XT2 Zoomed in Image Quality

[Foto Jay]

Hi! I have owned an Xt2 for a little over a year coming from a full frame Canon system. I have been super happy except one thing. Maybe I am going nuts but when I zoom in on an image it falls apart quality wise. Especially wider shots. I always view 1 to 1 in lightroom on a 27" I Mac and sometimes I zoom in a tad more to fix blemishes etc. The edges (not the edges of the picture, but the edges of the people or objects in them) just are more jagged, blotchy, very pixelated etc... More than I remember on my 5DIII. Is that just part of the APSC game? Once again, I am happy user but this has been bothering me. It would be kind of someone to post a picture or two for me to compare would be greatly appreciated. Of course the issue arrises more with the 18-55 kit lens then my others, but the issue is there with all my lens's, so I can rule out optics problems. Thanks in advance for any insights. I would like to put this to bed if I can. Like I said, I am super happy, but this has been on my mind the whole time from the very first shoot I did with it.

PS.... For what it is worth, I have tried all the raw converters to rule out lightroom messing with me I do use photoshop to sharpen, as I do notice lightroom sharpening does amplify the problem slightly.

 

[Iuvenis]

fuji excels in near field selected focus w a good distant blur. but if subjects are flat(as in too close to a wall etc) at infinity, the results has always been more disappointing. doesnt matter which lens you are taking about.

i believe its sensor issue. if you shoot 18-55 w a subject at 2-3 meters away the subj will be amongst the best in any system. but is the subj is 20m away against a wall...everything just becomes plain flat. and nothing is truly sharp nor blur...same w 18-135

 

[Foto Jay]

Hey woffles. You are correct. I have learned to make my jpgs flat in camera also, since I took this photo. Much better now. However a stop should not be a problem with my raw file and should easily render perfect when processed correctly.

 

[The Torontonian]

Hi! I have owned an Xt2 for a little over a year coming from a full frame Canon system. I have been super happy except one thing. Maybe I am going nuts but when I zoom in on an image it falls apart quality wise. Especially wider shots. I always view 1 to 1 in lightroom on a 27" I Mac and sometimes I zoom in a tad more to fix blemishes etc. The edges (not the edges of the picture, but the edges of the people or objects in them) just are more jagged, blotchy, very pixelated etc... More than I remember on my 5DIII. Is that just part of the APSC game? Once again, I am happy user but this has been bothering me. It would be kind of someone to post a picture or two for me to compare would be greatly appreciated. Of course the issue arrises more with the 18-55 kit lens then my others, but the issue is there with all my lens's, so I can rule out optics problems. Thanks in advance for any insights. I would like to put this to bed if I can. Like I said, I am super happy, but this has been on my mind the whole time from the very first shoot I did with it.

PS.... For what it is worth, I have tried all the raw converters to rule out lightroom messing with me I do use photoshop to sharpen, as I do notice lightroom sharpening does amplify the problem slightly.

Perhaps it's the lenses? Oddly enough, with my 90 f2, for the first time in my life, I keep thinking, "A 100% crop of this would be perfectly acceptable."

 

[Foto Jay]

Regrettably, and without meaning any offence, this is the kind of thread that you get when a newcomer to the forum someone raises a question or issue with image quality without clear samples and comparisons.

No one knows exactly what the issue is, so everyone with any kind of image quality issue at all piles in, thinking it must be what they are talking about. Then the OP thinks that other people share their problem, when in fact it may be something entirely different. At the end they go away none the wiser, but convinced their problem is somehow inherent.

There's only one way to solve IQ problems. You have to test in controlled conditions and you have to post the results in a way that allows other people to comment.

Otherwise, the most knowledgeable and helpful people on this forum won't be able to help you. Instead, you'll just get replies from other newbies (who may be struggling with something different) or people with a beef against this or other aspect of your lens/sensor/raw converter etc etc.

There are dozens of landscape photographers that have switched to Fuji - someone posted a link the other day. Fuji X cameras will never be the camera of choice for static landscape work, as size and weight is not an issue and you can get more resolution from other cameras (like the GFX). If you have to trek to get to your subject, it's a different story.

I'm talking about people that exhibit and sell their work. Seriously, they wouldn't be using a camera system that can't produce sharp results at infinity or struggles with foliage. You can produce the same results as them, and if you don't, it's not the camera that's holding you back.

Hi luvenis. You are correct and no offense taken. I am genuinely grateful to all who respond and smart enough to know the good, bad and the somewhere in between. In my defense (If i need to). I did not know this is a hot topic and I did post a real life (untested, uncontrolled, sample early on in this thread representing what I see on fairly common basis. I know it could be a ton of reasons why and I remain open minded to reasons. It would be great if someone said. Hey Jay you suck! Hold that camera still would you. Of course i could test in a controlled environment but I am sure this has been done to numbing effect in the past. I am overly happy with my Fuji purchase and will continue with the system and I would be happy to post more samples if needed.

 

[Foto Jay]

Hi! I have owned an Xt2 for a little over a year coming from a full frame Canon system. I have been super happy except one thing. Maybe I am going nuts but when I zoom in on an image it falls apart quality wise. Especially wider shots. I always view 1 to 1 in lightroom on a 27" I Mac and sometimes I zoom in a tad more to fix blemishes etc. The edges (not the edges of the picture, but the edges of the people or objects in them) just are more jagged, blotchy, very pixelated etc... More than I remember on my 5DIII. Is that just part of the APSC game? Once again, I am happy user but this has been bothering me. It would be kind of someone to post a picture or two for me to compare would be greatly appreciated. Of course the issue arrises more with the 18-55 kit lens then my others, but the issue is there with all my lens's, so I can rule out optics problems. Thanks in advance for any insights. I would like to put this to bed if I can. Like I said, I am super happy, but this has been on my mind the whole time from the very first shoot I did with it.

PS.... For what it is worth, I have tried all the raw converters to rule out lightroom messing with me I do use photoshop to sharpen, as I do notice lightroom sharpening does amplify the problem slightly.

Perhaps it's the lenses? Oddly enough, with my 90 f2, for the first time in my life, I keep thinking, "A 100% crop of this would be perfectly acceptable."

Hi Victoria,

Yes I was originally thinking it was the glass. I do see the issue arrises more with the 18-55 more than any others I have. Unfortunately, I do see it with all my lens's for the most part, depending on the scene. I will go out on a limb and say It just has to be my post processing or sensor characteristic or APS-C quality. Its probably that simple. As a whole, I am happy with what I get out of the camera.

 

[Greg7579]

Hi! I have owned an Xt2 for a little over a year coming from a full frame Canon system. I have been super happy except one thing. Maybe I am going nuts but when I zoom in on an image it falls apart quality wise. Especially wider shots. I always view 1 to 1 in lightroom on a 27" I Mac and sometimes I zoom in a tad more to fix blemishes etc. The edges (not the edges of the picture, but the edges of the people or objects in them) just are more jagged, blotchy, very pixelated etc... More than I remember on my 5DIII. Is that just part of the APSC game? Once again, I am happy user but this has been bothering me. It would be kind of someone to post a picture or two for me to compare would be greatly appreciated. Of course the issue arrises more with the 18-55 kit lens then my others, but the issue is there with all my lens's, so I can rule out optics problems. Thanks in advance for any insights. I would like to put this to bed if I can. Like I said, I am super happy, but this has been on my mind the whole time from the very first shoot I did with it.

PS.... For what it is worth, I have tried all the raw converters to rule out lightroom messing with me I do use photoshop to sharpen, as I do notice lightroom sharpening does amplify the problem slightly.

Perhaps it's the lenses? Oddly enough, with my 90 f2, for the first time in my life, I keep thinking, "A 100% crop of this would be perfectly acceptable."

Hi Victoria,

Yes I was originally thinking it was the glass. I do see the issue arrises more with the 18-55 more than any others I have. Unfortunately, I do see it with all my lens's for the most part, depending on the scene. I will go out on a limb and say It just has to be my post processing or sensor characteristic or APS-C quality. Its probably that simple. As a whole, I am happy with what I get out of the camera.

So I wake up 7 hours later and this thread is still here.

Now you are saying that APSC is inferior and that all fuji lenses have this problem you have tossed out with no corroboration. Look, I don't know how old or experienced you are, but you must be aware that coming on the Fuji board with extremely experienced shooters who love their Fuji gear and tossing out these little sizzling bombs is not going to get you the kind of responses you desire if you are really seriously looking for solid advice. If your intentions are otherwise then it is working, because the thread is still here and it is still irritating some really fine Fuji photographers.

Go look at the 40 images I just posted last night on a new thread from Mexico and tell me if you see a problem. My WiFi is too weak to post full size jpegs to Flickr.

And one of them is my wife up against a wall 40 meters away with the 50-140. I saw some incredible comment about fuji lenses not being good from distance with subjects up against a wall.... I laughed out loud when I read that....

And when you pixel peep, remember what you are looking at -- a 1 MBish small JPEG export from a 50 MB RAW file. Hello.....

This will be my last post to this thread, no matter how ridiculous it gets.

 

[Jerry-astro]

Regrettably, and without meaning any offence, this is the kind of thread that you get when a newcomer to the forum someone raises a question or issue with image quality without clear samples and comparisons.

No one knows exactly what the issue is, so everyone with any kind of image quality issue at all piles in, thinking it must be what they are talking about. Then the OP thinks that other people share their problem, when in fact it may be something entirely different. At the end they go away none the wiser, but convinced their problem is somehow inherent.

There's only one way to solve IQ problems. You have to test in controlled conditions and you have to post the results in a way that allows other people to comment.

Otherwise, the most knowledgeable and helpful people on this forum won't be able to help you. Instead, you'll just get replies from other newbies (who may be struggling with something different) or people with a beef against this or other aspect of your lens/sensor/raw converter etc etc.

There are dozens of landscape photographers that have switched to Fuji - someone posted a link the other day. Fuji X cameras will never be the camera of choice for static landscape work, as size and weight is not an issue and you can get more resolution from other cameras (like the GFX). If you have to trek to get to your subject, it's a different story.

I'm talking about people that exhibit and sell their work. Seriously, they wouldn't be using a camera system that can't produce sharp results at infinity or struggles with foliage. You can produce the same results as them, and if you don't, it's not the camera that's holding you back.

Excellent post and very well said. Not sure exactly how to frame a post, but if I could, this one would be high on the list.

 

[Bobo Hodls]

I did actually learn to post process on Fuji’s first and after that I’ve been working with Sony RAWs too. I would say there is quite a difference on how and what you can do with Fuji’s. Especially sharpening is tricky and you will find a host of solutions here in the forums on different issues. If you are using the film simulations you would see that they are very contrasty and can easily hide details in shadows and blow highlights.

Yes, be it sharpening, noise, or shadow/highlight adjustments, habits/approaches gleaned from Bayer sensor experience doesn't apply to Fuji X-Trans sensors.

 

[woffles]

Hey woffles. You are correct. I have learned to make my jpgs flat in camera also, since I took this photo. Much better now. However a stop should not be a problem with my raw file and should easily render perfect when processed correctly.

Yeah, but that photo is over a stop and a half underexposed at least and shot at a higher ISO. That's causing the noise. Without a full size raw to look at I can't tell anything else from it. You can also try demos of Capture One and ON 1 Raw. Both handle Fuji files better than Lightroom does. The only place I might see jagged edges sometimes is if something is around 45 degrees across the sensor. My Canon 5D MII is worse than my XT2 at this. Both can capture incredible details though. You might want to look into back button focusing too. A lot of wedding photographers like using this technique to help nail focus better.

People complain about soft distant details but that's from my experience an issue with technique not the sensor or lenses. Shooting the Rokinon 12mm, if you misfocus the background is soft. Get it right and you can zoom 100% all over the photo and see sharp details. I haven't been shooting the XT2 very long so am still learning the quirks of the system. I've had a X100 since they first came out and have shot tons on that. The XT2 is making me step my game up a little and shoot more deliberate. I like that though.

 

[Tom Schum]

If it helps, I've found that X-Trans truly does a good job at avoiding moire. Going back to my Bayer files, I'm surprised at how much I downplayed the impact of moire, even when it was visible in mere thumbnails. X-Trans is a win some, lose some proposition -- but I feel like I win more than I lose.

The moire resistance is what sold me on the X-trans sensor.

But like you say, there is a tradeoff in resolution.

If you don't need all 16-24 mpixels, you can try downsizing to 1/4 original pixels using the Nearest Neighbor algorithm. End result is quite sharp without artifacts such as sharpening haloes. This method breaks down if you downsize to something other than 1/4 original pixels, however, and you can get some funky artifacts when doing it. Also, if you start with too much sharpness this method will not fix it. Method was suggested by DCox, so many thanks to him.

Here is a sample X-E1 shot downsized to 1/4 original pixels using Nearest Neighbor:



--
Tom Schum
Every day a new image.

 

[woffles]

Just to toss out a couple of other things. Have you updated the firmware for the lens? You can also try turning off continuous OIS if you have it on and have it only active when you take the photo. If you're shooting from a tripod in the church, shut the OIS off as well.

 

[nikkor35f2]

fuji excels in near field selected focus w a good distant blur. but if subjects are flat(as in too close to a wall etc) at infinity, the results has always been more disappointing. doesnt matter which lens you are taking about.

i believe its sensor issue. if you shoot 18-55 w a subject at 2-3 meters away the subj will be amongst the best in any system. but is the subj is 20m away against a wall...everything just becomes plain flat. and nothing is truly sharp nor blur...same w 18-135

 

[NottsPhoto]

Hi! I have owned an Xt2 for a little over a year coming from a full frame Canon system. I have been super happy except one thing. Maybe I am going nuts but when I zoom in on an image it falls apart quality wise. Especially wider shots. I always view 1 to 1 in lightroom on a 27" I Mac and sometimes I zoom in a tad more to fix blemishes etc. The edges (not the edges of the picture, but the edges of the people or objects in them) just are more jagged, blotchy, very pixelated etc... More than I remember on my 5DIII. Is that just part of the APSC game? Once again, I am happy user but this has been bothering me. It would be kind of someone to post a picture or two for me to compare would be greatly appreciated. Of course the issue arrises more with the 18-55 kit lens then my others, but the issue is there with all my lens's, so I can rule out optics problems. Thanks in advance for any insights. I would like to put this to bed if I can. Like I said, I am super happy, but this has been on my mind the whole time from the very first shoot I did with it.

PS.... For what it is worth, I have tried all the raw converters to rule out lightroom messing with me I do use photoshop to sharpen, as I do notice lightroom sharpening does amplify the problem slightly.

Perhaps it's the lenses? Oddly enough, with my 90 f2, for the first time in my life, I keep thinking, "A 100% crop of this would be perfectly acceptable."

Hi Victoria,

Yes I was originally thinking it was the glass. I do see the issue arrises more with the 18-55 more than any others I have. Unfortunately, I do see it with all my lens's for the most part, depending on the scene. I will go out on a limb and say It just has to be my post processing or sensor characteristic or APS-C quality. Its probably that simple. As a whole, I am happy with what I get out of the camera.

So I wake up 7 hours later and this thread is still here.

Now you are saying that APSC is inferior and that all fuji lenses have this problem you have tossed out with no corroboration. Look, I don't know how old or experienced you are, but you must be aware that coming on the Fuji board with extremely experienced shooters who love their Fuji gear and tossing out these little sizzling bombs is not going to get you the kind of responses you desire if you are really seriously looking for solid advice. If your intentions are otherwise then it is working, because the thread is still here and it is still irritating some really fine Fuji photographers.

Go look at the 40 images I just posted last night on a new thread from Mexico and tell me if you see a problem. My WiFi is too weak to post full size jpegs to Flickr.

And one of them is my wife up against a wall 40 meters away with the 50-140. I saw some incredible comment about fuji lenses not being good from distance with subjects up against a wall.... I laughed out loud when I read that....

And when you pixel peep, remember what you are looking at -- a 1 MBish small JPEG export from a 50 MB RAW file. Hello.....

This will be my last post to this thread, no matter how ridiculous it gets.

 

[57even]

With a lack of comparable samples, preferably raw, it is impossible to say what your problem is, though some of the responses were quite amusing.

I traded in a D800 for a Fuji XPro2, and I didn't do it because I though a loss of image quality was 'acceptable'. I did it because there wasn't any significant loss worth speaking about.

Now granted, Xtrans processing is anything but conventional, but when done correctly, it is exactly where I expect a 24 megapixel sensor to be. Size has nothing to do with it unless you shoot at high ISO, and if you shoot at high ISO, even a small amount of underexposure, or poor editing, is a total disaster.

I have several hundred images from informal gigs, where the light levels were appalling, and I was shooting at ISO3200 and 6400 with the 56mm F1.2 wide open. The shots were not only in focus, but looked great with a bit of moderate PP.

And I also have a couple of urban landscape images printed at 36X24 that match anything I got from a D600 (FF 24MP).

In my experience of monitoring this forum, most 'issues' come down to genuinely faulty gear, or misunderstandings about processing basics with Xtrans. I can't tell in this case, except to say that your experience does not concur with mine.

That does not mean you don't have a genuine concern, and I did have a faulty 18-55 that had to be returned, but I cannot even start to guess what the issue is here. Lack of data.

I suggest a couple of raw images on a dropbox account.

--
Reporter: "Mr Gandhi, what do you think of Western Civilisation?"
Mahatma Gandhi: "I think it would be a very good idea!"

 

[Tom Schum]

And one of them is my wife up against a wall 40 meters away with the 50-140. I saw some incredible comment about fuji lenses not being good from distance with subjects up against a wall.... I laughed out loud when I read that....

In the far distance tiny details abound. Any camera movement will either blur them or double-image them, even though foreground details (larger) will not be visibly affected. This can be seen in the second image Neil189 posted here (look at the edge of the boulder):

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60629998

Another problem is that optical stabilization needs to be turned off when the camera is anchored to a tripod or even a park bench. Otherwise, it will simulate camera movement and screw up the distant backdrop.

I haven't had problems with my landscapes shot with my X-E1.

PS My raw processor is the free one you get from Fuji (the Fuji/Silkypix thing). Minimal worms.

--
Tom Schum
Every day a new image.

 

[NottsPhoto]

With a lack of comparable samples, preferably raw, it is impossible to say what your problem is, though some of the pseudo-authoritative responses were quite amusing.

I traded in a D800 for a Fuji XPro2, and I didn't do it because I though a loss of image quality was 'acceptable'. I did it because there wasn't any significant loss worth speaking about.

Now granted, Xtrans processing is anything but conventional, but when done correctly, it is exactly where I expect a 24 megapixel sensor to be. Size has nothing to do with it unless you shoot at high ISO, and if you shoot at high ISO, even a small amount of underexposure, or adjustment in post, is a disaster.

I have several hundred images from informal gigs, where the light levels were appalling, and I was shooting at ISO3200 and 6400 with the 56mm F1.2 wide open. The shots were not only in focus, but looked great with a bit of moderate PP.

And I also have a couple of urban landscape images printed at 36X24 that match anything I got from a D600 (FF 24MP).

In my experience of monitoring this forum, most 'issues' come down to genuinely faulty gear, or misunderstandings about processing basics. I can't tell in this case, except to say that your experience does not concur with mine in any way.

Yes, I do have some pretty poor shots, but the fault was always mine, apart from a few issues with an old XE1 that had faulty lens contacts and could not focus in the cold.

 

[57even]

Check hyperfocal distance at F5.6, and turn off OIS.

You have a double image - possibly shutter shock interacting with OIS.

Focus in wideangle shots is difficult. Any area of sufficient contrast is too small to register. Try F8, manual focus at about 10m, and it will look pretty sharp everywhere.

 

[57even]

With a lack of comparable samples, preferably raw, it is impossible to say what your problem is, though some of the pseudo-authoritative responses were quite amusing.

I traded in a D800 for a Fuji XPro2, and I didn't do it because I though a loss of image quality was 'acceptable'. I did it because there wasn't any significant loss worth speaking about.

Now granted, Xtrans processing is anything but conventional, but when done correctly, it is exactly where I expect a 24 megapixel sensor to be. Size has nothing to do with it unless you shoot at high ISO, and if you shoot at high ISO, even a small amount of underexposure, or adjustment in post, is a disaster.

I have several hundred images from informal gigs, where the light levels were appalling, and I was shooting at ISO3200 and 6400 with the 56mm F1.2 wide open. The shots were not only in focus, but looked great with a bit of moderate PP.

And I also have a couple of urban landscape images printed at 36X24 that match anything I got from a D600 (FF 24MP).

In my experience of monitoring this forum, most 'issues' come down to genuinely faulty gear, or misunderstandings about processing basics. I can't tell in this case, except to say that your experience does not concur with mine in any way.

Yes, I do have some pretty poor shots, but the fault was always mine, apart from a few issues with an old XE1 that had faulty lens contacts and could not focus in the cold.

 

[NottsPhoto]

With a lack of comparable samples, preferably raw, it is impossible to say what your problem is, though some of the pseudo-authoritative responses were quite amusing.

I traded in a D800 for a Fuji XPro2, and I didn't do it because I though a loss of image quality was 'acceptable'. I did it because there wasn't any significant loss worth speaking about.

Now granted, Xtrans processing is anything but conventional, but when done correctly, it is exactly where I expect a 24 megapixel sensor to be. Size has nothing to do with it unless you shoot at high ISO, and if you shoot at high ISO, even a small amount of underexposure, or adjustment in post, is a disaster.

I have several hundred images from informal gigs, where the light levels were appalling, and I was shooting at ISO3200 and 6400 with the 56mm F1.2 wide open. The shots were not only in focus, but looked great with a bit of moderate PP.

And I also have a couple of urban landscape images printed at 36X24 that match anything I got from a D600 (FF 24MP).

In my experience of monitoring this forum, most 'issues' come down to genuinely faulty gear, or misunderstandings about processing basics. I can't tell in this case, except to say that your experience does not concur with mine in any way.

Yes, I do have some pretty poor shots, but the fault was always mine, apart from a few issues with an old XE1 that had faulty lens contacts and could not focus in the cold.

 

[Foto Jay]

Hey woffles. You are correct. I have learned to make my jpgs flat in camera also, since I took this photo. Much better now. However a stop should not be a problem with my raw file and should easily render perfect when processed correctly.

Yeah, but that photo is over a stop and a half underexposed at least and shot at a higher ISO. That's causing the noise. Without a full size raw to look at I can't tell anything else from it. You can also try demos of Capture One and ON 1 Raw. Both handle Fuji files better than Lightroom does. The only place I might see jagged edges sometimes is if something is around 45 degrees across the sensor. My Canon 5D MII is worse than my XT2 at this. Both can capture incredible details though. You might want to look into back button focusing too. A lot of wedding photographers like using this technique to help nail focus better.

People complain about soft distant details but that's from my experience an issue with technique not the sensor or lenses. Shooting the Rokinon 12mm, if you misfocus the background is soft. Get it right and you can zoom 100% all over the photo and see sharp details. I haven't been shooting the XT2 very long so am still learning the quirks of the system. I've had a X100 since they first came out and have shot tons on that. The XT2 is making me step my game up a little and shoot more deliberate. I like that though.

Thanks. Yes this was early on and have since refined my XT-2 techniques. I was not worried about the noise as much as the jagged type edges. I have tried ON 1 raw and do like the results also. I used BB focus on my 5DmarkIII but haven't on the Fuji. Don't ask me why Just like the way it works without it on this system.