The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

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

bradhusick

Active member
Jono, this is indeed strange. I will shoot some around here today although there's not much grass at this time of year!

You're using the kit lens, yes? I will try that as well as a Leica 50 lux asph and see if there's a difference.
 

Braeside

New member
Jono, I'm not sure, but that copy of the lens doesn't look very good, certainly comparing similar stuff at same FL and aperture with my XP1 with the same lens OOC JPG. It may be the different sensor, but I agree not good at all. Have you updated the firmware on the lens? - there was an update very recently. Tried OIS off etc? Thanks for the test files BTW.
 

archiM44

Member
Jono,
Indeed very bad - grass looks cooked or like baby food.
I ran out and took some grass pictures but they are not quite so bad.
Irridient is still the best in my opinion, but to me fairly acceptable in the prerelease ACR from Adobe Labs.
I'll see if I can place it in my dropbox folder after I finish cooking.
regards
 

bradhusick

Active member
Jono,
Here are two test shots. One with leica 50 lux asph, the other with 18-55 kit zoom set to 50.5mm. Both shot MF, ISO 200, f/5.6. RAW files converted to DNG with Adobe converter then imported to LR. No adjustments. Full frame then 100% crops. Kit lens first then 50 lux.

I think they're both very good, Leica is sharper, but I don't see any of the strange green smearing you're getting.
 
Last edited:
In the limited tests I have done after the release oc ACR 8.4 RC I do not see any difference compared to ACR 8.3 other than the addition of profiles which are supposed to emulate the Fuji jpeg rendering.
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
Jono, I'm not sure, but that copy of the lens doesn't look very good, certainly comparing similar stuff at same FL and aperture with my XP1 with the same lens OOC JPG. It may be the different sensor, but I agree not good at all. Have you updated the firmware on the lens? - there was an update very recently. Tried OIS off etc? Thanks for the test files BTW.
Hi there David
I'm pretty sure I know what a bad lens looks like (and yes, I have updated the firmware). It may be it isn't brilliant, but that doesn't account for the weird patterns and the smearing.

All the best
 

greypilgrim

New member
Jono,
I've looked at the two JPEG's you provided and by accident discovered something on my Mac (which I believe you are using). Safari is potentially showing the JPEG's at slightly larger than actual size. When I take the pictures in to Preview and show them there at actual size, they are displayed slightly smaller than what Safari is showing them as. Not sure what is going on there. As a reference point, this was on a 13" Retina MBP. I will look at them on my 27" iMac later. The reason I bring this up, is that the grass picture looks decidedly worse in Safari than it does in Preview.

Next, the picture with the tress and leaves looks like it is slightly out of focus everywhere, almost as if the IS was not working properly, or IS was being used on a tripod. The non green portions of the trunks were also blurred. I am wondering if the tendency to watercolor the greens is magnified by minute camera shake/blur? Just a hypothesis.

I shot with the XE-2 over Christmas (same sensor), but with all manual lenses on a speedbooster adapter. I am going back through those to see what I can see (granted, I was NOT shooting grass on purpose :)).

Doug
 

pophoto

New member
The weird pattern you are seeing Jono, is like some have mentioned to do with the X-trans sensor (watercolor effect) and the way raw processors process a 'more' regular bayer cmos sensor with no problem. Sean Reid and DL have both mentioned it, and I have made myself stay away from the Fuji cameras for this being one of the main reasons. At the same time, I know the camera and lenses are great, but I cannot have it affect my images, it will drive me insane!

I have the A7 and was torn with the release the of the XT-1, you have now confirmed my suspicions the problems are still here! I guess I will be keeping my initial purchase!
 

TimWright

Member
I would agree that the 2nd shot looks out of focus. The first one I'm not sure but will download the raw files when I'm at home. What lens are these shot with? I shoot with both the EM1 and Fuji systems and generally I like the Fuji images better. The only Fuji zoom I use is the 18-55 and it is pretty good, on par with the oly 12-40. Most of the Fuji primes are really excellent.
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Jono,

I converted both RAFs in PS CC newest ARC and dropped them to you in a PM....

They both are very soft even with medium sharpening...mainly in the mid-field distances...not what I would expect near apertures of F 7-8....

The patterns you mention may still be there in these TIFs... thought you could look at them more easily this way.


Bob
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI Everyone
Many thanks for all the input - I think it's something worth bottoming out. I have to say I'm wondering about the OIS on the lens - (it was switched on), and I agree the second shot looks out of focus . . . but not everywhere- so I don't think it's just that.

What is really interesting and odd, is that I was looking at the files on a thunderbolt monitor, and this evening I've been looking at them on a 15 retina MBP, and they look a whole lot better (strange or what?) Some actually look really good. I'll be interested to hear what Fuji say (I've sent the files to them too).

incidentally Po-Ming Chu and Tim - I have the A7, and also the E-M1, I'm trying to make a decision as to which way to go - not easy!

All the best
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Jono, all,

I have both the Fuji XE2 with 18-55 and the Oly EM1 with 12-40 but I generally like the images from the Fuji better than from the Oly. This includes OOC JPEGs.

I am watching on a 15" MBP with normal display and a Eizo 24" full HD Pro display and on both I prefer the Fuji.

Not sure what (if) I am doing wrong.

Peter
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono, all,

I have both the Fuji XE2 with 18-55 and the Oly EM1 with 12-40 but I generally like the images from the Fuji better than from the Oly. This includes OOC JPEGs.

I am watching on a 15" MBP with normal display and a Eizo 24" full HD Pro display and on both I prefer the Fuji.

Not sure what (if) I am doing wrong.

Peter
Or What (if) I am :facesmack::eek::)

I still think your grass looks odd though - but things are definitely less bad on the 15"MBP

all the best
 

Braeside

New member
Jono, the first shot of the tree at 18mm when converted with AccuRaw and brought into Aperture as a TIFF and then sharpened etc looks pretty good. This is on a 15" Retina MBP.

Toggling Aperture to zoom in at what it calls 100%. What I do notice is there is quite a lot of distortion control in the JPG at 18mm, the raw via AccuRaw is not corrected for distortion and the horizon curves upwards at the edges as a result, so part of the smearing in the JPG may be the distortion correction stretching the corners. The raw does show more detail in the grass, and the very distant tree branches on the horizon. My impression is that the LHS of the image may be slightly more blurred on the horizon than the RHS, but this could also be due to the nature of the subject and the rendering from raw, but at normal viewing resolutions is acceptable to my eyes.

My initial thought about it looking terribly bad compared to what I am accustomed to seeing was because I was viewing it in preview and on the retina display and that gives a different magnification at 100% to what I normally see within Aperture.

I gave up on the other picture as I couldn't tell what was in focus, which made me think OIS problem initially.

I would still try another lens, even if you could borrow a Fuji prime from someone.

Cheers
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Jono,

while you are communicating with Fuji, could you please also mention that they should get Aperture support faster than in the past? The XE2 is now out for 6 months and still no support. Especially in the light of weird JPEG artifact that becomes even more a problem.

Thanks

Peter
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono, the first shot of the tree at 18mm when converted with AccuRaw and brought into Aperture as a TIFF and then sharpened etc looks pretty good. This is on a 15" Retina MBP.

Toggling Aperture to zoom in at what it calls 100%. What I do notice is there is quite a lot of distortion control in the JPG at 18mm, the raw via AccuRaw is not corrected for distortion and the horizon curves upwards at the edges as a result, so part of the smearing in the JPG may be the distortion correction stretching the corners. The raw does show more detail in the grass, and the very distant tree branches on the horizon. My impression is that the LHS of the image may be slightly more blurred on the horizon than the RHS, but this could also be due to the nature of the subject and the rendering from raw, but at normal viewing resolutions is acceptable to my eyes.

My initial thought about it looking terribly bad compared to what I am accustomed to seeing was because I was viewing it in preview and on the retina display and that gives a different magnification at 100% to what I normally see within Aperture.

I gave up on the other picture as I couldn't tell what was in focus, which made me think OIS problem initially.

I would still try another lens, even if you could borrow a Fuji prime from someone.

Cheers
HI There David
I don't think it's just the lens (it may be partly the lens). But I'll try a bit harder tomorrow with OIS turned off - it might be a contributor at least.

It would be really nice to get to the bottom of this - perhaps it's a hardware issue? we'll see.
 

Braeside

New member
Fine Jono, hope you get to the bottom of it, because I get the impression you like the camera design and function otherwise.

Peter, I agree Apple need to get a move on with supporting this camera, not sure that Fuji have much input to that. Given the popularity of the XT1 we can only hope that this will push Apple on a little faster.

Cheers
 

scho

Well-known member
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.

 
Top