X-Trans 1 (X-Pro 1 / X-E1) – Amazing colors/colours?

Thanks for the interesting exercise. I agree. Having an X-E1 in the past and currently an X-T3, I see the X-T3 files look duller, and the difference between film simulations is very subtle. I prefer the punchier, old files look.

Foskito wrote:

Thanks for the interesting exercise. I agree. Having an X-E1 in the past and currently an X-T3, I see the X-T3 files look duller, and the difference between film simulations is very subtle. I prefer the punchier, old files look.

Glad you enjoyed it. I really liked both of the outputs, probably made me appreciate my X-E3 (more).

Doug MacMillan wrote:

I think this demo shows the differences I see between my X-E1 and X-E3. The rendition of browns by the E1, and to a lesser extent the E2s is where I see the biggest difference in my photos and I just love how browns are rendered. This may be a result of Fuji's tweaking for nice skin tones.

I think with some adjustments I could make E3 JPEGS look like E1 JPEGS. I think the differences are noticeable but subtle. I picked up my E1 in like new condition at a good price and I was glad to have the chance to see for myself what all the fuss was about. I also hunted for a Pro1, but its price has certainly risen to the cult camera level.

My favorite setup for the E1 is to use vintage film lenses. Some of mine have "character" that fit right in with the E1.

Here's a photo taken with my E1 and a Canon FL 50mm f1.8.

Camera JPEG slightly tweaked. X-E1, Canon FL 50mm f1.8. Natural light in our dining room.

Lovely photo, did you happen to capture the scene with your X-E3 ? Would love to see a (direct) comparison for this scene !

Alternatively would you be interested in producing a another test scene using a lens of your choice (of course) ?

Thanks.

Whether or not the colors in this photo were helped by the lens I don't know.  However, you are absolutely right about the effect of lenses on the colors and even color balance.  I did a test with my 50- 58mm lenses, My Fuji baseline was the 18-55 @ 50 and the 55-200 @55. I also tested my Canon EF 24-70 @ 50 and my Canon "Nifty Fifty".

I used a fixed daylight WB and there was variation in color especially with my DR Summicron and my Canon FL 58mm f1.2. The Canon FD 50mm lenses (1.8, 1.4, Macro) were pretty consistent.

There was lots of variation in sharpness, CA, contrast, etc. wide open, but all were very good to excellent stopped down to f4-5.6. The two winners of wide open sharpness was the Canon FD 50mm f1.4  with a surprising runner up, the FL 50mm f1.8 which I bought at a charity sale for $10.00.

Thank you for the compliment!

I have actually thought of the very test you mentioned, shooting with the E1, E2s, E3 and H1.  I hope to do it soon, but my plate is pretty full right now.

Raymond L wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

A while back someone, hoping to disprove the notion that people could pick the X-Trans1 in a blind test with an X-Trans2 and X-Trans 3 photo (same studio scene, no PP added) found that almost everyone, myself included, who had experience with X-Trans1 cameras successfully picked the X-Trans1 image.

For the test scenes that I had provided, did you prefer the X-Trans 1 (jpg) images over the X-Trans 3 (jpg) ?

Interested to hear your thoughts.

From the samples you provided I honestly did not see much difference between X-Trans I and X-trans III.

In some of your images you can see that the X-E1 has more open shadows but colourwise I did not see much difference.

I have owned X-Trans I, II and III so far, and I am a JPG shooter with Fuji, i.e. I use the in camera raw processor to adjust white balance and exposure if needed and otherwise just slightly adjust the JPGs for contrast and crop the images if prefer a tighter framing.

So coming from that background (camera OOC JPGs) I think the X-trans I look is the most subtle, with lowest contrast. The X-trans II has a lot more shadow contrast and for that reason the colours look a lot more saturated. In comparison with X-trans I in the second generation cameras skin tone looks more pink. Next, in X-trans III skin tone oddly enough looks more yellowish than in X-trans I. Both in X-trans II and III I often find myself lifting shadows from JPGs - probably simply because I am used to that look from my experience with the X100 and X-E1. I am curious to try out X-trans IV at some point.

So I don't share your overall conclusion stated in the original post at the beginni g of this thread that the X-E1 produces the most contrasty JPGs and most punchy colours..

And here I was, reading this thread, hoping to get some conclusion on which X-Trans sensor is 'the best', but it seems the answer is (as usual) more complex and depends on personal preference...

However, I have to agree: when using Studio scene comparison tool, I've noticed that colors from X-E3 are not as pleasing as other cameras. At the same time, no camera is perfect, some are too pink.

I was pondering buying my first X-Trans sensor camera, but now I'm not sure anymore if X-E3 is the best choice, naively I assumed it should be as it's newer than I and II.

barret2023 wrote:

I was pondering buying my first X-Trans sensor camera, but now I'm not sure anymore if X-E3 is the best choice, naively I assumed it should be as it's newer than I and II.

Personally, having used all the X-Trans sensors, I really like the X-Trans III; the raw files stand up really well to all sorts of treatments in post processing, and the in-camera settings seem to be capable of working the colour and contrast much harder than previous versions. Essentially you have more options for in-camera processing than the I and II, but obviously you don’t have to pay X-Trans IV prices.

And for my money the X-E3 is possibly my favourite X body: it’s compact, the ergonomics are close to perfect, and the imaging capability is great. I wish it had retained the X-E2’s larger viewfinder, but that’s its only real shortcoming, and if you didn’t have another body to compare it to (or if you don’t wear glasses) then it’s not an issue. If it were weather resistant it would be the only camera I’d need.

Image characteristics are subjective, of course (not to mention being additionally dependent on the medium you view them on—whether that’s an iPad, a calibrated monitor, paper, canvas or whatever), and while the X-Trans III seems to be the one I get on best with, that’s not true for everyone. But do remember that you have lots of options for manipulating various aspects of the output, and each sample image you see on the web represents only one of millions of permutations. So you should be able to find a configuration (or rather, up to seven configurations) that you like; and like I say, the III gives you more latitude in that respect (as well as in terms of cropping) than the I and the II—which is why I personally tend not to take much notice of comparisons like this.

barret2023 wrote:

And here I was, reading this thread, hoping to get some conclusion on which X-Trans sensor is 'the best', but it seems the answer is (as usual) more complex and depends on personal preference...

However, I have to agree: when using Studio scene comparison tool, I've noticed that colors from X-E3 are not as pleasing as other cameras. At the same time, no camera is perfect, some are too pink.

I was pondering buying my first X-Trans sensor camera, but now I'm not sure anymore if X-E3 is the best choice, naively I assumed it should be as it's newer than I and II.

Having used all generations my opinion is that X-Trans1 has the best JPGs and X-Trans3 has the best RAWs. Avoid X-Trans2 because the shadows are heavier. After having an X-Pro2 (XTrans3) for several years and now an X100V (X-Trans4), I prefer the X-Trans3 images to the X-Trans4. So I would heartily recommend the X-E3 as its a great little camera which takes excellent photos.

Thanks guys!

Those are really useful insights, highly valuable, especially that they are backed by experience, much appreciated.

This forum is great, wealth of useful information thanks to people like you

Jeff Biscuits wrote:

Image characteristics are subjective, of course (not to mention being additionally dependent on the medium you view them on—whether that’s an iPad, a calibrated monitor, paper, canvas or whatever), and while the X-Trans III seems to be the one I get on best with, that’s not true for everyone. But do remember that you have lots of options for manipulating various aspects of the output, and each sample image you see on the web represents only one of millions of permutations. So you should be able to find a configuration (or rather, up to seven configurations) that you like; and like I say, the III gives you more latitude in that respect (as well as in terms of cropping) than the I and the II—which is why I personally tend not to take much notice of comparisons like this.

That's the point: looking at examples on the net you can easily fall for something which isn't necessarily true. I've seen some pretty bad examples of paining-like photos, with lost detail (but low noise), and while I'm normally obsessed with sharpness, I'm not sure if X-Trans is for me. At the same time I consider this as an opportunity to finally let go of pursuing technical perfection, and rather focus on other aspects.

Either way, thanks for your comment.

barret2023 wrote:

And here I was, reading this thread, hoping to get some conclusion on which X-Trans sensor is 'the best', but it seems the answer is (as usual) more complex and depends on personal preference...

However, I have to agree: when using Studio scene comparison tool, I've noticed that colors from X-E3 are not as pleasing as other cameras. At the same time, no camera is perfect, some are too pink.

I was pondering buying my first X-Trans sensor camera, but now I'm not sure anymore if X-E3 is the best choice, naively I assumed it should be as it's newer than I and II.

I think everyone has responded to those comments re: X-E3 and X-Trans.

But what i wanted to add is, you can also tweak the JPEG files further with recipes  if you aren’t happy with how the JPEG look https://fujixweekly.com/fujifilm-x-trans-iii-recipes/

Personally I prefer shooting RAW only, I posted another thread on processing fujifilm RAW file that you may find interesting https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4631591

Raymond L wrote:

barret2023 wrote:

And here I was, reading this thread, hoping to get some conclusion on which X-Trans sensor is 'the best', but it seems the answer is (as usual) more complex and depends on personal preference...

However, I have to agree: when using Studio scene comparison tool, I've noticed that colors from X-E3 are not as pleasing as other cameras. At the same time, no camera is perfect, some are too pink.

I was pondering buying my first X-Trans sensor camera, but now I'm not sure anymore if X-E3 is the best choice, naively I assumed it should be as it's newer than I and II.

I think everyone has responded to those comments re: X-E3 and X-Trans.

But what i wanted to add is, you can also tweak the JPEG files further with recipes if you aren’t happy with how the JPEG look https://fujixweekly.com/fujifilm-x-trans-iii-recipes/

Personally I prefer shooting RAW only, I posted another thread on processing fujifilm RAW file that you may find interesting https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4631591

Thanks Raymond,

I also prefer RAW over jpeg, I don't mind fiddling with settings in Lightroom (although I'm aware it might not be the best tool to handle X-Trans RAWs), but I'm also curious how good SOOC jpegs are from Fuji, so might try both - we'll see, I've just ordered X-E3.

As for your RAW thread you mentioned: that looks like a lot of work! Lots of examples, it's interesting to see how different software handles those RAWs. And also, I didn't know about IXT tool, I might check it out.

Cheers

Raymond L wrote:

barret2023 wrote:

And here I was, reading this thread, hoping to get some conclusion on which X-Trans sensor is 'the best', but it seems the answer is (as usual) more complex and depends on personal preference...

However, I have to agree: when using Studio scene comparison tool, I've noticed that colors from X-E3 are not as pleasing as other cameras. At the same time, no camera is perfect, some are too pink.

I was pondering buying my first X-Trans sensor camera, but now I'm not sure anymore if X-E3 is the best choice, naively I assumed it should be as it's newer than I and II.

I think everyone has responded to those comments re: X-E3 and X-Trans.

But what i wanted to add is, you can also tweak the JPEG files further with recipes if you aren’t happy with how the JPEG look https://fujixweekly.com/fujifilm-x-trans-iii-recipes/

Personally I prefer shooting RAW only, I posted another thread on processing fujifilm RAW file that you may find interesting https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4631591

I'm with you, always RAW. It's not like you can't get great results with jpegs, but I much prefer the freedom to concentrate just on composition, focus, and exposure when shooting, with the rest of the decision making deferred until later in post. It typically takes me no time at all to improve on a SOOC jpeg regardless of which sensor/processor my camera is sporting. I don't see any magical jpeg color in your examples that can't be easily approximated (or improved upon) with the RAW files.