In response to:
I'm not sure the fact that a photographer isn't able to get satisfactory results shows that one camera is better than another. Doesn't it show up differences in how to approach a picture taking situation?
While the X100 is an excellent camera for the situation you describe, so is the 60D. Doesn't this say more about the photographers and their choices rather than the cameras? i.e. You made the right choice and they didn't.
A 60D is perfectly capable of shooting in low light without flash, and there are all sorts of ways of getting natural results with flashguns. I would pretty much make the same choice you did now, but there have been occasions when I've been in that kind of situation with something like a 60D and surely its a question of how well you understand your system that produces satisfactory results, not the system itself.
David, you missed the 2-3 stop backlight problem. Yes, you can shoot without flash, but depending on the EV comp setting, you either get people coming out looking like silhouettes, or it's as if everyone's feeling the rapture and gone to heaven all at once.
and also in response to Nic:
Maybe next time he might think to switch the flash to manual when using a bounce flash. I agree with David that this comparison is no indication that an X100 wipes the floor with a 60D + 17-40L + 580 EXII combination. The Canon guy might want to spend some time learning the equipment instead of just spending money buying it.
He's an expert on the EOS system and flash. He's my guru and the guru of several other pros, former pros and advanced amateurs. We had a brief chat and we agreed it was technical reasons. I can't speak for his thought process, but here is roughly what he'd have told me:
Technically speaking, there are two areas in which the 60D falls short: (1) E-TTL II flash metering (2) JPEG dynamic range.
The solution to (1) would be to enter a moderately high ISO setting manually, then dial in a degree of flash compensation; the X100 seems to be achieving a good balance and offers auto ISO with a preferred value. In my case I set a relatively high preferred ISO based on a good shutter speed at wide aperture. If the X100 saw light levels that got out of parameters it could slip the ISO. It never had to because it can sync at all shutter speeds. The Canon's needs HSS and manual ISO; basically you need to think it through beforehand, not something that you want to do 20 times a minute in the middle of a kid's party.
In the case of (2) he needs to shoot in RAW, then post process to adjust for foreground flash exposure and recover shadows and highlights. The Fujifilm's DR program delves into the RAW data and does all that in camera for a pleasing effect. The X100's sensor has a higher native dynamic range than the 60D anyway. The areas in which the EOS system had technical advantages (speed of shooting, AF and flash joules, 18MP resolution) were negated in this situation, whereas the backlighting, moderate ambient lighting, proximity and such skewed the field to the X100's advantage.
The messages I wish to convey are:
- the X100's IQ is in the same ballpark as a prosumer DSLR
- in certain circumstances, the X100 is the better choice
- where both can achieve the same end results, it is easier to configure to ideal settings on the X100, the X100 requires less constant fiddling, and the workflow is altogether more pleasant.
Yes, you are right that he picked the wrong tool; he also owns a X100, but ironically he hasn't had it long and selected the camera that he is more familiar with. I've had my X100 longer than most (since March) and I've gotten a pretty good feel for it.
Anyway, at the end of the day, it's good to have various people all using different gear; you each end up with a distinctly different look.