Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

The Wait May Be Over
  
 
George Orwell
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · The Wait May Be Over


Fuji rumors is posting that the next camera by Fuji will be the first viewfinder containing ILC to drop the X Trans and go with a Bayer filter.

I've been on the outside looking in at the Fuji cameras, always held back by the ridiculously gimmicky sensor. Once this is gone, I may end up with a digital camera finally.

Fuji Rumors has a pretty good track record so it's highly likely this camera is coming soon.

Many people shots X-A1 (Bayer) images vs X-M1 (X Trans) and the results are clear and unambiguous; the X Trans offers nothing of substance. It's nothing but snake oil marketing nonsense.

http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-x-t100-currently-planed-bayer-sensor/



Sep 30, 2017 at 11:40 AM
Tom Conte
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · The Wait May Be Over


Troll much?



Sep 30, 2017 at 01:44 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · The Wait May Be Over


George Orwell wrote:
Fuji rumors is posting that the next camera by Fuji will be the first viewfinder containing ILC to drop the X Trans and go with a Bayer filter.

I've been on the outside looking in at the Fuji cameras, always held back by the ridiculously gimmicky sensor. Once this is gone, I may end up with a digital camera finally.

Fuji Rumors has a pretty good track record so it's highly likely this camera is coming soon.

Many people shots X-A1 (Bayer) images vs X-M1 (X Trans) and the results are clear and unambiguous; the X Trans offers nothing of
...Show more

I don't think it is snake oil or magic either. The X trans system is about a trade off. You lose a bit of base ISO resolution for increased high ISO sensitivity. For some people who shoot often at higher ISOs this can certainly be a good trade off, but for others who often shoot at base ISO more often then the Bayer system will likely be preferable. I do think, however, that the differences although noticeable aren't all that apparent when you have a good workflow for post processing and you are printing at smaller sizes. I can certainly, see however, why you would want a Bayer sensor version of a Fuji camera. I would prefer the Bayer sensor version as well, but I can also see why some people would prefer the X trans version.



Sep 30, 2017 at 02:34 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · The Wait May Be Over


Tom Conte wrote:
Troll much?


He's all troll, all the time...

Besides, the GFX has been out for a while now, and it is a "viewfinder containing ILC" with a Bayer sensor.



Sep 30, 2017 at 02:50 PM
TheEmrys
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · The Wait May Be Over


Personally, I really, really like the lack of an AA filter. Is there another APS-C body that lacks an AA filter?


Sep 30, 2017 at 02:58 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · The Wait May Be Over


TheEmrys wrote:
Personally, I really, really like the lack of an AA filter.


Personally, I think the benefits of the X-trans sensor (higher acuity, nicer colours) outweigh any detriments (which really was only RAW processing, and that has now largely been solved).

I'm kind of disappointed the GFX 50S does not have an X-Trans sensor...



Sep 30, 2017 at 03:34 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · The Wait May Be Over


I won't address here the first subject that some have raised. You can determine your own answer based on the forum record. (Moderators apparently removed the OP's linked post shortly after I pointed to it. Thanks.)

Regarding x-trans sensors, my thoughts are a bit complicated. I have used Fujifilm x-trans cameras since I got my first, the XE1 something like five years ago. That camera, and the XPro2 that I now use, are both capable of producing excellent image quality and very fine large prints. I am completely confident in the ability of the XPro2 files to reliably and consistently produce beautiful 20" x 30" prints and larger, and I have sold/licensed images at up to 20"x 30" from the XE1.

I'm also aware of the past complaints about "issues" with x-trans images. Early on, before raw file conversion programs got a better handle on these non-Bayer-array sensor files, these could include, in rare situations:

1. "Smearing," in which along high contrast abrupt borders that were non-linear (think of the inside angle of a small "v-shape" where the outside is green and the inside is orange) would sometimes "bleed" into adjacent areas. I never saw this in a print, but on some occasions I could look closely at 100% crops to locate it. I never notice it any more.

2. Issues in areas of dense "random" detail, especially in the green channel. This can be seen in some areas of extremely fine foliage where the half-sampling rate limit is approached (or exceeded?) and there can be a fine "wormy" effect. Again, while I can find this in 100% magnification displays, it isn't visible in rather large prints. (I am convinced that this, however, is an artifact specifically related to the x-trans design.)

3. Other issues such as the so-called purple flare (never have seen it) and sharpening problems (no longer an issue in current sensor).

So, am I hear to defend x-trans?

No.

What I've really come to believe, based on using non-AA-filtering cameras from Fujifilm and other manufacturers is that, while x-trans produces excellent image quality, I do not see any particular advantage in the x-trans system.

My theory is that Fujifilm also understands this, but faces a difficult marketing issue if they do away with it in their premiere 1.5x cropped sensor systems. Note that they are doing away with it in lower end cameras and their high end, flagship, miniMF GFX camera.

For my money, they could move the entire line to Bayer array sensors, and if they didn't announce the change I don't think anyone would even notice! (In other words, virtually no one is "waiting" for this before going to Fujifilm. It is essentially a non-issue either way.)

Dan

Edited on Sep 30, 2017 at 05:39 PM · View previous versions



Sep 30, 2017 at 04:06 PM
George Orwell
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · The Wait May Be Over


TheEmrys wrote:
Personally, I really, really like the lack of an AA filter. Is there another APS-C body that lacks an AA filter?


From memory I believe Pentax ditched the AA filter quite some time ago. Ricoh, Leica, and Nikon make APS-C cameras that do not have AA filters as well.




Sep 30, 2017 at 04:32 PM
Elisha82
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · The Wait May Be Over


I believe the D500 doesn't have it.

TheEmrys wrote:
Personally, I really, really like the lack of an AA filter. Is there another APS-C body that lacks an AA filter?




Sep 30, 2017 at 04:53 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · The Wait May Be Over


Tom Conte wrote:
Troll much?

All the effing time. He has yet to post anything other than skewed negative opinions.

I don't understand the obsession.



Sep 30, 2017 at 11:10 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


benee
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · The Wait May Be Over


Is George Orwell Rattymouse come back from the dead??


Sep 30, 2017 at 11:28 PM
rdeloe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · The Wait May Be Over


Would my X-T2 produce better RAW files if it had a Bayer sensor? Would my photography be better if it had a Bayer sensor? The answers are "who knows" and "no". So, moving right along...


Sep 30, 2017 at 11:33 PM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · The Wait May Be Over


The bayer sensor will only be an advantage if it performs better than the existing X-Trans sensor.

The X-T2 sensor is on par with the D500 except the D500 has a base ISO of 100.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm%20X-T2,Nikon%20D500

The issues relating to the XTrans post processing have all but been resolved. Personally I don't mind what work flow I use. Fuji should have been a lot more pro active in addressing the issues initially with Adobe as this would never really have been an issue. SilkyPix supported by Fuji was never really a good solution.

Leica M9 when it first was released it had all sorts of issues with post processing but this was resolved after about 12 months. There were many work arounds but still this should have dealt with faster.

Personally I love the detail and output with the XT2 so the bayer equivalent will have to quite special for me to convert



Oct 01, 2017 at 12:40 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · The Wait May Be Over


If I may make a gentle suggestion...

Although at times (rare, I believe) I have also given up and fought back against a few posters whose behavior was inciting or offensive (or, as an alternative, I have simply hidden them), when you have a concern about the behavior for a particular poster and the evidence to back it up, I have found that Fred Miranda is often willing to listen to your point of view.

Unless you were the personal subject of forum abuse it happens occasionally it isn't generally a good idea to go after an FM member in one of the threads on a photography subject.

That's all I'll say on the subject here.

Take care,

Dan



Oct 01, 2017 at 02:20 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · The Wait May Be Over


charles.K wrote:
The bayer sensor will only be an advantage if it performs better than the existing X-Trans sensor.

The X-T2 sensor is on par with the D500 except the D500 has a base ISO of 100.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm%20X-T2,Nikon%20D500

The issues relating to the XTrans post processing have all but been resolved. Personally I don't mind what work flow I use. Fuji should have been a lot more pro active in addressing the issues initially with Adobe as this would never really have been an issue. SilkyPix supported by Fuji was never really a good solution.

Leica M9 when it first was released it had all
...Show more

I agree with much of what you write here. I don't think there are any real problems with the x-trans sensors, and they produce fine image quality. I'm just not convinced, based on a lot of x-trans experience, that there is any real advantage to this alternative.

I also agree with you that many of the early issues a) have been resolved and b) were largely issues with conversion software more than with the camera. And, agreed, SilkyPix was never a realistic option for me. ACR and Photoshop work great for me with my Fujifilm files.

Dan



Oct 01, 2017 at 02:22 AM
Edward Castro
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · The Wait May Be Over


I'll just copy and paste what I wrote in the Fuji vs Sony thread:

As I've grown older with photography I've have come to the same conclusion that many others have come to before me:

Shoot with equipment that meets your needs as a pro, amature or novice and that gives you a pleasure to use.


If it doesn't meet your needs, move on.



Oct 01, 2017 at 04:22 AM
drewmey
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · The Wait May Be Over


gdanmitchell wrote:
My theory is that Fujifilm also understands this, but faces a difficult marketing issue if they do away with it in their premiere 1.5x cropped sensor systems. Note that they are doing away with it in lower end cameras and their high end, flagship, miniMF GFX camera.

Dan


When they do change, I actually think it will be pretty easy for them to defend/explain away from a marketing standpoint.

The main advantage in my mind of X-Trans has always been that you can "get away with" not having an AA filter on lower MP sensors that would otherwise require an AA filter (if Bayer and same MP count). They then "supposedly" provide better resolution/sharpness when compared to Bayer with an AA and the same MP. Their first X-Trans sensor was on a 16MP sensor. They are now up to 24MP. If the next sensor jumps up any further (say 26-30MP), they can just say that X-Trans is no longer necessary above 24MP sensors because they can simply not have an AA filter on the Bayer sensor as there may now be enough resolution for it to be considered acceptable from an aliasing standpoint.

Whether that explanation is marketing hype or BS at that point won't really matter in my opinion. You could choose not to believe that it is true, but it would be hard for someone to argue that the logic doesn't at least "make sense".

As you mentioned, I won't care either way. It has been a pretty smooth transition for me coming from a Canon 6D. That camera was nothing to brag about on the low ISO end and the X-Trans sensor has kept up in terms of high ISO in my opinion.



Oct 03, 2017 at 07:50 PM
rsk7
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · The Wait May Be Over


George Orwell wrote:
... the X Trans offers nothing of substance. It's nothing but snake oil marketing nonsense.
/


I take some mighty fine pictures with my snake oil marketing nonsense. Sold all my overweight, over-priced, over-sized Canon bayer ff legitimate marketing nonsense and haven't missed it much at all. Go figure.



Oct 04, 2017 at 04:01 AM
Nick3434
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · The Wait May Be Over


I shoot my Fuji x and canon FF cmos interchangeably and while finicky editing may be different frankly they both take pictures, I don't think that one or other is reason to buy or not buy a camera. Fuji Jpegs are cool, there is no doubt. Next time I travel with Fuji I think I want to shoot only in jpeg and just let the images be.

You are just making pictures. Both sensors seem quite capable of that.



Oct 04, 2017 at 03:57 PM
George Orwell
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · The Wait May Be Over


rsk7 wrote:
I take some mighty fine pictures with my snake oil marketing nonsense. Sold all my overweight, over-priced, over-sized Canon bayer ff legitimate marketing nonsense and haven't missed it much at all. Go figure.


First of all, your point is totally irrelevant. X Trans nonsense does not prevent the taking of pictures. No one said that it did. What was said is that is has no benefit.

Second of all, Fuji cameras costs more compared to Canon gear.

Fujifilm XT-2 $1599.


Canon 7D $1499






Oct 04, 2017 at 06:57 PM
1
       2       end






FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password