Fuji X-T1 - Greens and jpg files - help please?

[jonoslack]

This is an XP1 raw example (100% crop) from an XP1 with LR processing two years ago. No that bad now with LR improvements, but will give you an idea of how bad it used to be.

But this is what I'm seeing Carl - not that bad perhaps, but it's the same thing. Horrid - and in my mind it makes it unusable.

I find it incomprehensible that everyone seems to think the files are so great. Personally, I'm not sure where to go next!

 

[JonMo]

Hello Jono,
I have not recieved my x-t1 yet but i do use the x-e2
Personally the only raw processors I have been happy with for green foliage are;
Capture one 7; my primary and good for 90% of images.
Photo Ninja; my goto if Capture one can not quite get there.
I have not had an image that could not hold detail n greens.
I reguarily print on exebision fibre at 24 inches short side with no issues.
I primarily use; 18-55 55-200 and my adapted Olympus om 35 shift MC.
I downloaded your raw files and did a quick try through Photo Ninja.
The first file seemed to react really well. just a small adjustment in the detail slider and the grass popped very well.
The second appears to be soft.
Photo Ninja beta is a free download for cross platforms.
I only shoot Jpg for event portraits, so it dificult for me to comment on yours other than; the fine setting jpg with the "s" film setting works wonderfully.
Things to try;
change jpg in camera color to a different emulation.
found the emulators to change items significantly.
I run my jpgs with everthing off (orj as close as it gets) no sharpen, nr, ect.
I am on the road, but can look more in depth later.
Wish I could try it in Capture one, but no support yet.
Hope my own x-t1 shows soon.
If you wish, I can send you back your raws with my prossesing to view on your computer later. Perhaps I can find the time for a quick proof print to see if part of the problem is how the monitors are handling the translation of the images.
All the best to you.
typed on an ipad portable keyboard, please forgive the interesting spellings for some of my words.

 

[scho]

But this is what I'm seeing Carl - not that bad perhaps, but it's the same thing. Horrid - and in my mind it makes it unusable.

I find it incomprehensible that everyone seems to think the files are so great. Personally, I'm not sure where to go next!

I hope that Apple support for the Fuji Xti comes soon in Aperture and the demosaicing works well for you in that environment. Otherwise, you will have to use other 3rd party solutions for raw processing that yield decent transformations. So far I'm quite pleased with the X100S raws processed through ACR with the provided profiles (both camera and lens). I will stick with Sony for my main system and use the X100S as my travel camera.

 

[Paul2660]

Jono,

The image with the single tree looks fine to me. The grass comes out very sharp in the foreground. As do the trees in the distance. I so far have only used photo ninja on it. I will pull it up in LR 5.3 later today. I will say if you are using an older version of LR other than 5.3, the greens will suffer for sure.

I posted a crop from the bottom left. I am seeing individual blades of grass with no problem.

The 2nd image is just a bit out of focus and looks like an OIS issue for sure, in that it might not have kicked in fully. I find that the OIS tends to cause me issues quite a bit and most times leave it off especially on the 18-55.


Paul C.

 

[Paul2660]

I won't be able to use LR, I forgot it wont' open the X-T1 yet. I have not updated ACR for CS6, but it does now support the files, and I will take a look at it a bit later.

I hate it when the cameras get ahead of the software as it will quite a while before Capture One updates again and adds the X-T1 also.

Paul

 

[JonMo]

hello again Jono,

I had a little time to play with your first raw and jpg.
the jpg has a large amount of barrel distortion correction on it.
When I take the raw file in photo ninja and adjust it to the same distortion correction; it seems to do a better job of it, but it still just starts to smear similar to what is in your jpg. I will look later to see if the amount of lens correction in the camera is adjustable to allow for less automatic correction.

Regards,
Jon

 

[JonMo]

On the x-e2 menu layer 3 turn lens modulation off and try the JPG again.
I would try it myself on my e2 but I can only shoot cedar trees; the grass is kinda covered in snow.

Regards,
Jon

 

[GrahamWelland]

I've seldom converted a Fuji file worth keeping out of ACR/Lightroom. I don't have the types of issues listed here with C1 Pro & X files to date. I haven't tried X-T1 files in C1 yet but I would expect the only difference between it and X-E2 files to be the metadata in the header.

Not all raw converters are created equal. The image SCHO posted is probably one of the worst cases of Adobe garbling the greens I've seen. Even adobe's converter isn't that bad any more. The biggest issue I've had with ACR has been sensational reds - ie lacking subtle colour.

 

[JonMo]

Hello Graham,
now if only Phase would let Capture one open the x-t1 files.
As it is the same sensor as the x-e2; I have no idea why it currently doesn't.

Come on Phase!

Photo Ninja get my money for now.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I'm sure it's just the EXIF header info. They'll add the X-T1 soon enough I'm sure. As an alternative you could try one of the EXIF header modification apps and relabel the X-T1 files with an X-E2 header. That's what the Canon and Nikon folks often do until the converters catch up.

 

[ashwinrao1]

But this is what I'm seeing Carl - not that bad perhaps, but it's the same thing. Horrid - and in my mind it makes it unusable.

I find it incomprehensible that everyone seems to think the files are so great. Personally, I'm not sure where to go next!

Gosh, it's been 2 years since the XPro 1, and the same issue exists, albeit slightly tamed. As great as the XT-1 seems in all other regards, IQ issues seem unresolved.... Jono, how do you find the files, in comparison to the A7?

Ultimately, the XTrans 2 sensor doesn't appear to be much of an evolution from the original x-trans, save the addition of phase detect pixels. At times, the IQ is amazing. At other times, smudge factory....the inconsistency killed my desire to shoot with the camera...and I gave it a year of regular use...love what Fuji does in evolving their cameras, but the IQ issue is a problem....

In my mind, the XPro-1 was always best with it's own JPEG engine, but that really limites processing and creativity offered by RAW files. Now if Fuji offered out of camera TIFF's, using whatever engine that drives the JPEG production, or at least shared what RAW conversion they have with Adobe or Apple, then we'd have something...

Sadly for me, IQ is king, and these issues essentially obviate much of the greatness that exists in the XT-1....I have been sorely tempted to hit the "Buy" button, but I know this IQ, and I took my departure over a year ago, thanks to the smudge/water color effects. I had hoped that a year had resolved issues, but it doesn't seem that it has...bummer...

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Sadly for me, IQ is king, and these issues essentially obviate much of the greatness that exists in the XT-1....I have been sorely tempted to hit the "Buy" button, but I know this IQ, and I took my departure over a year ago, thanks to the smudge/water color effects. I had hoped that a year had resolved issues, but it doesn't seem that it has...bummer...

I understand... but I guess I see more value, even with the faults. You know how and what I shoot and these Fuji cameras work for me. My X-T1 arrives tomorrow morning just in time for my annual trek to New Orleans for Mardi Gras. Perfect timing to put it through a few hoops and tests in the real world. If it doesn't perform.. it goes back.. but based on the work I have seen from a number of pros who had access to it, I don't anticipate a return on this one.

I have the X-Pro 1 and the E-X2 but the X-T1 will be a bit of a game changer for me with the new EVF, fps and tracking.

As the Rolling Stones songs goes...

"You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes well you might find
You get what you need."

 

[Paul2660]

I'm sure it's just the EXIF header info. They'll add the X-T1 soon enough I'm sure. As an alternative you could try one of the EXIF header modification apps and relabel the X-T1 files with an X-E2 header. That's what the Canon and Nikon folks often do until the converters catch up.

Graham, do you have a windows app in mind for this?

Thanks
Paul

 

[GrahamWelland]

Gosh, it's been 2 years since the XPro 1, and the same issue exists, albeit slightly tamed. As great as the XT-1 seems in all other regards, IQ issues seem unresolved.... Jono, how do you find the files, in comparison to the A7?

Ultimately, the XTrans 2 sensor doesn't appear to be much of an evolution from the original x-trans, save the addition of phase detect pixels. At times, the IQ is amazing. At other times, smudge factory....the inconsistency killed my desire to shoot with the camera...and I gave it a year of regular use...love what Fuji does in evolving their cameras, but the IQ issue is a problem....

In my mind, the XPro-1 was always best with it's own JPEG engine, but that really limites processing and creativity offered by RAW files. Now if Fuji offered out of camera TIFF's, using whatever engine that drives the JPEG production, or at least shared what RAW conversion they have with Adobe or Apple, then we'd have something...

Sadly for me, IQ is king, and these issues essentially obviate much of the greatness that exists in the XT-1....I have been sorely tempted to hit the "Buy" button, but I know this IQ, and I took my departure over a year ago, thanks to the smudge/water color effects. I had hoped that a year had resolved issues, but it doesn't seem that it has...bummer...

Doesn't this seem a bit premature based on two images from Jono and in advance of full raw support across the board? It kind of smacks of finding flaws that you wanted to find ...

 

[JonMo]

I don't want to create a flame war but;
what the hell Ashwin?

I have been shooting cams to 30 years, professionally for 20.
Until just recently my go to cam was a Cambo RS with a combo of Aptus 65s and Credo back. I spent most of 2013 in a hospital and wheelchair and now have a restriction on how much weight I can carry for the next 5 years. This forced me to make a change to continue to do what I love.

I researched the crap out of what was available and made an informed decision to use the Fuji mirroless; the deciding factor was THE IMAGE QUALITY AVAILABLE ON THE X-TRANS SENSOR.

I have used the highest resolution backs with the (arguably) best lens (large format technical). I didn't make the choice for the Fuji as some hipster wanabe looking for a camera to match my goatee.

I am highly qualified to make educated opinions on image quality.

I am communicating on this thread to help Jono with an issue she found on her new camera.

I didn't realize that suddenly made this a forum for non Fuji users to bash what they haven't used recently or perhaps don't understand how to get the best from.
I get tired of reading people rehashing negatives that have nothing to do with this wonderful camera. Try it in Capture One, learn to work the raws; then make an informed comment.

On the subject ACTUALLY POSTED;
I did a couple more experiments and found;
Green smear seems to sometimes appear in jpgs with the 18-55 at 18 with the automatic barrel distortion being applied by the camera.
A jpg of the same scene with the correction turned off in camera resulted in much cleaner image across the entire shot.
The same scene in Photo Ninja with barrel correction resulted in distortion correction without smearing.

This is all on an x-e2 as I am waiting for delivery on my x-t1.

As it uses the same sensor; I am assuming that a similar result may occur on the x-t1.

I hope some of this information helps Jono.

Jon

 

[docmoore]

I understand... but I guess I see more value, even with the faults. You know how and what I shoot and these Fuji cameras work for me.

Truth is you and Ashwin do not share the same proclivities in how you shoot...
the drawbacks that he mentions are rarely encountered by you as you focus on those very intimate aspects of photography and do not usually do the large grand landscape....if you do it is usually centered on a center point of interest and as such allows a bit of room to let exposure and sharpness rolloff without objection.

And it works for you ... fabulously!

The rest of us will struggle with the wonky colors, strange artifacts, and weird sharpness issues in the XTrans...or will move to a different sensor until Fuji resolves this....

All of this angst about small sensor cameras has me looking again at MFDB and larger cameras...I would rather schlep a bit more weight than spend my time trying to resolve errors at capture....

A shame really as the X100 was a nice camera...the X-T1 looks to be a wonderful ride if they would just address the IQ issue for us grand landscape folks. Apologize for the rant....just too much froth over the new new thing....

Looking forward to seeing the new NO posts on Boxed Light.....always a treat.

Regards,

Bob

 

[docmoore]

I don't want to create a flame war but;
what the hell Ashwin?
the deciding factor was THE IMAGE QUALITY AVAILABLE ON THE X-TRANS SENSOR.

I am communicating on this thread to help Jono with an issue she found on her new camera.

I didn't realize that suddenly made this a forum for non Fuji users to bash what they haven't used recently or perhaps don't understand how to get the best from.
I get tired of reading people rehashing negatives that have nothing to do with this wonderful camera. Try it in Capture One, learn to work the raws; then make an informed comment.



Jon

Jon,

Not that you started a flame war but you seem to be relatively new here so a few facts....

Jono is a guy...great guy at that. He seems to find the most cogent problems with any camera out there and can quickly correct it or dismiss the camera and move on...we have been following his posts since the photo.net days....Nikon D2s at that point.

Ashwin has extensive knowledge and use of most every camera out there...he has used the Fuji...written about it and made a personal decision to move on...as have some of the rest of us...all hoping these issues would be solved...and I for one will state that it looks like they have not been completely corrected.

You like the Fuji...great enjoy it.

The key with GETDPI is to realize that no one else really cares if you like the Holga best...they expect you to conduct your posts as a friend, a gentleman, and a person of integrity and one who can take someone else's viewpoint not as an attack on your personhood but as their own view....nothing else.

So when Ashwin says it don't look good...most of us listen as he has a long track record of calling it as he sees it and his calling it usually is pretty persuasive.

Me.... I have been doing this since 1970 ... 35, MF, LF ... Imacon scanning, recent Phase P20, H3d II 39, Leica S2-P...and a short term affair with the original X100....keep looking at Fuji hoping to return.

Truth is I normally shoot landscapes in the late fall, winter and very early spring as I hate greens...yellows not far behind. Rather see a tree without leaves than a green one. So the green speckles are particularly a struggle for my way of viewing landscapes and while Astia in 4x5 and 8x10 worked...Velvia never did...probably why I preferred Acros and APX 25....

But I digress....

Jono has called out a problem that may be a deal breaker for a lot of folks....hope it can be resolved but I assume this can be done without disparaging others as we resolve it.

Regards,

Bob

 

[ashwinrao1]

Doesn't this seem a bit premature based on two images from Jono and in advance of full raw support across the board? It kind of smacks of finding flaws that you wanted to find ...

Sure, I guess so..Trust me, I was just about to hit "Buy" today after seeing the Chris Nichols and Kai Man Wong videos and hearing many many folks heap praise. I actually really liked my year with the XPro-1. I found Fuji colors to be supreme, but the camera's AF was laggy at the time, and I was never satisfied with the smearing that I saw in LR conversions.

I am totally a LR guy, and I am hearing many of the same comments that I saw nearly 2 years ago, when the camera was fresh and full of promise.

I suspect that there's just something about X-trans that folks haven't figured out yet (at Adobe/Apple) yet. Clearly, Fuji's JPEG engine can mostly get it right, and so that leaves me puzzled...why other's can't do it, or why Fuji hasn't provided the keys to that kingdom. They have responded in many other ways, and have provided a true shooter's camera in the XT-1....

All of that said, I am plenty happy at the moment with the A7, which also has its flaws....

We are all in search of a perfect camera....Fuji is close, but for me, until the IQ issues are tidied up in LR, I would struggle with it....plus, I really trust what Jono sees in things, as we see much in the same light....

 

[ashwinrao1]

By the way, I reserve the right to take it all back and join the crowd LOL...

 

[ashwinrao1]

Jon,

Not that you started a flame war but you seem to be relatively new here so a few facts....

Ashwin has extensive knowledge and use of most every camera out there...he has used the Fuji...written about it and made a personal decision to move on...as have some of the rest of us...all hoping these issues would be solved...and I for one will state that it looks like they have not been completely corrected.

You like the Fuji...great enjoy it.

The key with GETDPI is to realize that no one else really cares if you like the Holga best...they expect you to conduct your posts as a friend, a gentleman, and a person of integrity and one who can take someone else's viewpoint not as an attack on your personhood but as their own view....nothing else.

So when Ashwin says it don't look good...most of us listen as he has a long track record of calling it as he sees it and his calling it usually is pretty persuasive.





Regards,

Bob

Thanks for the support, Bob. You have represented my intent better than I could so do. I think GetDPI offers a safe environment by which to share and debate opinions. I am not trying to flame anyone, by any means, and I only state my opinion, based on the comments posted and my own year long experience with the XPro-1 (and much shorter time with the XE-1)....both which are reported to have a sensor that's very close to the present X-Trans II, save the phase detect sensors embedded in the chip and whatever software magic is going on behind the scenes......

Truth be told, I am a HUGE Fuji fan. They actually listen to us bozos here in forum land, and they tweak their cameras, even ones no longer in production, to try to make it right. Each firmware seems to bring improvements, and no other camera maker does it with such alpomb....I actually really love the colors coming from the X-Trans, along with the detail thanks to the lack of an AA filter. Their array is really innovative, as it allows both a lack of AA filter and minimal moire, due to the design of the sensors color pixel array...Really cool...What I find...um...not cool, is the water color effects. I remember stumbiling accross those when the first LR RAW profile came out, and I was somewhat jarred. I ended up mainly shooting my X-Pro1 as a JPEG camera, which is very atypical for me. I edit heavily, and prefer using RAW files to explore my creative interests in more depth. If, from what I have read, the XT-1 produces heavy reds and detail smearing, then this is an issue. It was an issue. i was hoping it would no longer be...and that the only compromise was a slightly smaller sensor, with so much more to gain...but like I said, pixel peeping IQ matters to me...for better or for worse. Just my $0.02. Don't mean to flame at all, so please don't take it that way...