camera give you better image quality than a 24 megapixel APS-C camera, all other factors being equal? IT SURE CAN.

nanakristine

Wondering which makes the photo a ggod quality photo a good censor or the amount of pixels? Sorry

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Neither. The true, if flip answer is: the PHOTOGRAPHER.

Pixel dimensions (megapixel count) just affects detail and recorded resolution. Sensor site size affects dynamic range and noise. A 16MP full frame sensor and a 16MP Micro 4/3 sensor have roughly the same number of pixels, but their images are subtly different.

Sensors have millions of tiny receptors, or sites, each of which is covered with a red, green, or blue primary color filter. The larger the sensor's site size, the more dynamic range and less noise you get. HOWEVER, this tendency is also affected by the quality of the processing that turns these RGB coded signals into a raw data file, and subsequently, into an image file. The sensor sites on a 16MP full frame sensor are FOUR TIMES larger than those on a 16MP Micro 4/3 sensor, and TWICE as large as those on a 16MP APS-C sensor.

As a general, rough rule of thumb, a 24x36mm full frame sensor will have one stop more dynamic range and one stop less noise than an APS-C sensor of the same quality grade and megapixel count. A Micro 4/3 sensor has 1/4 the area of a full frame sensor, so all other things being equal, it will have two stops more noise and two stops less dynamic range than a full frame sensor. The APS-C sensor is right in the middle of this range, with about 2/3 to one stop advantage over Micro 4/3.

Of course, if you made a 64MP full frame sensor, it would have very similar noise and dynamic range characteristics to a 16MP Micro 4/3 sensor, because the sensor sites would be the same size. But you would have to enlarge the full frame image by 2X (4X the area) to see that.

The most relevant question you must ask yourself, therefore, is, "DOES ANY OF THAT MATTER?" The answer depends on the kind of subjects you wish to photograph, the size prints you make (or whether you print AT ALL), how much you expect to crop, how often you need to work in very bright or very dim light, and several other situational factors.

If you record landscapes and make huge prints (larger than 24x36 inches), a full frame camera with a high megapixel count can be important for retention of detail and color depth. If you never print, but only post images on the web, just about any camera will do.

Sensor size in MP and MM is JUST ONE factor in the equation. There are DOZENS of important factors that affect camera platform and brand choice. The mix you choose may be perfectly appropriate for what you do, but not for what I do, and vice-versa. There is no one absolute best camera, platform, brand, etc. — just what meets your needs, circumstances, hopes, dreams, desires, aspirations...

censor = person who redacts (removes) potentially objectionable material from publications, movies, or broadcasts

sensor = something that translates reality into signals that can be transmitted or recorded for viewing elsewhere or later