Ridiculous Fuji X20 Claims Locked

Started Feb 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
ncruces Forum Member • Posts: 94
Re: foolishness

AngryCorgi wrote:

Ok, fair enough. Now do the same thing and set the mode to "RAW". Place the loupe over the woman's printed face. Why are there yellow angled lines going thru her face on the Fuji shot (also visible at ISO200)? The other three don't give this false moire color. Now move the loupe over the Bailey's bottle and the tree printed thereon. Smudged detail from the Fuji, fine per-pixel detail from the other three.

You see. The X-trans has traded one style of moire for another and presents a softening of fine pattern information from its color filtering process/demosaicing, and the only thing CLEARLY dominant is the Fuji JPEG engine vs the other JPEG engines.

Why set it to RAW? Why not set everything else to RAW and use Fuji JPEGs and see who wins.

At ISO 3200, the printed woman's face shows more detail in the Fuji JPEG than in the RAW from the NEX-7 or any of the others. What about the clock's face? At ISO 6400 can you read "Paul Smith" in any of the others, RAW or JPEG?

Comparing it to full-frame is more than a little ridiculous, as are many of Fuji's marketing claims. Even the 12 Mipx, 4 year old D700 can look much better, and much more effortless (as you've put it).

But acting like the X-Trans has no advantages at all, and all reviewers were fooled by a marketing trick is quite a bit ridiculous too. The removal of the AA filter alone has advantages. The different pattern trades color moire (advantage) for less color resolution (disadvantage).

More importantly it complicates things for RAW developers. Let's face it, unless Fuji ever becomes the next Canikon, Adobe will never have the incentive to build a pipeline to deal with the specificity of the X-Trans. It doesn't matter whether Fuji hands them all the details, or whatever. Adobe supports hundreds of cameras with the same basic algorithms and a few parameters they tweak for every camera. They won't build a completely different pipeline for Fuij. If Fuji wants to put the quality of their JPEGs into our hands they need to build their own tool that does the same thing in camera RAW development does, with only those parameters they already support, and which spits out 16-bit TIFFs. And/or spit out 16-bit TIFFs (or linear DNG, or something) in camera as well. They can't, and won't, force Adobe's hand.

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