frezeiss wrote: douglasf13 wrote: frezeiss wrote: douglasf13 wrote: frezeiss wrote: FlyPenFly wrote:
I don\'t think you can simply set the 5N Sharpening at zero. Bayer filter sensors are designed to be sharpened in post or in JPEG processing. So the fuji files are benefiting from JPEG sharpening in their internal algorithm while the 5N files are not receiving that benefit.
If or when Fuji gets very good ACR support and Fuji releases really great lenses, I\'ll take a hard look at that system. After handling Fuji lenses, they just seem ho hum and the test results are nothing worth bragging about.
...actually its quite mild. It looks aggresive because you are comparing to a NEX 5N, which has quite mushy results if you shoot RAW and didn\'t sharpen..
Look at my comparisons on the previous page. The XE-1 looks more smeared in ACR, and it has a lot more artifacts and moire in RPP. At least with current raw software, I\'ve yet to see the XE-1 look better than the 5N in good light.
I was comparing JPEGS between the two, as I have extensive experience with the 5N, evaluating the XE-1 to the 5N was second nature. In short I prefer the JPEGs from the Fuji as it was considerably sharper. Wether it was false detail or whatever it doesnt matter..as long as like what I\'m seeing. As a matter of fact, I prefer the Nex 3 output to the 5N, the 16 MP AA Sony sensor is just too mushy for me..
Sony has never been known for particularly good jpegs. If you\'re not talking raws, then that makes.
Well actually I find their jpegs are quite good, and love them vibrant colors the 5N produces. I cant stand it seeing the poor sharpness with the 5N when shooting raw. Actually this is good enoough for me unless I\'m doing serious landscapes with very wide DR.
Sony jpeg color is usually considered good, but both Sony jpegs and the packaged Sony raw converter have both been know to be lacking in the detail department. RPP kills both in terms of detail, but it generally kills just about any converter in terms of detail.
I don\'t understand your point about the raws, when the previous examples in this thread show the 5N raws to be competitive with the XE-1, in terms of detail, when using RPP. In fact, the 5N raws in RPP are better than any of the raws I\'ve seen from the X-E1. Are you mistaking artifacts in the X-E1 with actual detail? What sharpening settings are you using for the 5N in Lightroom? Are you using deconvolution?
frezeiss wrote: douglasf13 wrote: frezeiss wrote: douglasf13 wrote: frezeiss wrote: FlyPenFly wrote:
I don\'t think you can simply set the 5N Sharpening at zero. Bayer filter sensors are designed to be sharpened in post or in JPEG processing. So the fuji files are benefiting from JPEG sharpening in their internal algorithm while the 5N files are not receiving that benefit.
If or when Fuji gets very good ACR support and Fuji releases really great lenses, I\'ll take a hard look at that system. After handling Fuji lenses, they just seem ho hum and the test results are nothing worth bragging about.
...actually its quite mild. It looks aggresive because you are comparing to a NEX 5N, which has quite mushy results if you shoot RAW and didn\'t sharpen..
Look at my comparisons on the previous page. The XE-1 looks more smeared in ACR, and it has a lot more artifacts and moire in RPP. At least with current raw software, I\'ve yet to see the XE-1 look better than the 5N in good light.
I was comparing JPEGS between the two, as I have extensive experience with the 5N, evaluating the XE-1 to the 5N was second nature. In short I prefer the JPEGs from the Fuji as it was considerably sharper. Wether it was false detail or whatever it doesnt matter..as long as like what I\'m seeing. As a matter of fact, I prefer the Nex 3 output to the 5N, the 16 MP AA Sony sensor is just too mushy for me..
Sony has never been known for particularly good jpegs. If you\'re not talking raws, then that makes.
Well actually I find their jpegs are quite good, and love them vibrant colors the 5N produces. I cant stand it seeing the poor sharpness with the 5N when shooting raw. Actually this is good enoough for me unless I\'m doing serious landscapes with very wide DR.
Sony jpeg color is usually considered good, but both Sony jpegs and the packaged Sony raw converter have both been know to be lacking in the detail department.
I don\'t understand your point about the raws, when the previous examples in this thread show the 5N raws to be competitive with the XE-1, in terms of detail, when using RPP. In fact, the 5N raws in RPP are better than any of the raws I\'ve seen from the X-E1. Are you mistaking artifacts in the X-E1 with actual detail? What sharpening settings are you using for the 5N in Lightroom? Are you using deconvolution?
Dec 28, 2012 at 10:20 PM
Previous versions of douglasf13's message #11224122 « Fuji XPro1 vs Nex 5n Comparision Images »
