Is Old Fuji Color Better? Or Even Different?

norman shearer wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

FujiShooterCY wrote:

Foskito wrote:

John Sevigny wrote:

Yes and yes. The differences may be harder to qualify. “Better” is impossible to define. And aesthetics can’t be measured. But as Fuji has grown they’ve shifted noticeably toward a less daring and more generic approach to color science. My xpro3 and x100v produce images that look a lot more like Sony-Nikon-Fuji. My xe2 and x100t tilt more toward and old school slide film look...

2 years ago I said: "As a former XE-1 and X100 user, I prefer the overall look of my current X-T3 files. Including color."

I have to take back that statement. I agree recent Fuji sensors produce files that look generic, and the film simulations are barely noticeable anymore. The uniqueness so many people love about the original X-Pro1, X-T1, etc is gone.

So you can recreate it yourself if you wish, using your current camera

In theory you can create anything yourself.

Buy why should you put in the extra work required when you're already happy with what the camera does for you?

This is kind of why I've begun using my Canon 5D Mk1 again after years of it sitting in the cupboard. The colours often need zero attention in post. in fact this thread resembles many threads on the various merits of 5D Mk1 versus the other 3 versions. Wedding photographers especially swore by the Mk1.

The 5D Mk1 is a great camera! I own it. The mirror isn't as sturdy as later models (I actually super glued mine back down once - no appreciable change in focusing ability).

I do like the colors a bit better than the Mk2 which I also own.

If the 12.8 megapixels don't bother you, it's a great choice.

Second choice would be a Fuji X-Trans1 which is at least 16 megapixels but is APS-C which is a drawback in certain situations.

I have well over a decade working with various digital cameras & I'm firmly on the side of - use the equipment that produces the results you want with the least amount of work.

Agreed.