"the kind of detail which X-Trans sensors find hard to resolve"

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
photohp Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: The issue is software
4

tokumeino wrote:

mapline wrote:

I have an XT-20 (very happy with it) and use Capture One (express is free) for RAW + Affinity Photo for JPEG post processing.

Any converter (Irident, Darktable, Rawtherapee, Capture One, Adobe Enhanced details ...) does a good job. And that's why the issue is not XTrans, but rather one very particular and very weak implementation of demosaicing. I'm not promoting any particular software (and if I did, COP would not come in the first place when it comes to XTrans demosaicing). What I mean is that the issue reported by the OP is a software issue, not an inherent XTrans concern.

While you are technically correct, it doesn’t matter. Bottom line is Fuji files don’t look good in Adobe while files from every other vendor look fine.

Imagine if iPhones where not implementing Bluetooth correctly but every other vendor out there had figured that and implemented their speakers accordingly. But then there is this small vendor that insists that their Bluetooth implementation is the correct and it’s iPhone that has the problem.

Does it matter if they are right or not? No. What it matters is that users are not going to buy their speakers because they don’t work with their phones.

Fuji stubbornly persists to use X-Trans when it brings no real benefits while it doesn’t work with Adobe. They should just switch to Bayer and call it a day.

 photohp's gear list:photohp's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D800 Canon EOS 5D Mark III +22 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow