![]() Do not touch sharpness in menu, do not touch things regarding image. If you use XT1 on Manual, on Standard film Look. I really hope this disappears in future models. I looked up what Sven said, the "watercolor" look, and I came across this: Looks like I found my answer. I have a lot of respect for FujiFilm and have been waiting for them to get back into the dSLR game since the FujiFilm Pro S5. Does anyone have any examples of an image from an X-T1 that doesnt have in-camera filters applied (a RAW file, perhaps?) I'm still really interested in this camera, but the look bugs the heck out of me. It's almost like every edge is well defined and sharpened, but any area that isn't an edge (doesnt have a lot of drastic pixel-to-pixel local contrast) and has some amount of gradation has its clarity turned down, if that helps. It now has a more earthy, organic dirt-like overtone. ![]() On a more important note, I have noticed the free range, low sodium chicken noodle soup at Whole Foods shifted a bit with regard to it's flavor profile. The X-T1 is the one I use the most these days. I love the X-T1, hated the X100 (nothing to do with AF or the pre-fixed-firmware era everything to do with how they handled SAB), enjoy all full frame Nikons, tolerate the RX1/RX1r - the Fuji being the most plastic of them all, side by side. I almost understand the plastic comment, but more importantly, don't think it matters much to him or anyone else. It's a lot more noticeable on a calibrated retina monitor than it is on a Chromebook or average consumer based monitor, also. Honestly not trying to offend anyone, I'm just glad to hear I'm not the only one to have noticed it. Is it because of the bespoke pixel array in the X-Trans CMOS II sensor? It's kind of how digital cameras look a little clean and dry compared to film, the x-line cameras create a look that is even cleaner, but it makes it have a similar look to 3d modeled computer graphics. The size and the way it feels with the combination of it having an asp-c censor + the sharp fujinons are great. I want an X-T1, but the look turns me off. Maybe that's what John means.or maybe that he just "trolling" because he has a Nikon. I just purchased an xt1, and as of yet, not noticed any "plastic" look.However, I have noticed more of a "film like" quality to my pics, and less of a digital look. Not smooth as in soft or airy, but just like plastic, haha. I guess everything looks too smooth in a way that looks plasticky. ![]() I don't know how to explain it, other than you either notice it or you don't. Most of the images in the group have this "plastic" look, as far as I can see. I use the X-T1.and before I bought it.I noticed a similar look.some call it watercolor effect as well.if you are using high ISO and shooting jpeg some images do tend to look that way.but if you shoot raw you can get rid of that us the black and white settings are amazing on the x-t1 as well as some of the other film simulations.right now the only weakness I see for the fuji x line of cameras is using flash photography.but I use a 3rd part flash off camera and with good results.good luck in finding what you are looking for John.there are lots of nice choices.I shoot micro four thirds and Nikon as well.and like them all for different reasons and different occassions They just look like they lack life? Anyone else seeing this? And it's nice to support a small company that's doing awesome things.I've been going through a lot of the images shot by the new FujiFilm X line, and all the images look like. Adobe is unforgivably lazy and there's better raw processing (and better software generally) out there, but Lightroom is as serviceable for X-Trans as it is for any other files, IMHO.Īll that being said, Iridient X-Transformer is excellent and if you want an alternative to X Raw Studio that can fit into an existing workflow it's perfect, but I really only use it for when I'm batch-processing a bunch of images that I'm going to process and stack outside of my normal workflow (it's part of my astrophotography workflow). I also think that the complaints with Lightroom and Camera Raw are vastly overblown in the majority of cases today - I would encounter an occasional annoyance with foliage and X-T1 files a few years ago, but I had no issues with X-Trans III files and Adobe's processing before I switched to Capture One. What issues are you having? I find Capture One to be quite good enough. Since X-trans processing support is not quite satisfactory in the major raw developers
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |