What is advantage and disadvantage between X-trans vs Bayer array

Started Sep 7, 2013 | Questions thread
DMillier
Forum ProPosts: 17,973
Like?
Re: X-Trans is Simply More Added Value, In Our Favor!
In reply to ulrikem, Sep 9, 2013

I'm not sure why people expect more detail because the OPLF filter has been omitted.  Technically, an AA filter is required to avoid aliasing.   Fuji and other manufacturers are playing with fire by omitting it.

Aliasing is always present if nothing interferes with the sharpness of the optical image presented to the sensor. Usually that is the AA OLPF.  I'm used to the effects of this omission because I own a Kodak 14n and a couple of Foveon Sigma DSLRs.  The Sigmas are immune to colour moire because of their layered sensor approach but they luminance alias like crazy.  The Kodak has a regular Bayer CFA and it luminance and colour aliases like crazy. It isn't pretty.

The X-trans approach claims to reduce the risk of colour aliasing/moire effects but it can't do anything about luminance aliasing (jaggies, false diagonal striped patterns and the like) unfortunately.

And the benefits of omitting the AA filter seem tenuous to me. It doesn't really improve detail unless some kind of ridiculously heavy filter is being used, really what it does is improve acutance.  Acutance (a.k.a. microcontrast) can be restored in post with the judicious application of deconvolution sharpening.

I suspect that the positive image quality aspects of xtrans have little to do with it being xtrans, it's just a good package.

Anyway, the postman has just this minute handed me a box with my new XE1 in it, so I'll find out whether theory meets practice!

Cheers

Dave

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