Fuji X-T1 Two part review

axlotl · Mar 11, 2015

Loading…

cameraergonomics.blogspot.com.au

This short review is a bit late in the X-T1 product cycle, for which my apologies.

I recently had the opportunity to borrow an X-T1 with 23mm f1.4 lens for a week and used it for tests and comparisons with other cameras.

There are two posts. The link to the first one is above. The second one is about ergonomics.

There is nothing really new here. The current version of Photoshop Camera Raw still doesn't work well with the Fuji X-Trans RAW files. I found some other issues with picture quality which I was unable to explain.

The post about ergonomics is a continuation of my comparative analysis of 'traditional' vs 'modern' camera control systems, with a newly developed scoring system for ergonomics which I am still trialling.

All constructive feedback welcome, especially about the ergonomics scoring system.

Happy reading

Andrew

deednets · Mar 12, 2015

axlotl said:
http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/fuji-x-t1-review-part-1-image-quality.html

This short review is a bit late in the X-T1 product cycle, for which my apologies.

I recently had the opportunity to borrow an X-T1 with 23mm f1.4 lens for a week and used it for tests and comparisons with other cameras.

There are two posts. The link to the first one is above. The second one is about ergonomics.

There is nothing really new here. The current version of Photoshop Camera Raw still doesn't work well with the Fuji X-Trans RAW files. I found some other issues with picture quality which I was unable to explain.

The post about ergonomics is a continuation of my comparative analysis of 'traditional' vs 'modern' camera control systems, with a newly developed scoring system for ergonomics which I am still trialling.

All constructive feedback welcome, especially about the ergonomics scoring system.

Happy reading

Andrew

How constructive?

You mention that you compared it to other cameras. Pana outresolves the prime with its super-zoom. Pana silent af and smack on, Low light goes to the Fuji but not much else.

Reading your review part one .... and I have a hunch as to where part 2 will be going.

Thanks for sharing!

Deed

Jared Huntr · Mar 12, 2015

I'm thinking maybe better results can be achieved with alternative RAW processing methods. For example, this sharpening technique:

SHARPENING X-TRANS FILES IN ADOBE LIGHTROOM (REVISITED) — Pete Bridgwood Photography

SHARPENING X-TRANS FILES IN ADOBE LIGHTROOM (REVISITED) A detailed guide for sharpening Fuji Raw files in Adobe Lightroom - covers all X-Trans sensors.

petebridgwood.com

Or maybe a different RAW processor. Why base an assessment on a less than optimal approach?

bowportes · Mar 12, 2015

I'm sorry. I found your review's purported objectivity questionable. It is widely known on this Forum that LR requires different settings for X-Trans than for Bayer. Unless you were optimizing the LR settings for each processor, you were working with optimal settings for the non-Fuji camera, and sub-optimal ones for Fuji, so the comparison is biased from the start.

What is more, your ergonomic analysis is grounded in equally subjective premises. Your assumption, for example that the camera's weight should be supported by the right hand skews your results. Your analysis of how difficult it is to change "modes" also skews your results. Mode changing on the Panasonic, for example, is a separate step than setting the exposure. With the Fuji, on the other hand, it can be a single step -- one puts the camera in aperture priority BY setting the aperture. If your question had been, "How many steps does it take to change the camera from P mode to A mode and then set the aperture to F 5.6?" Or "How easy is it to set up the camera before ever turning it on or bringing it to your eye?" the Fuji would have won hands down. But you didn't frame the comparison in a way that highlighted the Fuji advantages.

Beyond the underlying premises of your comparison, it is ridden with inaccuracies. I can easily shift ISO, for example, without ever taking my eye from the EVF. And I can easily change shutter speeds in S mode with just my thumb. And I have no problem going from spot to multi-metering or manual to auto-focus without taking my eye from the EVF. What is more, I can change shutter speed with my right thumb while I change aperture with my left hand... all without taking the camera from my eye.

I think the primary thing reflected in your analysis is the fact that you are used to the way the panasonic works, and so you feel comfortable with it; while you had the Fuji X-T1 for only a week, which wasn't long enough for your adjustments in shooting behavior to become fluid and natural. The aperture ring on the lens, for instance, does require resting the camera in the palm of your left hand if you are to take full advantage of the placement of the Fuji aperture ring. When you reject that from the get go, it biases your ergonomic analysis against the Fuji. It is not simply an unbiased choice on your part.

Science, in the case of your ergonomic measure, is a bit of a smokescreen in this case, I believe.

You asked.

deednets · Mar 12, 2015

Jared Huntr said:
I'm thinking maybe better results can be achieved with alternative RAW processing methods. For example, this sharpening technique:

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

Or maybe a different RAW processor. Why base an assessment on a less than optimal approach?

There is highly biased language at play in his "review" e.g. the Fuji interview, where he concluded that image quality wasn't mentioned within the customer feedback. Maybe it wasn't mentioned because nobody thought that the IQ was better than average, the "reviewer" thought that it was very much like similar 28mm cameras (but his Panny Point & Shoot way ahead in sharpness!)

And so it goes ...

And odd "review" plenty of time that went into this, but I couldn't help thinking of Winston Churchill ...

Deed

Jerry-astro · Mar 12, 2015

bowportes said:
I'm sorry. I found your review's purported objectivity questionable. It is widely known on this Forum that LR requires different settings for X-Trans than for Bayer. Unless you were optimizing the LR settings for each processor, you were working with optimal settings for the non-Fuji camera, and sub-optimal ones for Fuji, so the comparison is biased from the start.

What is more, your ergonomic analysis is grounded in equally subjective premises. Your assumption, for example that the camera's weight should be supported by the right hand skews your results. Your analysis of how difficult it is to change "modes" also skews your results. Mode changing on the Panasonic, for example, is a separate step than setting the exposure. With the Fuji, on the other hand, it can be a single step -- one puts the camera in aperture priority BY setting the aperture. If your question had been, "How many steps does it take to change the camera from P mode to A mode and then set the aperture to F 5.6?" Or "How easy is it to set up the camera before ever turning it on or bringing it to your eye?" the Fuji would have won hands down. But you didn't frame the comparison in a way that highlighted the Fuji advantages.

Beyond the underlying premises of your comparison, it is ridden with inaccuracies. I can easily shift ISO, for example, without ever taking my eye from the EVF. And I can easily change shutter speeds in S mode with just my thumb. And I have no problem going from spot to multi-metering or manual to auto-focus without taking my eye from the EVF. What is more, I can change shutter speed with my right thumb while I change aperture with my left hand... all without taking the camera from my eye.

I think the primary thing reflected in your analysis is the fact that you are used to the way the panasonic works, and so you feel comfortable with it; while you had the Fuji X-T1 for only a week, which wasn't long enough for your adjustments in shooting behavior to become fluid and natural. The aperture ring on the lens, for instance, does require resting the camera in the palm of your left hand if you are to take full advantage of the placement of the Fuji aperture ring. When you reject that from the get go, it biases your ergonomic analysis against the Fuji. It is not simply an unbiased choice on your part.

Science, in the case of your ergonomic measure, is a bit of a smokescreen in this case, I believe.

You asked.

+1. Couldn't have said it better myself. I had exactly the same impression when reading the review. I would take it with a huge grain of salt.

Pritzl · Mar 12, 2015

Don't own a Fuji but I have to agree that's a pretty biased review. If you'd stated it was just your subjective opinion I wouldn't care. e.g., to assume that what works (or doesn't) ergonomically for you is the gold standard by which ergonomics should be measured is deluded.

BTW, I agree that the shutter button on top is not ideal, but would argue that the dials actually allow you to skip the unnecessary mode step; you jump right to exposure settings. Yet, I would not presume to say that this is the best control scheme for everyone.

axlotl · Mar 12, 2015

Jared Huntr said:
I'm thinking maybe better results can be achieved with alternative RAW processing methods. For example, this sharpening technique:

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

Or maybe a different RAW processor. Why base an assessment on a less than optimal approach?

Hi Jared, Thanks for the feedback. The reason for using Photoshop/Camera Raw/Lightroom as the raw converter is that is the most popular one. Not the best for Fuji X Trans files it appears. However I suspect many RAW shooters would prefer to select a camera which works well with the Adobe Photoshop family given that the investment of time and effort into learning how to get the best from Photoshop is so great.

Andrew

axlotl · Mar 12, 2015

bowportes said:
I'm sorry. I found your review's purported objectivity questionable. It is widely known on this Forum that LR requires different settings for X-Trans than for Bayer. Unless you were optimizing the LR settings for each processor, you were working with optimal settings for the non-Fuji camera, and sub-optimal ones for Fuji, so the comparison is biased from the start.

What is more, your ergonomic analysis is grounded in equally subjective premises. Your assumption, for example that the camera's weight should be supported by the right hand skews your results. Your analysis of how difficult it is to change "modes" also skews your results. Mode changing on the Panasonic, for example, is a separate step than setting the exposure. With the Fuji, on the other hand, it can be a single step -- one puts the camera in aperture priority BY setting the aperture. If your question had been, "How many steps does it take to change the camera from P mode to A mode and then set the aperture to F 5.6?" Or "How easy is it to set up the camera before ever turning it on or bringing it to your eye?" the Fuji would have won hands down. But you didn't frame the comparison in a way that highlighted the Fuji advantages.

Beyond the underlying premises of your comparison, it is ridden with inaccuracies. I can easily shift ISO, for example, without ever taking my eye from the EVF. And I can easily change shutter speeds in S mode with just my thumb. And I have no problem going from spot to multi-metering or manual to auto-focus without taking my eye from the EVF. What is more, I can change shutter speed with my right thumb while I change aperture with my left hand... all without taking the camera from my eye.

I think the primary thing reflected in your analysis is the fact that you are used to the way the panasonic works, and so you feel comfortable with it; while you had the Fuji X-T1 for only a week, which wasn't long enough for your adjustments in shooting behavior to become fluid and natural. The aperture ring on the lens, for instance, does require resting the camera in the palm of your left hand if you are to take full advantage of the placement of the Fuji aperture ring. When you reject that from the get go, it biases your ergonomic analysis against the Fuji. It is not simply an unbiased choice on your part.

Science, in the case of your ergonomic measure, is a bit of a smokescreen in this case, I believe.

You asked.

Hi bowportes, Thanks for taking the time to provide detailed feedback. Maybe your have better dexterity than me.

Although I only had the X-T1 for a week, I have the Panasonic LX100 with a very similar control system, have previously tested the X-E1 and have been using various cameras with the 'traditional' control system since my first Pentax Spotmatic in 1967.

Cheers

Andrew

deednets · Mar 12, 2015

axlotl said:
Jared Huntr said:

I'm thinking maybe better results can be achieved with alternative RAW processing methods. For example, this sharpening technique:

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

Or maybe a different RAW processor. Why base an assessment on a less than optimal approach?

Click to expand...

Hi Jared, Thanks for the feedback. The reason for using Photoshop/Camera Raw/Lightroom as the raw converter is that is the most popular one. Not the best for Fuji X Trans files it appears. However I suspect many RAW shooters would prefer to select a camera which works well with the Adobe Photoshop family given that the investment of time and effort into learning how to get the best from Photoshop is so great.

Andrew

You can't help it I guess, the most popular food in the world is possibly McDonalds.

I understand your reasoning, but your strong bias towards Pana is barely hidden, so you undermine your own credibility.

And you post your findings here? You are on a mission?

Deed

deednets · Mar 12, 2015

Pritzl said:
Don't own a Fuji but I have to agree that's a pretty biased review. If you'd stated it was just your subjective opinion I wouldn't care. e.g., to assume that what works (or doesn't) ergonomically for you is the gold standard by which ergonomics should be measured is deluded.

BTW, I agree that the shutter button on top is not ideal, but would argue that the dials actually allow you to skip the unnecessary mode step; you jump right to exposure settings. Yet, I would not presume to say that this is the best control scheme for everyone.

Jerry-astro · Mar 12, 2015

axlotl said:
Jared Huntr said:

I'm thinking maybe better results can be achieved with alternative RAW processing methods. For example, this sharpening technique:

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

Or maybe a different RAW processor. Why base an assessment on a less than optimal approach?

Click to expand...

Hi Jared, Thanks for the feedback. The reason for using Photoshop/Camera Raw/Lightroom as the raw converter is that is the most popular one. Not the best for Fuji X Trans files it appears. However I suspect many RAW shooters would prefer to select a camera which works well with the Adobe Photoshop family given that the investment of time and effort into learning how to get the best from Photoshop is so great.

Andrew

No, not really. The issue you encountered with Lightroom is both a function of the settings that you use within that application and the type of image you're dealing with. The sharpening techniques and settings that work best with LR on highly detailed images (usually landscape photography) are not necessarily exactly the same as those that you might use for a more traditional Bayer sensor. There are a ton of threads here on this subject, and I might gently suggest that you get educated on this before coming to the conclusion that this is an issue that you have to live with if you opt to use an X-T1 (or any X-Trans sensor based Fuji camera for that matter). Start with the article referenced in the above post. Frankly, I rarely encounter this issue but when I do, I can generally get excellent results by tweaking my LR sharpening settings. Worst case, for those very few images that demand it, I can use Iridient Developer or Photo Ninja to possibly get a bit better results.

Sorry, but this is not, IMHO, a legitimate issue that should drive a purchase decision when there are so many other factors that go into deciding on a system. If you're going to do camera reviews, you might want to bone up on the specifics here. Like others, it sure felt as if you did this review with a specific agenda in mind.

Jared Huntr · Mar 12, 2015

Jerry-astro said:
No, not really. The issue you encountered with Lightroom is both a function of the settings that you use within that application and the type of image you're dealing with. The sharpening techniques and settings that work best with LR on highly detailed images (usually landscape photography) are not necessarily exactly the same as those that you might use for a more traditional Bayer sensor. There are a ton of threads here on this subject, and I might gently suggest that you get educated on this before coming to the conclusion that this is an issue that you have to live with if you opt to use an X-T1 (or any X-Trans sensor based Fuji camera for that matter). Start with the article referenced in the above post.

I must admit, that article is lacking in that it doesn't show any before and after examples to prove his point. Where can I see examples of sharpening done wrong and right on the same image? I don't have an XT-1 but am learning about the challenges posed by X-trans. Frankly, I'd prefer it if it had a Bayer sensor with no AAA filter. I have a Ricoh GR with a 16 MP sensor with no AAA filter and the detail is quite impressive. Now if I could get the same level of detail but with Fuji's color rendering and other features, i'd be less hesitant to upgrade from my X-A1.

IMO, the Xtrans is an unneccessary distraction in the workflow that isn't worth the extra effort when the gain in resolution of detail is negligible to nil. It is something that needs to be tolerated to get the best results, but I don't get the impression that I am really gaining anything over Bayer to make it worthwhile.

Jerry-astro · Mar 12, 2015

Jared Huntr said:
Jerry-astro said:

No, not really. The issue you encountered with Lightroom is both a function of the settings that you use within that application and the type of image you're dealing with. The sharpening techniques and settings that work best with LR on highly detailed images (usually landscape photography) are not necessarily exactly the same as those that you might use for a more traditional Bayer sensor. There are a ton of threads here on this subject, and I might gently suggest that you get educated on this before coming to the conclusion that this is an issue that you have to live with if you opt to use an X-T1 (or any X-Trans sensor based Fuji camera for that matter). Start with the article referenced in the above post.

Click to expand...

I must admit, that article is lacking in that it doesn't show any before and after examples to prove his point. Where can I see examples of sharpening done wrong and right on the same image? I don't have an XT-1 but am learning about the challenges posed by X-trans. Frankly, I'd prefer it if it had a Bayer sensor with no AAA filter. I have a Ricoh GR with a 16 MP sensor with no AAA filter and the detail is quite impressive. Now if I could get the same level of detail but with Fuji's color rendering and other features, i'd be less hesitant to upgrade from my X-A1.

IMO, the Xtrans is an unneccessary distraction in the workflow that isn't worth the extra effort when the gain in resolution of detail is negligible to nil. It is something that needs to be tolerated to get the best results, but I don't get the impression that I am really gaining anything over Bayer to make it worthwhile.

Honestly, it isn't really getting in my way. If I were trying to use LR to process images from two different cameras, say a Fuji X-T1 and a Canon DSLR, then it might be more concerned about having to use somewhat different processing parameters. However, since I've pretty well moved completely to Fuji, I simply have to work a bit differently with the images, so it's not an issue. What's more, only a small percentage of the images I deal with seem to be really sensitive to the issue, and require some additional fine tuning when sharpening.

I love the Fuji colors and overall IQ and simply haven't seen X-Trans as big issue. But, then again, I don't tend to pixel peep to the extent that many people here do, so my overall indifference to the issue may simply be a function of that as much as anything else. I sounds as if Fuji is pretty dedicated to X-Trans, so I'd be really surprised if they decided to ditch it in subsequent generations.

johnc in ok · Mar 12, 2015

I am new to posting on this forum but I do not see how photographing a classified ad page from a newspaper can give a true evaluation of resolution. The ink is not consistent in tone and there is no sharp edge. Legibility of the image will be more a test of post processing. The better lens may not fare as well as lesser lens due to the better lens showing the irregularities of the newsprint. Also the blur at the bottom could be attributed to greater DOF of a shorter focal length. I have the 23 mm and 35 mm1.4 and it is superb on the XT1,XP1 and XE1. 16 X 24 prints are superb.

deednets · Mar 13, 2015

bowportes said:
I'm sorry. I found your review's purported objectivity questionable. It is widely known on this Forum that LR requires different settings for X-Trans than for Bayer. Unless you were optimizing the LR settings for each processor, you were working with optimal settings for the non-Fuji camera, and sub-optimal ones for Fuji, so the comparison is biased from the start.

What is more, your ergonomic analysis is grounded in equally subjective premises. Your assumption, for example that the camera's weight should be supported by the right hand skews your results. Your analysis of how difficult it is to change "modes" also skews your results. Mode changing on the Panasonic, for example, is a separate step than setting the exposure. With the Fuji, on the other hand, it can be a single step -- one puts the camera in aperture priority BY setting the aperture. If your question had been, "How many steps does it take to change the camera from P mode to A mode and then set the aperture to F 5.6?" Or "How easy is it to set up the camera before ever turning it on or bringing it to your eye?" the Fuji would have won hands down. But you didn't frame the comparison in a way that highlighted the Fuji advantages.

Beyond the underlying premises of your comparison, it is ridden with inaccuracies. I can easily shift ISO, for example, without ever taking my eye from the EVF. And I can easily change shutter speeds in S mode with just my thumb. And I have no problem going from spot to multi-metering or manual to auto-focus without taking my eye from the EVF. What is more, I can change shutter speed with my right thumb while I change aperture with my left hand... all without taking the camera from my eye.

I think the primary thing reflected in your analysis is the fact that you are used to the way the panasonic works, and so you feel comfortable with it; while you had the Fuji X-T1 for only a week, which wasn't long enough for your adjustments in shooting behavior to become fluid and natural. The aperture ring on the lens, for instance, does require resting the camera in the palm of your left hand if you are to take full advantage of the placement of the Fuji aperture ring. When you reject that from the get go, it biases your ergonomic analysis against the Fuji. It is not simply an unbiased choice on your part.

Science, in the case of your ergonomic measure, is a bit of a smokescreen in this case, I believe.

You asked.

The reviewer claims that it is not a "like" but science of ergonomics, that makes him rate traditionally equipped cameras so low, e.g. he rates the LX100 (which has an aperture ring, a shutter dial and a compensation dial) best when used in P mode ...

I guess that says it all, P mode?? Really?

Quote from the LX100 (also Panasonic!) "review":

"Operating 10/25
Some may think this low score is a bit hard on the LX100. Many reviewers have waxed lyrical about the “traditional” controls. I have explained why I am not a fan at considerable length in many posts on this blog. I refrain from repeating all this material here.
On my analysis this camera works best for general hand held photography in P Mode without the user having to touch either the aperture ring or shutter speed dial"

A camera used best when the user never has to touch the aperture ring and the shutter dial???

Really??

The total score of the LX100 was 54/100 and the FZ1000 83/100 ... maybe for somebody who constantly changes from P to S to A to M mode?? No, wait I think I would actually be considerably faster with those 2 dials ...

Deed

polishpunk68 · Mar 13, 2015

I'm not talking about just processing Fuji RAWs wrong, which you are. I can easily duplicate your results with Lightroom, and then get perfectly fine results with no smearing with just a few slider changes.

No. I'm talking about the photos you have of reviewing the ergonomics of the XT1. YOU'RE HOLDING IT WRONG!

I find it ironic that someone with little to no photo experience, who clearly doesn't know how to hold a real camera properly, steadily, and securely, runs a blog on camera ergonomics.

SSantana75 · Mar 13, 2015

From his 'review'

"Capture Phase—Viewing

* EVF: The EVF is large, clear and sharp although I found that on the FZ1000 slightly sharper.

Viewing score 13/20"

This, his 'review' and score for what has been found by almost every reviewer on the planet to be arguably the best EVF to this day. And please don't tell me you think an OVF is superior and thus would score higher as in your own words "Modern EVFs like this one make the argument for an optical viewfinder look very weak. The optical viewfinders of DSLRs with 28mm diagonal sensors are by comparison small, dim, unsharp and almost impossible to use for manual focussing." all those disadvantages also apply to full-frame OVFs except to some extent the size and brightness, so I wonder what would a VF have to do to get 20/20? maybe a 3D 60" LCD screen? but that would certainly impact on the 'ergonomics' of the camera wouldn't you say?

BTW, I've NEVER seen anyone hold a camera the way it's shown on your review and I've seen hundreds if not thousands of professional photographers and every single one of them has used their left hand to 'cup' either the lens or the bottom of the camera to create a stable 'shelf' with their elbows firm against their torso to minimise movement. Holding the camera in the fashion shown on your article would leave the elbow floating next to the torso in a typical 'chicken wings' stance many inexperienced photographers adopt. I would love to see you shoot a D810 with that grip, I can assure you blurry images even with VR switched on.

J Frank Parnell · Mar 13, 2015

I don't recall any well regarded photography site or photographer's site where the left hand overhand grip is cited as the correct way to hold a camera. As such, this self-proclaimed ergonomics expert's claims are immediately dismissed as nothing more than personal opinion.

Also, isn't the posting of a negative opinion about a product on a forum dedicated to that product, the very definition of an internet troll?

bowportes · Mar 13, 2015

J Frank Parnell said:
I don't recall any well regarded photography site or photographer's site where the left hand overhand grip is cited as the correct way to hold a camera. As such, this self-proclaimed ergonomics expert's claims are immediately dismissed as nothing more than personal opinion.

Also, isn't the posting of a negative opinion about a product on a forum dedicated to that product, the very definition of an internet troll?

No. Being negative for negativity's sake or to stir things up is the definition of a troll.

Had the review seemed reasonably even-handed -- unbiased in his assessment procedures and criteria -- then I wouldn't have minded a negative conclusion.

You are absolutely right about the best, if not the only way, to hold a camera. SLR guide 101 used to teach fledgling photographers such things. The best way is the way that produces maximum stability. Nuff said.

Fuji X-T1 Two part review

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

New member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts