X-Trans for commercial work

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Asylum Photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,277Gear list
Like?
Re: X-Trans for commercial work
In reply to mr moonlight, 5 months ago

mr moonlight wrote:

Randy Benter wrote:

Asylum Photo wrote:

Looks like we've had a few shooters reply that they've had no issues.

Certainly no one here has said they do have issues.

But we have one guy who doesn't have the camera(s) claiming that there are issues.

This place is predictable.

You seem to have missed the point; the OP is not asking if the artifacts/smearing exist. It is well known that this can be a problem when looking at pixel-level detail in X-Trans files. The OP posted examples of the artifacts he is concerned about.

The OP is asking if any pros have had issues with submitting X-Trans files for professional use. He is not claiming there are such issues; he is asking. If the OP has previously had his images subjected to pixel-level scrutiny, then he has a valid concern and question for the forum.

Your attempt to discredit and dismiss the OP was rude and "predictable".

To the OP: As far as I know, no pros have reported problems with submitting X-Trans images. Some of them even use Adobe raw processing, though other converters eliminate the pixel-level artifacts. I tend to agree with others who have said that a good photo is a good photo even if you can pixel-peep and find a few pixels that aren't as they should be. If a pro ever does have an X-Trans image rejected due to such artifacts, they could address the issue by processing the raw file with a different application (like the aforementioned CaptureOne). Whether or not it is worth purchasing/using another application is completely up to the individual.

Quite true. Many aspiring photographers browse forums to get all types of info on everything from lighting to gear. When you start talking gear, you get a flood of discussion revolving around miniscule details that are for the most part meaningless in the real world, but are enough for people to slam a camera as useless or a complete failure across the forums. For a beginner who's never experienced the professional photographic world, it may seem like these details will make or break you once you start submitting photos for publication or that this or that camera is useless as a professional tool because it's missing some random feature. It's easy to get caught up in all the talk and the OP was expressing a very valid concern of, do these issues matter in real world use? and wanted the input of Pro's who would know from experience.

The answer has been shown to be a clear and resounding "no."

Yet the OP is getting in a pssing match about OMD's detail retention in DPR's "lab test". Originally, I was fine with the question. And I like the answers, as well. It's the followup discussion that called for my snarky answer.

-- hide signature --
 Asylum Photo's gear list:Asylum Photo's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow