p.5 #1 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
flashinm wrote:
I was talking about your argument, not our argument. You just keeping bring it up as a disadvantage thats inherent to the trans x sensor. All I'm asking is, is it really a disadvantage and if so, how?
I've already mentioned, according to theSuede, the sensor can only have 50% of bayer chroma resolution at low ISO compared to bayer, even with ideal conversion. What that means in real world use remains to be seen, because we don't have raw conversion for it that is great, yet. Maybe it'll be a non-issue. I'm sure theSuede can give you a better prediction than I can. Canon adjusted their CFA with the 5Dii to achieve better lowlight performance, and not many complained about that, either, so it may not be practically relevant.
On a more practical note, although I used to use other raw converters like RPP, Lightroom finally got good enough that I've switched to it entirely, and I'm mired in its workflow. For me to personally adopt X-Trans, I'll have to wait for Adobe to become good at the demoisacing, because I'm not interested in changing my whole work flow.
Please understand, I think the X-Pro1 is awesome. There are just a few things keeping me from buying one, so far. If the AF is that much faster with the new firmware, one of those things may already be knocked off of my list.
p.5 #2 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
olelovold wrote:
douglas:
I have not compared it to the X100. I owned the X100 for half a year and as far as I can remember it was not nearly as fast. I also have a friend who got his X-Pro 1 yesterday who has used a X100 up until then, and he says the difference is remarkable. So consensus is that the AF of the XP1 is superior.
Another thing worth noticing is MF. Manual focusing on the XP1 went from being utterly cumbersome to being enjoyable after 2.0. Now there is a 3x magnification option (tons better than the 10x), and the focusing action when turning the ring is far more responsive - feels almost like using a mechanical lens....Show more →
Thanks. I guess it's tough to say, because the X100 has undergone autofocus improvements in the last several months, as well. That is certainly good news about the manual focus.
One more question, does the XP1 still open and close the aperture all of the time in various light levels when aiming it around? That drives me crazy about my X100, and it really slows things down.
p.5 #3 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
FlyPenFly wrote:
I don't get why on the Fuji files, I'm not seeing the same sort of WoW clarity you get from other AA less sensors.
I kind of wish Fuji bought Foveon instead of Sigma.
There is actually a lot of default sharpening applied to the Fuji X-Pro1 raw files when converted in, for example, the Fuji/Silkypix default converter. Turn that sharpening off and the files look a bit soft, just like files from a traditional AA sensor camera. My guess is that whatever processing Fuji does with the raws in the camera, they are being softened to help minimize all the artifacts that result from the wacky CFA arrangement Fuji went with. In short, you will not see the same sort of sharpness/ clarity from the Fuji as you will see with other bayer based AA less cameras. Any sharpness you see in raws or jpegs from the Fuji is due to sharpening and not the lack of an AA filter. The only advantage I see with that sensor is high ISO.
p.5 #4 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
The aperture dance which was quite prominent after the camera was released initially is now gone. The camera is silent.
I recommend you go to a store and try it out for yourself. Make sure the camera and lenses have the latest firmware. The X-Pro 1 has had quite the price reduction lately also. As for LR not being optimal yet. It's not really much of an issue. If you're printing huge, just run the file through RPP and process it in LR as a TIFF.
There is a measured increase in resolution from the X-Pro 1 and 35mm f/1.4 combo compared to APS-C cameras of the same megapixel count that have AA filters. Quote: "It is clear that the MTFs of the tested lens (35mm f/1.4 on X-Pro 1) can get to the level of 65 lpmm so much higher than those 51-53 lpmm you reach on typical APS-C sensors of 15-16 Mpix class. "
p.5 #6 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
olelovold wrote:
The aperture dance which was quite prominent after the camera was released initially is now gone. The camera is silent.
I recommend you go to a store and try it out for yourself. Make sure the camera and lenses have the latest firmware. The X-Pro 1 has had quite the price reduction lately also. As for LR not being optimal yet. It's not really much of an issue. If you're printing huge, just run the file through RPP and process it in LR as a TIFF.
I just looked it up. I wasn't worried about the sound, and, after the firmware fix, the lens still opens and closes aperture, like my X100. It just doesn't do it chaotically like firmware 1.0 did. This drives me batty, and I'm not sure why Fuji can't do it like Sony. It really slows down shutter response.
There is a measured increase in resolution from the X-Pro 1 and 35mm f/1.4 combo compared to APS-C cameras of the same megapixel count that have AA filters. Quote: "It is clear that the MTFs of the tested lens (35mm f/1.4 on X-Pro 1) can get to the level of 65 lpmm so much higher than those 51-53 lpmm you reach on typical APS-C sensors of 15-16 Mpix class. "
FWIW, I believe lenstip used Fuji's supplied converter, which doesn't negate what Tariq is saying.
p.5 #8 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
Here is a 100% crop from the X-Pro1 with 35 1.4 lens taken at 5.6. This was a test I did back when I had the camera. On the left is the raw file processed through the Fuji/ Silkypix software with all defaults. On the right is the same exact file with no sharpening applied by the software. Pretty noticeable difference to me. There is no "native" increased resolution with the X-Trans sensor as used in the X-Pro1 that I saw from my testing. Looks the same as from any other decent 16MP camera except you get a few artifacts here and there. http://www.gibranstudio.com/xpro1s.jpg
BTW, here is a link to the original Fuji Raw file if anyone wants it. I found the 35 1.4 to be a fantastic lens.
There is a measured increase in resolution from the X-Pro 1 and 35mm f/1.4 combo compared to APS-C cameras of the same megapixel count that have AA filters. Quote: "It is clear that the MTFs of the tested lens (35mm f/1.4 on X-Pro 1) can get to the level of 65 lpmm so much higher than those 51-53 lpmm you reach on typical APS-C sensors of 15-16 Mpix class. "
p.5 #10 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
I'm just interpreting what I see from the lenstip test, and that is that the sensor in the XP1 gives a noticeable resolution advantage compared to its 16MP APS-C counterparts. Sharpening only increases perceived sharpness, not resolution, which they are measuring. Or am I wrong?
p.5 #12 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
FlyPenFly wrote:
Eleven for an unsharpened raw file for a camera that has an AA filter, that looks pretty bad.
To be fair, it is actually a pretty demanding shot with demanding fine, subtle detail. Infinity landscape shots are a real litmus test in my experience. I do think that is one area where you might really see the benefits of a typical AA less sensor (but not the X-Pro1).
The LR conversion almost looks like it's shot with a soft filter. RPP does lots better in resolving detail, but RPP has its problem with artifacts, like here:
There's some false colour in the pattern on her coat. Again RPP is superior in detail.
Note: These are not scientific or done thoroughly, just a quick comparison done mostly for myself. Same default LR sharpening has been applied. Some grain added as well (just part of my processing).
I think the sensor is capable of superior results compared to a comparable resolution APS-C with a conventional Bayer array. I think the problem lies in the way the data is interpreted by the RAW converters
p.5 #14 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
RPP does a good job with most files I have used it with. It does seem to have a few artifact issues with X-Pro1 files, depending on subject matter (false color is the one I have noticed as well). Seems like all the current raw converters have dealt with X-Pro1 files through trade-offs of one sort or another. By the way, in the RPP examples above has sharpness or local contrast been checked on and/ or has additional sharpening been used?
p.5 #15 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
Yes, there are some trade-offs indeed.. I hope there are someone clever out there right now working on perfecting the math for these files. Capture One is said to be working with Fujifilm on support, however they have no ETA on that.
The RPP examples only have standard LR sharpening (25/1.0/25/0) and grain (20). No sharpening applied in RPP.
p.5 #16 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
olelovold wrote:
I'm just interpreting what I see from the lenstip test, and that is that the sensor in the XP1 gives a noticeable resolution advantage compared to its 16MP APS-C counterparts. Sharpening only increases perceived sharpness, not resolution, which they are measuring. Or am I wrong?
I don't trust that last opinion from "Ray Sachs" on that thread, because he used f11 in the sun, which isn't much of a problem with my X100 is it is now. The problem I have is at wider apertures in the sun, the camera stops down, making the camera slower to fire outside than indoors. The NEX cameras either open all the way up, or focus at shooting aperture, depending on the light, so the aperture rarely moves and causes delay.
The LR conversion almost looks like it's shot with a soft filter. RPP does lots better in resolving detail, but RPP has its problem with artifacts, like here:
There's some false colour in the pattern on her coat. Again RPP is superior in detail.
Note: These are not scientific or done thoroughly, just a quick comparison done mostly for myself. Same default LR sharpening has been applied. Some grain added as well (just part of my processing).
I think the sensor is capable of superior results compared to a comparable resolution APS-C with a conventional Bayer array. I think the problem lies in the way the data is interpreted by the RAW converters ...Show more →
p.5 #18 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
douglas, to completely eliminate shutter lag in all conditions, just half-press the shutter (thereby closing the aperture). Frame the subject and press the shutter all the way. Voila, no lag. I do this all the time whilst shooting in the street. Just a thing to get used to.
I have shot lots of street with this camera in London. I have a page for it on my website, should you be interested at seeing some pictures: http://www.eriklovold.com/london-working
p.5 #19 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
olelovold wrote:
douglas, to completely eliminate shutter lag in all conditions, just half-press the shutter (thereby closing the aperture). Frame the subject and press the shutter all the way. Voila, no lag. I do this all the time whilst shooting in the street. Just a thing to get used to.
I have shot lots of street with this camera in London. I have a page for it on my website, should you be interested at seeing some pictures: http://www.eriklovold.com/london-working
That doesn't fix the problem. It's the half press of the shutter that is delayed, especially if you're shooting at wider apertures in daylight. When you half-press the shutter, the aperture often does a little dance before the AF locks on. Oddly, it isn't as much of an issue in lower light, because the aperture just stays wide open.
Either way, that new firmware looks good for the XP1.
p.5 #20 · Fuji EX-1 on DPR. This looks very interesting!
olelovold wrote:
I have shot lots of street with this camera in London. I have a page for it on my website, should you be interested at seeing some pictures: http://www.eriklovold.com/london-working
Nice Work! Looks like a perfect use for the X-Pro1.
