Demonstration of X-Trans Under-the-hood RAW Spatial (Noise) Filtering

jm10 wrote:

kiwidad wrote:

jm10 wrote:

tradesmith45 wrote:

jm10 wrote:

Thanks for posting this. Very interesting study. I can clearly see the importance of this for serious and dedicated astrophotographers. Looks like it may cause some to re-evaluate their equipment selection. Not sure about the implications for more casual "astrophotographers"...Too bad that the users have no control over the filtering.

jacob

Hope it helps some. I had a couple other reasons for posting this. I've seen hours processing my images thinking I was doing something wrong or that I'd gotten bad copies of lenses that was causing the muddy stars I got from the X-T2. But it was the filtering.

Makes me PO'd that Fuji hasn't owned up to this & that's the another reason for the post. Sony has acknowledged what they do.

Couple of things. First, do you think that this type of filtering has an effect on general photography (other than astrophotography) and secondly, could Fujifilm implement some sort of a "switch" if they wanted to?

In the original post it is mentioned this is only applied to exposures of 5 seconds or longer

Fair point but long exposures are used not only in astrophotography...

True but in your post you stated "other than astrophotography" and that is already answered by original post ( I may=je a bad assumption perhaps that general photography isn't long exposures...

, as far as 2 goes who knows.

Its interesting though since this whole thread seems to indicate Fuji do stuff to the raw data which may explain why the lesser cameras with Bayer seem to have sharper raw images straight out of the camera.