Latest Fuji X-trans vs Bayer, has X-trans lost it already?

il_alexk wrote:

sluggy_warrior wrote:

I'm seeing worms in the black noise of the X-T100?

What about X-A5?

Anyway, it's subjective, but I see muddy grey patterns in the black noise of X-Pro3. I typically see this as a result of an aggressive chroma noise removal which is ironic, since X-trans is supposed to have less chroma noise.

So, basically we are comparing the different settings of JPEG engines on different cameras. It doesn't say much about details and noise unless we compare RAWs.

Anyway, the same muddy patterns kills the details around letters on X-Pro3.

well, the X-Pro3 sample has visibly less noise than the X-T20 sample. That's what I said, aggressive NR killing details in flavor of cleaner noise. I shoot RAW only, and I still have to make the same decision: finding the right balance (for me) between retaining details vs noise reduction.

Read the texts on the color charts, too, I can read the word "RED" easier on the X-T20 shot, sign of over-aggressive NR on the X-T100 killing details for less noise?

Not sure, I "perceptually" see more details on X-A5.

Nah, it's just different JPEG settings of the cameras. The X-A5 visibly has much more sharpening, not only the details are sharper, but the noise (in the black area) are also sharper and more distinct. If you play around with different sharpening settings and algorithms, you can make huge differences. It's just a matter of personal preferences, finding the fine balance between showing more details vs too much details to the point of  unnatural.

Here's an example of the X-T20 at ISO6400 from RAW, with and without default sharpening and local contrast in darktable. With sharpening, you can see the texts much clearer (more details, as you said), but also more visible noise.