X-A1 = X100 non trans with lenses in a small body

Started Sep 17, 2013 | Discussions thread
jfjal New Member • Posts: 16
Re: X-A1 = X100 non trans with lenses in a small body

Ed B wrote:

photo perzon wrote:

Half of people who have an X100 are afraid of the X-trans of the X100S. The X-A1 is a small portable m4/3 sized camera that effectively gives a X100 lens options.

The X-A1 will simply be Fuji's new entry level camera (good idea).

It will have the Bayer sensor because these sensors are less expensive than the X-Trans sensors and it seems Fuji has done everything possible to keep the price down on this camera.

I'm sure image quality will be very good and that a lot of people will be happy with the camera.

Lot of talk about AA filter, etc. but I haven't heard whether this camera will have a AA filter or not.

I'd almost bet it does not have the filter because most manufacturers are opting to do away with the filter and not worry about moire. Most modern Bayer sensors seem to handle moire very well without the filter.

Not sure why anyone would be "afraid" of the X-Trans sensor. The only problem that Fuji has ever had with the sensor is the fact that third party raw converters hadn't been updated to play nice with it.

Besides that, Fuji's JPEG engine is so good that raw processing almost becomes an outdated and unnecessary procedure. Even (JPEG) white balance can easily be adjusted with many good post processing programs.

I'll get blasted for saying this but it wouldn't surprise me to see raw either completely go away or become the exception within the next couple of years.

Saying this you demonstrate that you do not know what raw-prossessing is about.

It is NOT about getting a "nice" photo. Well sometimes it is, and a jpeg will do, but in many cases it is about rescuing blown highlights, improving murky shadows, adjusting single colors, local adjustments etc. etc. or creating an expression different from that of the opinion of the software developer who created the jpeg-engine. In spite of what you are saying also you have far more possibilities for adjusting white balance.

A jpeg file is a compressed file, having little room for adjustments before you get unwanted effects.

You should also understand that you do not get a jpeg directly, it is an interpretation of the raw data captured by the sensor.

Learning to use a raw-developer is a natural step in progression as a photographer, just as developing darkroom skills used to be.

Naturally, my opinion isn't any more valid than anyone's opinion and I suppose if you have a calibrated eye ball you could tell the difference between a well processed raw image and a well processed JPEG but the difference is almost negligible.

I'm sure the new X-A1, with the Bayer sensor, will be rated a bit lower than a camera with the X-Trans sensor but doubt most people who buy the camera will be able to tell the difference and doubt most people will even care.

I think the camera will be a big success (just my opinion again).

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