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
OP il_alexk Senior Member • Posts: 2,867
Re: Fight Club: X-A5 sensor vs X-Pro3, ISO 6400

CAcreeks wrote:

Thanks for posting the comparison. Wow, you still have Adobe Flash? (I thought Flash was required for gallery additions, but perhaps they fixed this.)

I use the latest version of Chrome and if it decides to use Flash over HTML5, then be it.

The out-of-camera X-A5 JPEG is better in all cases, though a bit redder. As I've said before, it is very difficult to beat high ISO Fuji o-o-c JPEG with Raw processing. This is why DxO Prime noise reduction would be nice to have.

I would not have posted, except for a question:

Why are your X-Pro3 conversions only 6000x4000 pixel size? They should be 6240x4160.

Your attention to details is quite impressive.
To make it apples-to-apples. It feels counter-intuitive  to me to compare images of different size, especially synthetically expanded images ones vs native resolution, so I exported images to be in the same original size. Another option would be to export X-A5 to 6240x4160, but then again we might end up with a debate of the visual perception of details in images that with synthetically increased pixel count.

Anyway, I can assure you that  there is no difference in the amount of details in X-Pro3 images whether they are exported in native or Iridient resolution.  After all, it's only 240 more pixels out of 6000 in horizontal direction.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Alex

 il_alexk's gear list:il_alexk's gear list
Pentax K-5 IIs Sony a7R III Fujifilm X-A5 Fujifilm X-T100 Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 +9 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