Why the x100s files are lacking

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
ealvarez
Regular MemberPosts: 135
Like?
You clearly misquoted what Zack Arias had said..
In reply to samhain, Mar 30, 2013

samhain wrote:

I just wanted to be clear- I didn't post this to slam the x100s (or x-trans sensors). In fact I'll be buying one.
Like Zac Arias said- I don't care that the images are 'flat' or 'lacking'. It makes them easier to work with in PP.

I just see a lot of folks saying the files are: different, lacking, not as good as x100, more digital looking, etc.
I thought this user's post was an interesting take on the subject. It shouldn't persuade anyone not to buy an x100s. It's just some input as to why the files are different, or lacking as some say.

You clearly misquoted what Zack had said.. He never said he thought images from X100S are flat. He said (on March 28, 2013):

"I can’t say that I’ve found the images to be more flat than the original x100. Being I always tweak images I’d be fine with flat images as it allows me to have more control of contrast. Again though, I have no issues with these images coming from the x100s.

Cheers,
Zack"

This was his answer to question from one poster by the name of George Koury (March 28, 2013) on his blog who asked this question:

"Thanks Zack for the great review and gorgeous images. I’ve read some reviewers claiming that they found many of the X100S images were flat, further stating that they felt the sensor on the X100 produced better images with a bit greater contrast.

In your time with the X100S, have you found this to be the case?

Many thanks."

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
?New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow