CCC Forum

This is a fair assessment by Thom Hogan of the current state of the various manufacturer's mirrorless offerings.

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/mor ... state.html

My personal view is that mirrorless only really makes sense with an APS-C sensor. Yes, it is a compromise trading lower bulk and weight for image quality*, but one which I am willing to accept. To my surprise, Sony has demonstrated that full frame mirrorless lenses are not realy any smaller than their DSLR equivalents, which reduces the incentive to switch. Canon appears to have come to a similar conclusion with the EOS-M mount. If it can replicate what Fuji has done with X-Trans but with a conventional sensor, it can come to dominate mirrorless in the same way as it does with DSLRs. Its late entry into the market notwithstanding.

*I acknowledge that depth of field characteristics at any given angle of view differ according to format. Usually I am looking to maximise depth of field, so a smaller sensor has an advantage there as well.

He's quite critical of Fuji, especially about out-of-the-box quality issues. What is the workflow change he says is necessary/what do you do? I don't have the breadth of exposure to multiple mirrorless kit across brands as he does but for me he massively overrates Olympus and underrates Fuji. If I was going mirrorless it'd either be Sony FF or Fuji, until i get my hands on an m5 at least

Have you seen this?

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/x-tran ... aims-test/

davidc wrote:He's quite critical of Fuji, especially about out-of-the-box quality issues. What is the workflow change he says is necessary/what do you do? I don't have the breadth of exposure to multiple mirrorless kit across brands as he does but for me he massively overrates Olympus and underrates Fuji. If I was going mirrorless it'd either be Sony FF or Fuji, until i get my hands on an m5 at least

The workflow change appears to be that Lightroom does not get the best out of the the Fuji Raw files, which means switching to another application such as Capture One. Personally, I use Lightroom and am generally happy. However, it is usually necessary to use different settings for Post Capture sharpening and I always set Detail to 100. I do wonder, though, whether the X-Trans sensor really has the advantages that Fuji claims. I have an article in the club's next bulletin where I describe the processing in Lightroom for one of my images which is in the annual exhibition and was taken on my X-E2.

I suspect Olympus got the nod over Fuji for both the workflow issue and having more options when it comes to lenses, especially at the long end. I cannot really comment about the Canon system, which he also rated over the Fuji, but it has potential.

He does say that all the systems are capable of delivering good results and ultimately it comes down to personal preference. The Fuji lenses are top rate and one of the reasons to buy into the system. For me, the pick of them are the 14 f/2.8, 23 f/1.4 and 50-140 f/2.8, all of which yield images which really pop onto the scree.

davidc wrote:Have you seen this?

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/x-tran ... aims-test/

Yes.

The author is quite critical of the X-Trans sensor. PetaPixel published an earlier article where he also questioned its performance.

https://petapixel.com/2017/01/27/x-tran ... e-problem/

Personally, I like what I see coming out of the camera, as do a lot of other people. That is the real test.

davidc wrote:What is the workflow change he says is necessary .....?

Over at The Online Photographer, there is a discussion about using different converters for Fuji Raws. This comment might well answer your question about workflow.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.co ... 6a4d37970c

Personally, the main change to my standard workflow is to alter the Capture Sharpening I apply. I use the settings recommended by Pete Bridgwood and have created presets for them.

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

I also find that Lightrroom's Clarity slider, which acts on midtone contrast, has a more marked effect on Fuji images than those from cameras with Bayer sensors. Accordingly, I use it sparingly to enhance detail so that I do not get dramatic changes in contrast which look unnatural.