X-T5 has a color similar to X-T2

Before getting a used X-T2 I did look at several video about X-T2 / X-T3 / X-T4 colors

I was curios to test the difference between my X-T5 and my X-T2 and they seem pretty close

shoot in RAW with Provia

Exported from Capture One

WB 5000k ( but I also try with Auto WB )

800 ISO 1/30s f4

Fuji XF 33mm f1.4

I had to slight underexpose X-T5 and overexpose X-T2 file in post

al404 wrote:

Before getting a used X-T2 I did look at several video about X-T2 / X-T3 / X-T4 colors

I was curios to test the difference between my X-T5 and my X-T2 and they seem pretty close

shoot in RAW with Provia

Exported from Capture One

WB 5000k ( but I also try with Auto WB )

800 ISO 1/30s f4

Fuji XF 33mm f1.4

I had to slight underexpose X-T5 and overexpose X-T2 file in post

What you’re seeing here is Capture One’s Provia color profile for the X-T5 being close to their Provia profile for the X-T2, not necessarily differences in “camera” color. Any color differences between these two cameras could be significantly more (or less) pronounced using a different RAW editor. With a RAW file you can, of course, correct any color irregularities if necessary.

Using the X-H2 (same sensor) I was struck from the first frame that blue sky is rendered much better, without the tendency to cyan.  It really is noticeable.  Thom Hogan says the 26Mpix sensor was already a deal better in this respect.

a_c_skinner wrote:

Using the X-H2 (same sensor) I was struck from the first frame that blue sky is rendered much better, without the tendency to cyan. It really is noticeable. Thom Hogan says the 26Mpix sensor was already a deal better in this respect.

Are you talking RAW or jpeg? Two entirely different things.

I found the drift to cyan in either raw or JPGs.  Standard film sim, Astia isn't it?

a_c_skinner wrote:

I found the drift to cyan in either raw or JPGs. Standard film sim, Astia isn't it?

The OP’s examples are RAW with Provia. The blues have always been very significantly off from reality using Astia, IMO. RAW or jpeg.

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

What you’re seeing here is Capture One’s Provia color profile for the X-T5 being close to their Provia profile for the X-T2, not necessarily differences in “camera” color. Any color differences between these two cameras could be significantly more (or less) pronounced using a different RAW editor. With a RAW file you can, of course, correct any color irregularities if necessary.

Of course any RAW editor would open the file in a different way but I did not select PROVIA in C1

it is the default profile by Capture One

I just specify that in camera I did select PROVIA

In this video Omar Gonzalez di a comparison on previous sensor

Notice how that color in the box is different, I also found other reference that seems to pint out cooler and more muted color on X-Trans IV vs III

al404 wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

What you’re seeing here is Capture One’s Provia color profile for the X-T5 being close to their Provia profile for the X-T2, not necessarily differences in “camera” color. Any color differences between these two cameras could be significantly more (or less) pronounced using a different RAW editor. With a RAW file you can, of course, correct any color irregularities if necessary.

Of course any RAW editor would open the file in a different way but I did not select PROVIA, it is the default profile by Capture One

The point is, you are comparing editor here, not camera color. An editor’s color matching profiles can vary a bit between camera models and certainly from other editors’ profiles. Did C1 select Provia automatically or its own default profile? Either way, it should be a pretty close match between different cameras using matching profiles (though they can vary quite a bit in Lightroom). Your examples look close, but even on my phone, the light greens look a bit brighter in your X-T2 example.

I did with auto curve, this is with linear

Your right, the colours are very close.

Sorry, I was going off on a tangent as it was to me a very obvious colour difference twixt the two.

As Capture One is a Fuji-licensed raw converter, the match to OOC-JPEG output in terms of color accuracy will be extremely close. The other major raw converters will tend to be off - sometimes a little and sometimes a lot in my testing.

The X-T5 OOC-JPEG processing for NR is pretty far ahead of the X-T2 and does not have to be reduced to minimum to avoid considerable softness evident in the older body. Presumably this is due to the much-greater processing power.

The X-T5 is really great for Nostalgic Neg. which is an excellent sim for people shooting and some scenery situations; X-T2 does not have that sim.

maltmoose wrote:

JNR wrote:

The X-T5 OOC-JPEG processing for NR is pretty far ahead of the X-T2 and does not have to be reduced to minimum to avoid considerable softness evident in the older body. Presumably this is due to the much-greater processing power.

I think youre the first person ive seen mention that. Not that i disbelieve you as i think its certainly possible and needed but do you have a source anywhere that has shown this.

The source is my eyes. I've mentioned it at least a couple times previously in threads where recommendations are often made to reduce NR to the -4 (minimum) on the X-T2 and even add some sharpening to overcome the smearing problem. I've suggested that you can back that off to -3 and retain plenty of detail in high ISO situations with the X-T5. Of course, this has a bit to do with the denser sensor as it relates to detail-noise ratios, but my sense is it has more to do with improvements in overall camera processing quality.

AFAIK, this is the first time the thought has been questioned. It doesn't really matter to me much as I depend on the raws for 99% of my work, but it's nice to have improved OOC JPEGs as I use them as a reference point. To my eyes, the extent of improvement is more than a subtle difference.

maltmoose wrote:

JNR wrote:

maltmoose wrote:

JNR wrote:

The X-T5 OOC-JPEG processing for NR is pretty far ahead of the X-T2 and does not have to be reduced to minimum to avoid considerable softness evident in the older body. Presumably this is due to the much-greater processing power.

I think youre the first person ive seen mention that. Not that i disbelieve you as i think its certainly possible and needed but do you have a source anywhere that has shown this.

The source is my eyes. I've mentioned it at least a couple times previously in threads where recommendations are often made to reduce NR to the -4 (minimum) on the X-T2 and even add some sharpening to overcome the smearing problem. I've suggested that you can back that off to -3 and retain plenty of detail in high ISO situations with the X-T5. Of course, this has a bit to do with the denser sensor as it relates to detail-noise ratios, but my sense is it has more to do with improvements in overall camera processing quality.

AFAIK, this is the first time the thought has been questioned. It doesn't really matter to me much as I depend on the raws for 99% of my work, but it's nice to have improved OOC JPEGs as I use them as a reference point. To my eyes, the extent of improvement is more than a subtle difference.

On the xe3 gen cameras the noise reduction and demosaicing on the jpegs could certainly be improved on. The difference between ooc defaults, reduced noise reduction and a properly processed raw file are quite high compared to some other brands. So an improvement in this area on the newer cameras is welcome imo. I dont have the newer cameras but have looked at samples but havnt really noticed so thought id ask the question. Its just a bit of an annoyance seeing as the jpegs are otherwise quite nice. All pixel peeping i guess.

You pretty much nailed it. With the X-T5, I actually had to do a couple weeks worth of trial and error to get the processed image consistently looking better than OOC... a bit of that was Capture One defaults were so far off from optimal on the X-T5 once you went beyond about ISO 800. Improving on OOC with the X-T2/20 came almost right away.

Yes, the coloration of the JPEGs has always been lovely, sharpening/NR was always the issue for me. And the color science has gotten even better, IMO, with more recent sims such as Classic Chrome and Nostalgic Neg. Fortunately, Capture One is very faithful to the Fuji color science.

Personally, I don't put much stock in the appearance coming from defaults - OOC or raw conversion. If the camera (or converter) offers flexibility, it is a wise option for the user to maximize the look to whatever best pleases you. That's one of my photography joys.