Fuji X-E2 image problems

Started Nov 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
Alessandro63
Contributing MemberPosts: 787
Like?
Re: Mass hysteria vs. reality and the voice of reason.
In reply to Daniel Lauring, Nov 13, 2013

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Alessandro63 wrote:

Thanks.

Now we may all agree that is a mess...
There's something new, inside (the raw): RPP can't open it, I will indagate other developers.
The jpeg is horrible, I'm sure fuji will acknowledge and correct the disaster in a future FW update.

To me, this is a perfect example of mass internet forum hysteria. Words like, "mess", "horrible" and "disaster" to describe a bit too much skin smoothing only shown at ISO 6400. This internal jpg processing appears to be pretty much exactly the same processing as is in the X100s which has been out for about 8 months and in that time has won top awards from the likes of Steve Huff and Zack Arias and been called "camera of the year" by several others. In fact, it just took top honors on dpreview's own website.

Let's look at the facts.

1. Fuji applies appears to apply more skin smoothing, at ISO 6400 than they do other noise reduction and to many people this amount of smoothing is objectionable.

2. Early X-E2 processors (specifically LR) don't do a great job of processing the RAW files.

That is it.

So, if ISO 6400 is an important part of your portrait work, and you don't care to process RAW, or if you only will process RAW with LR, it is clear that you should not buy the X-E2.

For pretty much everyone else the issue is much more minor.

First: I have written very soft and circumstantiated posts, and you are interested only in my less than perfect english. What do you want.

The example file is a mess. Dot. If you can live with that, congrats. I even doubted it was a fake. The OP is not speaking of the X100s. Why do you detour... No, I don't have seen similar horrible results coming from Mr Zack Arias's X100s.

And to conclude: I don't know if LR does a bad job. If you read well, you are going to see I only criticize that very jpeg, while regarding the RAW I think it is a matter of mixed lighting.

You are a perfect example of misreading and accusing the wrong person.

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