 |
| This is the image I made with both cameras. All four were identical. |
I went out and photographed the exact same image with both cameras set exactly the same. The cameras were set to record RAW + JPEG at its highest setting, same distance, focal length, ISO and shutter speed. I imported all four images into Lightroom CC 2015, confirmed they were identical, then opened all four in Photoshop CC 2015. Here is what I found.
Olympus E-M1 Fujifilm X-T1
Sensor Size 16.28mp 16.3 mp
File Sizes 4608 X 3456 4896 X 3264
RAW file size 17.512 mb 32.977 mb
JPEG file size 10.463 mb 6.699 mb
Sizes as opened in Photoshop
RAW file size 91.10 mb 91.40 mb
JPEG file size 45.60 mb 45.70 mb
For all intents and purposes, both cameras have the same number of pixels available for image creation. However, there must be some heavy duty compression going on with the Olympus RAW file as viewing it in Windows Explorer shows the Olympus file is 53.1% the size of the Fujifilm RAW file. Conversely, the Fujifilm JPEG is 64.0% the size of the Olympus JPEG file. Now to be perfectly clear, the X-T1's best JPEG is called FINE while the Olympus has a higher setting called SUPER FINE. That may account for that difference.
I don't remember reading anywhere that indicated Olympus may be highly compressing their RAW files, but that is what appears to me to be happening. That being said, when all files are opened in Photoshop, they indeed are the same full size.
Just another interesting thing I noticed and thought it may interest you as well.
UPDATE: After thinking about this and doing some searching on the web, here is what I think this is. I think both cameras are capturing 14-bit RAW files, although I couldn't find anything definitive from Olympus on this fact. I base this on both cameras RAW files being essentially the same full size when opened in Photoshop.
Also, Olympus has the Super Fine setting for JPEGs, which give a larger, thus potentially better JPEG file, than the Fine setting in the Fuji. However, there is one other possibility for the difference in JPEG sizes and that is Fuji is compressing their JPEGs much more. I just don't know about that right now.
I've used both of these cameras extensively over the past couple of years. The image quality is essentially (and potentially, depending upon which RAW processor you use for the Fuji files) the same. I think it comes down to which camera feels better in your hand, which has the menus and controls you prefer. I like both cameras a lot, but if I had to choose just one, I would choose the Olympus. Why? No reason other than personal preference. Ford vs. Chevy. PC vs. Mac. Film vs. Digital... Both are wonderful tools. With either you just can't lose. (this doesn't mean I'm selling my X-T1. I just can't bring myself to do it...)
Thanks for looking. Enjoy!
Dennis A. Mook
All content on this blog is © 2013-2015 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.
Olympus's raw file is a lossless compressed file whereas Fujifilm strangely does not compress its raw file.
ReplyDeleteIf you zip the Fuji RAW file, does it come closer in size to Olympus RAW file?
ReplyDeleteNiranjan, Thanks for the comment.
DeleteI haven't tried zipping either file, but I believe both are 14-bit (when fully opened in Photoshop they are the same size) but I think Olympus is applying lossless compression to their RAW files where Fuji is not.
Interesting. Thanks for posting this.
ReplyDeleteOly has 12bit files. Fuji has 14bit color depth.
ReplyDeleteHow do you calculate the file size? Simple: 12bit means 2 Pixel within 3 Byte. 14 bit is 4 pixel in 7 byte (but mostly done 4 in 8 so 1 in 2).
This means 16MP 12bit in the Oly should have (uncompressed) 24MB. The Fuji 14bit files 32MB.
That's just the RAW data. Then there is metadata, lens correction information and embedded Jpgs.
Finally, Oly is compressing it's raws, while Fuji uses uncompressed files.
About the JPGs: Fuji used to compress their JPGs heavily. That was nice since it saved some space. But on the internet some complained, because you can't edit those JPGs easily (no details in the shadows). One could ask why edit the JPGs when there is RAW, but that's a different topic. However, the files of the X-T10 are larger.
The thing is, that there are huge complains about Sonys 11bit+7 approach but 12bit on nearly any µFT camera are fine?!
There is one more thing: many cameras decrease color depth when using electronic shutter (for a faster read out), this also decreases file size and makes the files less robust for editing. Some Panasonics reduce to 10bit! Let's see how this will work on the Olympus when the firmware update comes out (Fuji keeps their 14bit with electronic shutter)
Thanks for the comment. I could never find anything definitive as to whether or not Olympus had 12-bit or 14-bit files. If you know where I can find that, I would appreciate you passing it along.
DeleteI did a test with my D810. Two identical images, one at 12-bit uncompressed raw and the other at 14-bit. The 12-bit file (looking at it in Explorer) is 58.98 mb while the 14-bit is 76.78 mb. A difference of about 30%. Visually, as with most individuals, I could find no difference. However, I think the difference can be found on grossly under or over exposed images if I remember an article I read several years ago.
Again, thanks for the comment.
The EM1 uses a Panasonic sensor (because they needed on sensor phase detection for four thirds lenses and Sony has non). The used sensor is the MN34230
DeleteLooking into the documents you can find an ADC bit depth of 12: http://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/ds4/MN34230PL_E.pdf
About the difference of 14 bit and 12 bit. I did some tests on this for myself. You won't notice this when doing just "point and shoot". You can see the differences when doing (heavy) post production. Push the shadows 4 stops (or the whole image), some color changes and you will see artefacts and other problems with 12 bit.
This gets worse when moving to 10 bit (Panasonic electronic shutter)
Hope this helps :)