Fuji X-E2 image problems

Started Nov 10, 2013 | Discussions
Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,342
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

FYI, here is a ISO 5000 "RAW" crop from the Canon 70D.

from Pocket-lint review.

helmus
helmus Contributing Member • Posts: 660
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

stimpy wrote:

Have you loaded the new profile in LR ? Do you use LR or what? Your exposures all look ok so my thoughts are PP work. Maybe try to do a conversion in camera.

Search out Rico, he's the guy that can figure things out and he's had the camera longer than most.

BTW...there's nothing wrong at all with anything on the XE1.
--
Cheers, Don

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pgrshooter/

blog
http://streetshooter.net/

None of these have had any pp work, sooc raws

How can you show sooc raw here ???  without convertion ???

The pics you show here are 8 bit JPG and not RAF files !?!?!?

 helmus's gear list:helmus's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Carl Zeiss C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R +16 more
sgoldswo
sgoldswo Veteran Member • Posts: 5,717
image problems or internet fora problems?
1

stimpy wrote:

FYI - a RAW file should not need that much work if all you wish to do is replicate what your eyes saw. You certainly should not have to remove purple masks and blotches from peoples faces.

I agree, but this kind of issue is common amongst new cameras. That's why I flagged the fact LR 5.3 is turning faces in Olympus E-M1 raws a kind of mottled yellow colour (presumably an attempt to restrain the blowing of the red channel that was evident in the LR results from LR5.2).

If that is an acceptable part of your workflow, that's wonderful for you. But it isn't for me. Call me fussy

You can say that is a Lightroom issue, or say it is problem with unfriendly the X-Trans sensor, but it either way it is a problem for users of both systems, a problem that does not occur with any other camera I have ever shot with

See above. I can recall numerous issues in the past with new or beta support for new cameras in LR. In fairness to Adobe, if it's not a release version, you would expect some issues.

The JPEG issue is simply a fuji issue, as I have said, this has been highlighted many times on other forums and by some very competent photographers back as for as the Xpro1 (see a post here by none other than Damien Lovegrove: http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/topic/4302-too-much-noise-reduction-in-std-mode-x-pro1/) perhaps you'd like to tell him it's his fault and not the camera.

Or here by Rachel Ruffer (albeit a milder showing of the problem) http://www.rachelrufferblog.com/photography/fuji-x100s-ugly-noise-reduction-why-im-only-shooting-raw-now/

Or here by Fredrik Averpil: http://fredrikaverpil.tumblr.com/post/44849668414

You've gone to so much trouble to write a long post that is more patronising than constructive or helpful. You epitomize DPRs brand specific forums, where all anyone wants to do is celebrate the good and turn a blind eye to the bad.

My experience of these fora is that people focus on the bad rather than the good. This thread is a case in point. People rarely respond in great numbers to threads that are positive. Threads with negativity in content or title ellicit many, many replies. I was in two minds as to whether to reply to this again, but it least it (in the final analysis) saves us from further uninformed speculation about things which may not be a problem.

Are you speaking from any experience? Have you got an X-E2? Can you post samples to the contrary of my experience?

I do have an X-E2. I don't like the default noise settings for jpegs, so I adjust them. The results are comparable with or better than other camera jpegs at high isos (6400 etc). I don't think they are particularly "bad". The same goes for results from my X100S.

I am guessing you don't, and your reply is, like many others, born from a rather unhealthy emotional attachment to a brand who in your eyes can't possibly produce a camera with any issues.

I would conversely point to an unhealthy obsession many who post to internet fora have with throwing muck based on pure speculation at all camera brands. I have no issue with those who have genuine issues and it IS hard to separate those with genuine issues from those who simply can't operate their camera (I'll put but hand up for at least one my AF is broken thread about a lens with a clutch mechanism) or those who are trolling in one shape or form. However, all too often these "issues" turn out to be nothing but noise.

I confess I did read your post and sighed to myself. I don't think you are wrong that there are issues with the RAW conversions from the RC version of LR, but you are wrong to limit that to one camera as an attack on that camera. Its also a bit premature to attack RAW conversions based on output in a RC version of LR generally.

As to the point about jpegs, well, I think what you are saying is that they aren't to your taste. If that was the theme of your post it would be entirely fair comment. As it is it has somehow been conflated with an issue with LR and given a "scary" title. I find that depressing.

I've read this through and it seems a bit personal. I'm sorry about that - I don't know how to make these points in another way and this is genuinely what I felt on reading your post (and indeed the responses).

 sgoldswo's gear list:sgoldswo's gear list
Leica Q Leica M Typ 240 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon D750 +1 more
Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,342
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Another example. The FF Sony RX1 at ISO 6400.  Do you think there is a lot more detail than with the Fuji X-E2?  I don't see it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/peteradams/8483970150/

From this Camera Lab review.

hexxthalion Contributing Member • Posts: 538
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
2

David Mintzer wrote:

CraigArnold contradicts himself. In his 100X blog he says: DPReview is a curious place, everyone is a bit nastier on DPReview than they are in real life. Take it with a large pinch of salt and a thick skin.

Then in his first response to stimpy, he says The problem here is not inside the camera, it is behind it.

Do us a favor and stop attacking a guy who for all you know could be a very good photographer. Be aware that he came here for help, not to be confronted by someone who obviously feels his role is to defend Fuji. I love the Fuji camera I own, but it is far from perfect.

could you guys resolve these outside of this thread? i find it irrelevant to the question raised here. i'm thinking about getting X-E2 so I'd like to know what is the current status and if there are any problems with it.

 hexxthalion's gear list:hexxthalion's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R +11 more
CraigArnold Contributing Member • Posts: 697
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
1

Trevor G wrote:

CraigArnold wrote:

Indeed, anyone who routinely shoots portraits at ISO6400 has a lot of problems and none of them are camera related.

I think you are repeatedly being unnecessarily unkind, CraigArnold.

I regularly shoot portraits under stage lighting at ISO3200 to ISO4000.The job has problems including poor lighting of the stage, which I enjoy overcoming.

The people who receive my output regularly compliment me highly, but then I am using either a D700 at high ISO or an old D200 at ISO800, along with f1.8 lenses.

So, shooting portraits at high ISO does not natively indicate a flaw on the part of the shooter. You should apologise for your comment and ask for it to be withdrawn.

You are quite right.

If the OP is shooting under stage lighting I unreservedly apologise.

 CraigArnold's gear list:CraigArnold's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Olympus Tough TG-4 Sony a7R Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
CraigArnold Contributing Member • Posts: 697
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
4

stimpy wrote:

FYI - a RAW file should not need that much work if all you wish to do is replicate what your eyes saw. You certainly should not have to remove purple masks and blotches from peoples faces.

If that is an acceptable part of your workflow, that's wonderful for you. But it isn't for me. Call me fussy

You can say that is a Lightroom issue, or say it is problem with unfriendly the X-Trans sensor, but it either way it is a problem for users of both systems, a problem that does not occur with any other camera I have ever shot with

The purple blotches are terrible. Most likely a result of a beta version of LR doing a horrible job. But you still haven't said what lens you are using or shown a full file to show the issue in context. The file may be underexposed, as well as being at ISO6400. We just don't know from the data you are presenting. There are many possible contributing factors.

BUT YOU COULD ACTUALLY HAVE A DEFECTIVE CAMERA (or lens).

Wouldn't it be nice to find out?

The JPEG issue is simply a fuji issue, [snip]

Agreed and not contested. It's why I don't shoot jpgs, even though Fuji are generally excellent, under challenging conditions (like ISO6400) RAW is preferred.

You've gone to so much trouble to write a long post that is more patronising than constructive or helpful.

You're right, I apologize for being patronising, but I genuinely believe that you would benefit from learning about digital processing because your posts exhibit many signs of confusion. Is there a way to say that without being patronizing? I'm not sure, I did mean to express frustration because I don't think you're listening to the answers you've been given or coming to sensible conclusions about the problems you are seeing.

You epitomize DPRs brand specific forums, where all anyone wants to do is celebrate the good and turn a blind eye to the bad.

And your post which at first appeared to be genuine, starts to come across as trollish when you ignore sensible comments and seem to just want everyone to agree that the sky is falling and a lot of Fuji-bashing is the only appropriate response.

I don't believe that was your initial intention, but that's how it's starting to look.

Are you speaking from any experience? Have you got an X-E2? Can you post samples to the contrary of my experience?

Nope. But most doctors are not suffering from the ailments they treat either.

I don't have an X-trans camera. Largely because I think LR is pretty weak at processing the RAW files (the default settings can produce criminally poor results) though if one is willing to actually move the sliders off their defaults it can do a "good enough" job most of the time. And as it happens I'd rather not have to ditch LR for CaptureOne just so that I can buy an X-trans camera.

I am guessing you don't, and your reply is, like many others, born from a rather unhealthy emotional attachment to a brand who in your eyes can't possibly produce a camera with any issues.

Not at all. I applaud Fuji for their work in X-trans, it just sucks that LR's algorithms are so deeply tied into the demosaicing that the results with the sensor are not great. I personally would much rather have a very high resolution Bayer sensor which can then be down-sampled according to output requirements.

I love the Fuji cameras and design philosophy.

Let's back up for a second... There are a few possibilities here:

1. Your camera is broken.

2. Your camera is fine. But the version of LR you are using is rubbish under these conditions.

3. Your camera is fine. LR is fine. You have special scenarios where you need a specific type of result, and the X-E2 is simply not good enough for your needs.

4. Your camera is fine. LR is fine. Your requirements are not particularly out-of-the-ordinary. You are searching for problems with the camera, but they exist in your knowledge or technique or expectations of what the equipment should be able to do.

At the risk of being patronising again. I believe that it's mostly #2 with a side order of #4.

Download a CaptureOne trial and see what results you get with that.

 CraigArnold's gear list:CraigArnold's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Olympus Tough TG-4 Sony a7R Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
(unknown member) Regular Member • Posts: 362
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
1

Can you just post a full RAW so we can see the purple problem for ourselves?

Alessandro63 Contributing Member • Posts: 857
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

stimpy wrote:

Here, is another example, untouched RAW.

I'll kindly add my request to the others: would you please put one or more problematic raw files online? This doesn't mean I don't believe your output is genuine. I'd like to dig into the raw with my SWs.

A question: did you shoot at 6400iso with DR perhaps higher than 100%? The risk is to get a severely underexposed 6400 iso image. LR and other raw developers (and the jpg engine) are going to auto-compensate, so it won't be obvious.

If your files have been exposed at what equates to, say, 25.600 iso, I wouldn't be surprised with that mess.

BUT we may only speculate and perhaps come at wrong conclusions without some untouched file to indagate. So please, upload some of your raw files.

CraigArnold Contributing Member • Posts: 697
Public apology.
13

David Mintzer wrote:

CraigArnold contradicts himself. In his 100X blog he says: DPReview is a curious place, everyone is a bit nastier on DPReview than they are in real life. Take it with a large pinch of salt and a thick skin.

Then in his first response to stimpy, he says The problem here is not inside the camera, it is behind it.

Do us a favor and stop attacking a guy who for all you know could be a very good photographer. Be aware that he came here for help, not to be confronted by someone who obviously feels his role is to defend Fuji. I love the Fuji camera I own, but it is far from perfect.

David is correct for admonishing me. I have been at the very least (borderline) rude, and possibly not borderline. So to the OP I apologize for that.

"Everyone is nastier on DPReview" applies equally to me. And is one of the reasons why I changed my DPReview name to be my real name. It's harder to be nasty when not hiding behind a pseudonym.

One's photographic abilities are not really at issue though. There are some truly excellent photographers who don't know much about digital processing. There are some excellent technical people who are horrible photographers.

I myself am neither an expert at digital processing nor a fantastic photographer. I'm middlin' in both.

But I am a good analyst. And I am genuinely interested in finding out what's happening here.

So once again to the OP and everyone else: my apologies for being an ass.

 CraigArnold's gear list:CraigArnold's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Olympus Tough TG-4 Sony a7R Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
mr moonlight Senior Member • Posts: 1,789
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
1

newone757 wrote:

Can you just post a full RAW so we can see the purple problem for ourselves?

I agree. It's impossible to evaluate these images without full disclosure as to what we are looking at. Without knowing the ISO, where the crop was taken from, what lens, shutter speed, f-stop, lighting or what the RAW files look like, any arguments to what the issue is, is just speculation.

Stimpy, I also suggest posting the RAW files, otherwise the post is kinda pointless.

AustinB Regular Member • Posts: 380
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Is this problem (if indeed deemed a problem) unique to X-Trans sensors or a more general "Fuji" J-PEG problem as some have stated? Using the X-A1 in a few limited low light scenarios, I didn't notice it, albeit there has been no pixel peeking thus far.

Question for OP or any other informed poster... thanks.

Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,342
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Did a little more research.

1. Purple artifacts is either poor RAW processor or problem with your specific camera. Try the included processor and see it that eliminates the problem.

2. Skin smoothing is a "feature" of Fuji cameras and probably one reason they are so loved by portrait and wedding photographers because of their "kindness."

Fuji's "Skin Smoothing Function."

Some people like it, some people, do not.

Fuji "ugly" noise reduction (Rachel Ruffer)

The skin smoothing isn't adjustable but is only applied to jpegs. If you fall in the hate category, and you don't mind the workflow of RAW, you can process the shots yourself. Of course, at this time you would not do that with the LR RAW processor because it apparently has color issues.

P.S.  If this wasn't so ironic I'd think it was an April Fools joke.

Fuji Astalift skin care products

Randy Benter
Randy Benter Veteran Member • Posts: 3,196
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Did a little more research.

1. Purple artifacts is either poor RAW processor or problem with your specific camera. Try the included processor and see it that eliminates the problem.

2. Skin smoothing is a "feature" of Fuji cameras and probably one reason they are so loved by portrait and wedding photographers because of their "kindness."

Fuji's "Skin Smoothing Function."

The Skin Smoothing Function is NOT a feature of Fuji cameras. It is a feature of Fuji printers (part of their Digital Lab equipment). Skin smoothing in JPEGs is the result of aggressive NR. One can minimize the issue by setting NR to -2 or process raw for complete control.

 Randy Benter's gear list:Randy Benter's gear list
Apple Aperture Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +16 more
Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,342
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Randy Benter wrote:

The Skin Smoothing Function is NOT a feature of Fuji cameras. It is a feature of Fuji printers (part of their Digital Lab equipment). Skin smoothing in JPEGs is the result of aggressive NR. One can minimize the issue by setting NR to -2 or process raw for complete control.

Actually, I did some side by side pics, with the X100s (set to NR -2) and a Olympus E-M1 and you can definitely see the smoothing going on with the Fuji compared to the Oly pics.  Having said that I don't think it is a bad thing because most people prefer this look.  It is much more flattering, which even Rachel admits in her blog.  If you don't like it, and don't like to process raw I'd say the Fuji X-series might not be for you.  I still need to do a test comparison between the X-A1 and X-E1 to see if there are any sensor differences or if it's a pure processing thing.

I want to reiterate that this only appears to affect jpegs...not RAW.

AustinB Regular Member • Posts: 380
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Perhaps referring to the "SP" mode which "enhances" portraits? Hard to imagine that is the problem with the OP's pics though.

Lakeview Man Regular Member • Posts: 370
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
1

Randy Benter wrote:

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Did a little more research.

1. Purple artifacts is either poor RAW processor or problem with your specific camera. Try the included processor and see it that eliminates the problem.

2. Skin smoothing is a "feature" of Fuji cameras and probably one reason they are so loved by portrait and wedding photographers because of their "kindness."

Fuji's "Skin Smoothing Function."

The Skin Smoothing Function is NOT a feature of Fuji cameras. It is a feature of Fuji printers (part of their Digital Lab equipment). Skin smoothing in JPEGs is the result of aggressive NR. One can minimize the issue by setting NR to -2 or process raw for complete control.

For my X100s I found even with NR to -2 the OOC Jpeg made the skin look a bit to plastic for my taste. I've stopped shooting JPEG because of that, and shoot now RAW only for all kind of pictures. I develop in Lightroom, but I sharpen the pictures in Nik Sharpener (if needed for pics with lots of detail, grass/leaves) because of the "water color" effect and loss of fine detail that Lightroom sharpening unfortuneately provides.

Haven't tested the XE2 though.

-- hide signature --
 Lakeview Man's gear list:Lakeview Man's gear list
Fujifilm X100T Nikon D810 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Fujifilm X-Pro2 Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM +17 more
Randy Benter
Randy Benter Veteran Member • Posts: 3,196
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

AustinB wrote:

Perhaps referring to the "SP" mode which "enhances" portraits? Hard to imagine that is the problem with the OP's pics though.

The X-E2 does NOT have SP modes.

 Randy Benter's gear list:Randy Benter's gear list
Apple Aperture Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +16 more
Randy Benter
Randy Benter Veteran Member • Posts: 3,196
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems
1

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Randy Benter wrote:

The Skin Smoothing Function is NOT a feature of Fuji cameras. It is a feature of Fuji printers (part of their Digital Lab equipment). Skin smoothing in JPEGs is the result of aggressive NR. One can minimize the issue by setting NR to -2 or process raw for complete control.

Actually, I did some side by side pics, with the X100s (set to NR -2) and a Olympus E-M1 and you can definitely see the smoothing going on with the Fuji compared to the Oly pics.

Yes, the X100s and newer cameras apply aggressive NR to high ISO JPEGs. If you compare to other cameras, the X100s JPEG will look smoother due to higher NR (even at -2). This should not be confused with Fuji's "Skin Smoothing Function" which is specific to Fuji printers.

 Randy Benter's gear list:Randy Benter's gear list
Apple Aperture Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +16 more
AustinB Regular Member • Posts: 380
Re: Fuji X-E2 image problems

Randy Benter wrote:

AustinB wrote:

Perhaps referring to the "SP" mode which "enhances" portraits? Hard to imagine that is the problem with the OP's pics though.

The X-E2 does NOT have SP modes.

Apologies, I thought it would because it is present on my X-A1.

As for the thread-- Looking back at the JPEGs I shot at high ISO a week back, there is some smearing present with -1 noise reduction. No color problems. As the previous posted mentioned, it has more smearing than my OMD files, but in general the JPEGs are also much better than those from the OMD. Without pixel-peeping, the smearing is not very pronounced.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads