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

Started Sep 7, 2013 | Questions
newellj
Contributing MemberPosts: 876Gear list
Like?
Re: What is advantage and disadvantage between X-trans vs Bayer array
In reply to dotborg, Sep 7, 2013

dotborg wrote:

stuartgolden wrote:

Shoot with a standard CMOS sensor and then the X-Trans and you will see the differences. Subtle but there.

I do and there is zero advantage.

What if CCD proves superior to CMOS and X-Trans???

 newellj's gear list:newellj's gear list
Sony RX100 II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
junyo
Regular MemberPosts: 310
Like?
Re: What is advantage and disadvantage between X-trans vs Bayer array
In reply to DVT80111, Sep 8, 2013

DVT80111 wrote:

junyo wrote:

X-Trans CFA, being new, is not as well supported by RAW image processing apps, especially the mainstream ones (Lightroom, Capture One, Aperture).

Not quite true. I got latest Adobe Camera Raw plugin and it works fine. TheSILKYPIX software comes with the camera work well too. But the JPG out of camera is pretty good by itself. I have not seen much advantage with RAW files really.

The combination of the X-trans and software manipulation gives a little more detail in shadow. So in post, I don't need to boost up exposure too much. The X-trans is at least 1f stop better than the best Bayer out there. The difference is probably just due to the AA filter.

In bright light, the Fujifilm tends to blow out the highlight. All you need to do is to crank the compensator to minus 1-1.5 f-stop.

I did lot of research and picked the X-E1 over the NEX6. So far so good.

As a subjective opinion, I agree that Adobe products work fine, that's what I use. However, my answer was designed the give the OP an objective, balanced and succinct synopsis in response to their question, not spout my personal opinion or engage in another round of 'XTrans is AMAZING-Is Not!!!-Is Too!!!' circle jerk that these threads always (and this thread has already) become.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Davinator
Forum ProPosts: 13,352Gear list
Like?
Re: What is advantage and disadvantage between X-trans vs Bayer array
In reply to DVT80111, Sep 8, 2013

DVT80111 wrote:

junyo wrote:

X-Trans CFA, being new, is not as well supported by RAW image processing apps, especially the mainstream ones (Lightroom, Capture One, Aperture).

Not quite true. I got latest Adobe Camera Raw plugin and it works fine. TheSILKYPIX software comes with the camera work well too. But the JPG out of camera is pretty good by itself. I have not seen much advantage with RAW files really.

The combination of the X-trans and software manipulation gives a little more detail in shadow. So in post, I don't need to boost up exposure too much. The X-trans is at least 1f stop better than the best Bayer out there. The difference is probably just due to the AA filter.

In bright light, the Fujifilm tends to blow out the highlight. All you need to do is to crank the compensator to minus 1-1.5 f-stop.

I did lot of research and picked the X-E1 over the NEX6. So far so good.

Odd, I find the opposite.  Withthe option of selecting DR400%, it is darn near impossible to blow highlights.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Charles2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,237
Like?
Clean
In reply to ealvarez, Sep 8, 2013

XE-1 images generally look "cleaner" to me than photos from Bayer sensors. Subjective and difficult to define - as though a thin veil had been removed. Not a matter of resolution or noise.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alexander2505
New MemberPosts: 24Gear list
Like?
Re: Simple
In reply to Chris Dodkin, Sep 8, 2013

Nothing to add appart from great adantage of nice fuji colors specialy greens that my canon was unable to reproduce

 Alexander2505's gear list:Alexander2505's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alexander2505
New MemberPosts: 24Gear list
Like?
Re: Clean
In reply to Charles2, Sep 8, 2013

Removing barrier makes everything much more sencitive. As easy as that.

 Alexander2505's gear list:Alexander2505's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
glacierpete
Senior MemberPosts: 1,917
Like?
Re: Clean
In reply to Charles2, Sep 8, 2013

+ 1 good point.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dotborg
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,659
Like?
Comparison
In reply to ealvarez, Sep 8, 2013

Some people really want to attribute some mystical greatness to Fujifilm's X-Tranny sensor. Well here's a comparison. The colors aren't exactly the same as I didn't apply any profiles but who can tell me based on sharpness, detail, cleanness, goodness, whatever, which one is the Fujifilm X-E1 and which one is the Olympus E-M5? No sharpening was applied at all. The files were demosaiced using dcraw then the color balance, contrast and levels were adjusted in RawTherapee.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alexander2505
New MemberPosts: 24Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

Top one looks Fujifilm

 Alexander2505's gear list:Alexander2505's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Randy Benter
Senior MemberPosts: 2,093Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

I think the top image has slightly better detail. I get your point; even when viewed at 100%, these images are extremely close.

 Randy Benter's gear list:Randy Benter's gear list
Leica X2 Fujifilm X100S Leica X Vario Leica M Typ 240 Fujifilm X-E2 +27 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ealvarez
Regular MemberPosts: 192Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

I don't know..I prefer image on the bottom. It has this 3D/'real life' looks of the paper clips. And reds are more pleasing to look at IMO. Is that from an Olympus camera?

ED

EDIT: Green is also much better

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Davinator
Forum ProPosts: 13,352Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

dotborg wrote:

Some people really want to attribute some mystical greatness to Fujifilm's X-Tranny sensor. Well here's a comparison. The colors aren't exactly the same as I didn't apply any profiles but who can tell me based on sharpness, detail, cleanness, goodness, whatever, which one is the Fujifilm X-E1 and which one is the Olympus E-M5? No sharpening was applied at all. The files were demosaiced using dcraw then the color balance, contrast and levels were adjusted in RawTherapee.

As Olympus applies heavier OOC sharpening and saturation, it would be rather hard to make a judgement call.  Based upon raw files I have worked on, the Fuji can pull more detail and has lower noIse.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Charles2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,237
Like?
Re: Comparison: The Fuji XE-1 is the bottom shot (n/t)
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

xxx

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Charles2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,237
Like?
Re: Comparison - the lenses!
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

You can make this comparison go either way depending on the pair of lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Randy Benter
Senior MemberPosts: 2,093Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison - the lenses!
In reply to Charles2, Sep 8, 2013

Charles2 wrote:

You can make this comparison go either way depending on the pair of lenses.

In this comparison, the E-M5 is shot with the Olympus 50mm f/2 and the X-E1 is paired with the Fuji 35mm f/1.4.

 Randy Benter's gear list:Randy Benter's gear list
Leica X2 Fujifilm X100S Leica X Vario Leica M Typ 240 Fujifilm X-E2 +27 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Aethon
Regular MemberPosts: 310
Like?
Re: What is advantage and disadvantage between X-trans vs Bayer array
In reply to flbrit, Sep 8, 2013

Randy Benter wrote:

ealvarez wrote:

Thanks for your reply. Why do you think then Fuji had to develop this new x-trans if no great deal of benefit come out of it? Why not just stay with 'proven' Bayer array? You seems to have the most comprehensive information in your reply and I wonder if you could share your further thoughts about the future of x-trans. I mean Fuji must have had invested a lot of time and money into this X-trans system. Do you share the opinion of many people who think that X-trans is a purely marketing gimmick?

Ed

I would not call it a marketing gimmick. With X-Trans and also with past EXR sensors, I believe Fuji is continually trying to develop sensors that perform better. That is not an easy task as Bayer sensors and algorithms have been incrementally improved over many years. So far, I think they have come up with sensors that offer slight improvements in some areas while being slightly weaker in other areas. Sigma Foveon sensors are similar in this regard; they have awesome detail at low ISO, but poor Hi-ISO performance, large files that slow the camera operation and poor battery life.

All camera makers try to market features that set their products apart from the competition. And they all tend to make lofty claims about the effectiveness of those features. Look at the vendor web page for just about any camera and you will likely find a paragraph describing the improved low-light performance of that particular model.

As far as the future of X-Trans, I believe it will be just like the EXR sensors. Fuji will continue to use it and market it until they come up with their next unique sensor technology.

Quote

"As far as the future of X-Trans, I believe it will be just like the EXR sensors. Fuji will continue to use it and market it until they come up with their next unique sensor technology."

My main concern is not so much the sensor, rather the future of the X mount itsself. I have a nice X-E1, 14mm, 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit but will not at this time invest in more lenses until I'm more confident that the mount and future X mount cameras will continue for a while.

I am loving the output and weight saving.

I am very tempted by the Fujifilm f1.4's and the WA zooms but will resist at this moment.

I really believe the camera market is going through a major shake up bought on by the global economy and technology change which is IMO about to take a leap rather than an incremental advance. The shake out will be very interesting.

Brian

It's sensible to take a conservative approach of course, but one of the reasons I bought into the X-series is because of Fujifilm's corporate philosophy. They have a tradition of taking a long-term view and making long-term strategic commitments in order to develop new business lines. While Kodak was busy maximizing short-term profits, Fujifilm was investing its light-sensitive chemicals experience into a cosmetics business (of all things) which is now extremely successful.
I think the evidence points to the idea that they wouldn't have created the X-series without having a long-term commitment to it, and the pace of new lens development and the fact that they are going for quality before volume points in the same direction.
Fujifilm is much more financially secure than Olympus, less reliant on the camera business alone than Nikon, and less flaky than Sony.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DonSantos
Senior MemberPosts: 1,123Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison: The Fuji XE-1 is the bottom shot (n/t)
In reply to Charles2, Sep 8, 2013

xxx

What happens when you find out that the obviosly superior bottom image is from the omd?

Also ooc sharpening or contrast don't apply because these are both from raw.

 DonSantos's gear list:DonSantos's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon D600 Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57even
Senior MemberPosts: 6,323Gear list
Like?
Re: What is advantage and disadvantage between X-trans vs Bayer array
In reply to ealvarez, Sep 8, 2013

ealvarez wrote:

Hi folks,

Aside from their technicality which I have read in wiki and other places, why one would choose one over the other?. And why people are excited over supposedly upcoming Fuji camera namely X-A1 which will utilize Bayer array sensor instead of x-trans. Isn't x-trans array that made Fuji IQ 'different' and perhaps now appealing than the rest?

Thanks

ED

Well, I can only speak from personal experience. I was using a D700 and D7000 when I purchased an Xpro1 with the 18, 35 and 60 lenses.

Early versions of LR RAW conversion were really not good, but the current one is comparable with the JPEGs, which means it is at least as sharp as the D7000 when properly processed (but only with the best primes on the D7000).

However it did seem to be able to handle a higher degree of highlight and shadow recovery, which makes the RAW files extremely flexible. Overall, in that respect it compared well with my D700, only with more resolution.

I would not say high ISO noise is much lower, but it is low. However it's the amount of detail at high ISO that is most impressive. I believe the large blocks of green pixels, and the specific demosaicing method, does allow a more accurate detail rendition in these circumstances with lower luminance noise.

The downside, and there always is one, is that colour detail in very fine details can be lost. At least 2 pixel widths of detail seem to be required to guarantee colour in low light, but it is only really noticeable in low light or low contrast areas, and at large magnifications. In an A2 print, the images are quite spectacular. In other words its a pixel peepers issue, but really doesn't impact the output. By comparison dealing with moire and NR from some other cameras is a tedious distraction.

I have no idea if it's specifically due to the X-trans layout or Fuji's processing (I suspect the latter) but the one thing I most like about the output from the camera is the richness of the colour response (even in RAW). It really is quite exceptional.

But in the end I don't really care. I like the way the cameras handle and a like the output. I also like the lenses, the overall philosophy of operational simplicity and the constant refinement through firmware that has transformed the cameras from tricky to highly functional.

This is not to say someone would not be happy with any of the competition, cameras are a personal thing, but for me it's a good fit and they are not. I have largish hands so the relatively relaxed and well spaced controls on the X-cameras are a real advantage compared to (say) any of the NEX or Olympus models.

 57even's gear list:57even's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Sigma 20mm F1.8 EX DG Aspherical RF
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Charles2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,237
Like?
Re: Comparison - the lenses!
In reply to Randy Benter, Sep 8, 2013

Randy Benter wrote:

In this comparison, the E-M5 is shot with the Olympus 50mm f/2 and the X-E1 is paired with the Fuji 35mm f/1.4.

You know -- subgroup with OP? Multiple user accounts? Hidden info in the file?

So how much was each shot cropped, and how far were the cameras from the subject? I also wonder about the exposures of each shot, despite the adjustment of levels in Raw Therapee.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57even
Senior MemberPosts: 6,323Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison
In reply to dotborg, Sep 8, 2013

Single comparisons at one focus distance are relatively meaningless. Quite apart from anything else, the MFT sensor has more DOF.

Most lenses function best at a particular focus distance. Landscape lenses tend to work best at infinity, macros close up.

Also comparing details on two sensors with different aspect ratios does not take into account the relative pixel dimensions of each object in the shot.

I'm not saying the MFT sensor is not excellent, it clearly is, but it's very hard to make an accurate comparison.

 57even's gear list:57even's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Sigma 20mm F1.8 EX DG Aspherical RF
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads