X-Trans advantages - fact or fiction ?
Is there really little difference, or has it just not been noticed?
It looks as if some people see some small differences and others, like me, don't perceive a big enough difference to notice. At least it makes me feel as if I'm not missing something obvious
I wonder if it depends on subject matter, as it does with the X10 (EXR sensor) and the X20 (X-Trans)?
In general, when we only had the X10 we thought it resolved well. However, as this shot shows, certain details, like a face, show little difference between the two cameras, whereas the weave in a pair of jeans is quite obviously better resolved with X-Trans.
These two cameras have the same optics but different sensors. These are crops from the same two images:
Differences best seen at Original size.
I have shot extensive comparisons between these two cameras and the differences are not always clearly visible. At certain times on certain detail in certain scenes the differences are obvious.
When comparing published review images from the X-A1 and X-M1 with, say the X-Pro 1, it appears that different optics are being used. The two cameras are so obviously inferior in detail sharpness that I assume different lenses were used, possibly the kit lenses on the X-A1 and the X-M1, while the X-Pro 1 looks like it has a good prime attached.
It became obvious after a while with the Nikon D800, for instance, that good optics were needed to get the extra details out. Kit lenses showed no improvement over lesser cameras.
I understand that the same issue dogged first reports from the Pentax K3. Unless you use appropriate quality optics, better sensors won't necessarily show their features.
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com
Edited feb 22, 2014 by Trevor G
Fiction. Fuji keeps talking about no AA filter bla bla bla. Like that is something unique and special just to them. However you can buy a 24 mega pixel Nikon D7100 with no AA filter and it is a Bayer sensor. I think even the new little D 5300 doesn't have an AA filter. So where is the advantage. Then you look at all the trouble they had with poor raw processers and output and it is clear that there is no advantage to Xtrans. I will buy the XT-1 but it is inspite of the Xtrans train wreck sensor. Now having said that the images from fuji cameras are gorgeous and equal to anything else.
Sal Baker wrote:
You don't need any of us to tell you what you like. Do what I did a couple of months ago. Download a decent RAW file for the X camera of your choice form the Internet, and download a free demo of any of the major converter programs.
Yes, that's the best idea, and definitely what I'd do if I were looking to buy a new system.
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com