Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

4 end

Archive 2013 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

mortyb wrote:
Do you have another photo of how they look with trad. bayer? How on earth is this an issue in any practical application? Do the big prints look bad? Sincere questions.

This is more of a comment about LR in particular, although Aperture trades the painterly-ness for chroma issues and some weird little speckled areas:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8548/8702613263_a2cdc41bdd_o.jpg

I only bring this up because I keep reading that this is a foliage-only issue, but I see it all the time in other areas of fine detail.

Of course, print or viewing size always comes into play, but that's the case for all IQ debates, and that's what makes 100% crops somewhat useful, because it at least gets everyone on the same page. I personally see issues with X-trans when viewing images full screen on my 23" monitor, which isn't exactly huge (I think that would mean 30%-ish crop,) but, of course, YMMV.

Edited on Jun 12, 2013 at 01:11 PM · View previous versions

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:09 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

michael49 wrote:

A high percentage of my photography is done in the woods and thus involves plenty of foliage - I saw my first example of the "water color" effect of the X-trans sensor in a shot I took this past weekend while hiking in VT with the X-E1.....I've looked at many other images that I've taken with the X-E1, but this is the first time I've really noticed it.....

X-E1, 18-55, 18.8mm, f/8, ISO 200, shot RAW, PP in LR4....


	http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/Other/Summer-13/i-CXCh35v/0/XL/DSCF4180-12-XL.jpg

Crop from the grass in the right edge/mid frame....


	http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/Other/Summer-13/i-qKKKM9j/0/L/DSCF4180-20-L.jpg

This is not an image I would normally print, but I'd be curious to print...Show more →

Willing to share RAW in the name of testing RAW developers?

Its nice example..

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:10 PM

mortyb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Well, I'm happy to say my mileage varies from yours.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:10 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

mortyb wrote:
Well, I'm happy to say my mileage varies from yours.

That's fine by me. If you're printing small or shooting web jpegs, most IQ discussions probably aren't worth the trouble, although Michael49's example is pretty bad even at web size. I don't consider my general print size of 13x19 to be particularly gigantic or anything.

I have nothing against Fuji. In fact, if anything, I want them to succeed. I just think there's a lot of room for raw conversion (and jpeg) improvement.

Edited on Jun 12, 2013 at 01:14 PM · View previous versions

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:12 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

douglasf13 wrote:
This is more of a comment about LR in particular, although Aperture trades the painterly-ness for chroma issues and some weird little speckled areas:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8548/8702613263_a2cdc41bdd_o.jpg

I only bring this up because I keep reading that this is a foliage-only issue, but I see it all the time in other areas of fine detail.

Of course, print or viewing size always comes into play, but that's the case for all IQ debates, and that's what makes 100% crops somewhat useful, because it at least gets everyone on the same page. I personally see issues with X-trans when viewing full screen...Show more →

I will just guess, but I think Aperture does processing right. Sensor behind X-trans is regular Sony 16 mpix, which while being clean doesnt have some amazing SNR, its just good. So when processed right, Fuji X files could have bit of noise..

Mostly is X-trans praised for high ISO performance, but most of that performance is caused by demosaicing algorithms which as side-effect work as noise removal.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:14 PM

mortyb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

But do you see these so-called x-trans/raw issues in a 13x19 print? That's my prefered print size as well. Edit: I saw your edit. I don't give a f about brands. I just cannot understand that these "issues" make any real world difference.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:15 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Mescalamba wrote:
I will just guess, but I think Aperture does processing right. Sensor behind X-trans is regular Sony 16 mpix, which while being clean doesnt have some amazing SNR, its just good. So when processed right, Fuji X files could have bit of noise..

Mostly is X-trans praised for high ISO performance, but most of that performance is caused by demosaicing algorithms which as side-effect work as noise removal.

I thought so, too, even to the point where I switched to an all Aperture workflow with my X100s for a while. The problem is, other issues started popping up with Aperture. I started seeing these purple/green areas of color, like in this shot, where my strap, the camera lens writing, and even my grey shirt shows chroma issues, which don't appear in LR. Accuraw is probably the best I've seen, but it has it's own issues. All the converters seem to be trade offs.

Here is a crop from the un-zoomed screen in Aperture:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5462/9027845524_730f675aac_o.jpg

And here is 100%:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7305/9025617843_40efa09e0e_o.jpg

Edited on Jun 12, 2013 at 01:32 PM · View previous versions

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:29 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

mortyb wrote:
But do you see these so-called x-trans/raw issues in a 13x19 print? That's my prefered print size as well. Edit: I saw your edit. I don't give a f about brands. I just cannot understand that these "issues" make any real world difference.

Yes.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:30 PM

mortyb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Okay. I don't.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:33 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

mortyb wrote:
Okay. I don't.

Do you see it in Michael's pic above? Not the 100% crop, but the web-sized jpeg?

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:35 PM

mortyb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

When I know what to look for, slightly. But I don't think I'd ever think of it if I didn't know.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:43 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Sounds good. I do think it gives the file a "look" that sometimes rubs me the wrong way, even at smaller sizes, but maybe it's just me. I've certainly been trying to love this X100s.

Jun 12, 2013 at 01:45 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Bit of RAW files wouldnt hurt.

Jun 12, 2013 at 02:03 PM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

There are some great examples in this thread, particularly from Michael and Douglas. I'm really surprised how bad the false color type artifact is in your camera strap/ T-shirt example Douglas. I guess that example would look fine in LR/ ACR whereas Michaels example might look better in Aperture.

Jun 12, 2013 at 02:16 PM

FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Wow that shirt example is bad.

You can even see the false color on the lens markings.

Jun 12, 2013 at 02:30 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Tariq Gibran wrote:
There are some great examples in this thread, particularly from Michael and Douglas. I'm really surprised how bad the false color type artifact is in your camera strap/ T-shirt example Douglas. I guess that example would look fine in LR/ ACR whereas Michaels example might look better in Aperture.

Yeah, Aperture is strange in that it would likely show these chroma artifacts in Michael's example, too, but they'd be small enough to probably not warrant much concern, unless you're really printing big. Aperture's issues look better from a distance than LR's do, IMO. However, the more blatant examples from Aperture, like my camera strap pic, are probably WORSE than LR's, overall. Accuraw seems to do a better job, but I had zippering issues with that converter. I think theSuede is right in that it will take more bold raw converter designs to get these files really humming along.

Jun 12, 2013 at 02:31 PM

cputeq
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Eh, I'd argue the Fuji/Sony 16Mpix is a damn good sensor and does have great SNR (which is why it's clean!). They're only bested by FF sensors and the new 7100/5200 sensors.

I'd also argue Aperture does not translate the RAWs correctly.
I'm still looking for the "best" but I'm not sure I'll find it

Jun 12, 2013 at 02:48 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

cputeq wrote:
Eh, I'd argue the Fuji/Sony 16Mpix is a damn good sensor and does have great SNR (which is why it's clean!). They're only bested by FF sensors and the new 7100/5200 sensors.

I'd also argue Aperture does not translate the RAWs correctly.
I'm still looking for the "best" but I'm not sure I'll find it

None of the converters translate the raws correctly, which is a big part of the problem.

I agree that the high ISO is good, although my X100s' ISO values are nearly a stop off from my other cameras, so the difference isn't as much as some believe.

As to why X-trans is good at high ISO, see here. IMO, it isn't worth the trade off: LINK

Jun 12, 2013 at 02:52 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

In Michael's comparison against the Olympus, I see it more in the field of tall grass behind the near row of trees, than in the trees themselves. Were those SOOC Jpegs or RAW conversions? It's also interesting to see the difference in 'clarity' type contrast where the darker areas of shading in the leaves and tree trunks/branches and the darker leaves against the bright sky are prominent in the Fuji.

It definitely boils down to the entire image processing chain. It's interesting to see the differences between converters. And I don't think the Sigmas are exempt from unnatural effects either. I've seen infinity landscapes where distant foliage was blurry clumps while building details exhibited over-exaggerated edge contrast. But at print or normal viewing distances would probably be fine. Same with the M9 vs. the M240 comparisons that emerged when the M240 started shipping. The chosen RAW converter seemed to play a considerable role there in suppressing false details.

One thing though that bugs me slightly with Fuji's and Sigma's rendering interpretations is what appears to be a fair dose of edge contrast enhancement. Not really USM sharpening, but more like clarity. And with the Sigmas, the intentional crushing of shadow values to increase the 'Kodachrome' impact of the effect. No doubt the Merrills resolve really well and the matched lenses help, but I think it's been shown a resized NEX-7 file is very competitive and arguably much more versatile.

Jun 12, 2013 at 03:23 PM

michael49
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · X-Pro 1 does shrubbery

Mescalamba wrote:
...

Willing to share RAW in the name of testing RAW developers?

Its nice example..

I would have no problem with that.

Jun 12, 2013 at 07:34 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.