DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

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

Started Jan 23, 2020 | Discussions thread
HatWearingFool
HatWearingFool Senior Member • Posts: 2,758
Re: Latest Fuji X-trans vs Bayer, has X-trans lost it already?
1

sluggy_warrior wrote:

sluggy_warrior wrote:

You made me curious, so I ran "darktable -d perf" and exported two ISO6400 RAWs of X-T20 and X-T100 (from dpreview studio). They have identical history stack, except the X-T20 uses Markesteijn 3-pass and the X-T100 uses AMaZE (color smoothing 5 times, match green disabled).

LOL, the Markesteijn took half the time of AMaZE. I actually had to run it again two more times to confirm that I didn't make a mistake.

Interesting that AMaZE is faster than Markesteijn when turning off GPU/OpenCL.

EDIT: I've just noticed that AMaZE doesn't have an OpenCL version ("CPU" and "GPU" read too similar), it's of course slower when GPU is enabled. So yes, the claim that X-Trans takes more processing power is probably true.

Thanks for the update.

Certainly not 33% difference. I wonder if there is a bigger difference because there are chips with hardware jpeg conversion on the market but fuji has to do it in software?

-- hide signature --
 HatWearingFool's gear list:HatWearingFool's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PM1 Fujifilm X-T20 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:2.8 Pancake Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
JNR
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow