The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

I'm noticing I'm getting the painterly effect with landscapes, not all the time but quite often. Rocks/stones tend to possibly be the worst, but also foliage particularly that in the distance. RAW seem to be better but it's still there, is there any voodoo magic to try and minimise this?

Shots were at 200 ISO, and I'm using Lightroom CC which is updated regularly.
 
snerkler said:
I'm noticing I'm getting the painterly effect with landscapes, not all the time but quite often. Rocks/stones tend to possibly be the worst, but also foliage particularly that in the distance. RAW seem to be better but it's still there, is there any voodoo magic to try and minimise this?

Shots were at 200 ISO, and I'm using Lightroom CC which is updated regularly.
Click to expand...

I found the best way to cure it was to sell it and buy a Nikon D750. :D fixed it straight away. :banana:
 
It really is. Haven't gone all the way yet though. Seriously, the painterly effect is something I have made no secret about suffering from. I believe it is a mix of the X-Trans sensor and using Adobe software.

Lovely system and the lenses were awesome but the final product for me eventually wore me down. FF is a nice jump up in IQ.

And weight.
 
Just wondering, is the painterly there in the jpgs or in the raw if opened in other software?
 
minnnt said:
I found the best way to cure it was to sell it and buy a Nikon D750. :D fixed it straight away. :banana:
Click to expand...
Yep, but I already have one of those :p

I do like the way it renders the rest of the images, and it's much better than the D750 for travel. I also prefer general rendering to the Olly, and obviously both the RX100 and G7x. Just find the painterly effect a bit disappointing, and also confusing that it's not consistent. Bloody cameras :LOL:
 
JohnN said:
Just wondering, is the painterly there in the jpgs or in the raw if opened in other software?
Click to expand...
Painterly is worse in JPEG's but also there in RAW to a lesser extent. Not tried other software as I don't want to change my workflow.
 
Understood, just wondering if its a Fuji thing or Adobe, sounds like Fuji, I forget are you XT1 or 2?
 
Not been overly active in this in this thread for a wee while and when I have been in all this XT2 loveliness makes me want so bad! For the time being though it is the trusty XT1 for all my shots.

Two very contrasting images both taken from the Botanic Gardens in Edinburgh.

1 - Spiral
&
2 - Little Lady in red

Thank you in advance for looking!

Spiral.jpg Little Lady in Red.jpg
 
JohnN said:
Understood, just wondering if its a Fuji thing or Adobe, sounds like Fuji, I forget are you XT1 or 2?
Click to expand...
Reading around it's software not being able to interpret the Xtrans processors properly. Apparently Adobe is better than it was but still not perfect. However, what doesn't make sense if this is true about it just being software not being able to interpret Xtrans is why then do the JPEG's have this effect as JPEG is universal. Out of curiosity I will try using the Fuji software to compare the results.

It's the XT1 I've just bought.
 
snerkler said:
Yep, but I already have one of those :p

I do like the way it renders the rest of the images, and it's much better than the D750 for travel. I also prefer general rendering to the Olly, and obviously both the RX100 and G7x. Just find the painterly effect a bit disappointing, and also confusing that it's not consistent. Bloody cameras :LOL:
Click to expand...

That's just an excuse for your GAS.

mickledore said:
Strewth. A voice from the grave.
Thought you were dead. Saw you selling your wonderful Neyecon. What are you using now?
Click to expand...

I came to my senses and stuck with it.
 
minnnt said:
That's just an excuse for your GAS.
.
Click to expand...
Definitely an element of that ;)

I've always run a lighter setup alongside the DSLR though, just can't settle on one as there's always a niggle. Fuji is the best so far though.
 
There's no painterly effect with the X-Trans 1. I use my old X- Pro1 sometimes and for static pics it's still a fantastic camera and actually nicer to use than my X-T1 (built far better for example). For X-T1 I edit the RAW files - I hardly use the jogs
 
southernjessie said:
There's no painterly effect with the X-Trans 1. I use my old X- Pro1 sometimes and for static pics it's still a fantastic camera and actually nicer to use than my X-T1 (built far better for example). For X-T1 I edit the RAW files - I hardly use the jogs
Click to expand...
I thought the X-T1 used the X-trans 1?
 
snerkler said:
I'm noticing I'm getting the painterly effect with landscapes, not all the time but quite often. Rocks/stones tend to possibly be the worst, but also foliage particularly that in the distance. RAW seem to be better but it's still there, is there any voodoo magic to try and minimise this?

Shots were at 200 ISO, and I'm using Lightroom CC which is updated regularly.
Click to expand...

Yeah this remains my concern too, again noticing it mainly with Rocks and distance foliage. I was using Irident Developer which seems to reduce the effects but its not quite as good to use as Lightroom!

minnnt said:
It really is. Haven't gone all the way yet though. Seriously, the painterly effect is something I have made no secret about suffering from. I believe it is a mix of the X-Trans sensor and using Adobe software.

Lovely system and the lenses were awesome but the final product for me eventually wore me down. FF is a nice jump up in IQ.

And weight.
Click to expand...

This is the conundrum for me, fantastic bodies and lenses but the "painterly" effect is a little irritating, especially as I can't even seem consistency in when its an issue!
 
chrism_scotland said:
X-Trans II in the XT1 I think?
Click to expand...
Yeah, just looked on Fuji and it is II. Which Fujis have I and which II then? I wonder if the new 24mp trans III has this effect?
 
Fingers crossed I may know soon :)
 
JohnN said:
Fingers crossed I may know soon :)
Click to expand...
Will be interesting to know. I need to decide in the next couple of days whether the XT1's a keeper or not as I have til Friday to return it under the 14 day cooling off period. I do really like the camera, just not sure whether I'll be able to get past the painterly effect. If I don't keep the Fuji I'm kinda out of options on a lightweight setup though :facepalm:

I think I'll try different NR and sharpening settings, as well as LMO to see if I can reduce the painterly effects. Apparently Fuji add processing to the RAW so maybe this will effect RAWs as well. I've also been reading that there are lens adjustments embedded in both RAW and JPEG that can't be turned off in Adobe software but can with others so may look into this too. What these are and how they're different to those corrected with LMO I've no idea :confused:
 
manualfocus-g said:
A "Sold items" search on ebay shows nice, boxed bodies selling for £500 or thereabouts.
Click to expand...
Seems a lot. You can buy excellent condition used ones from stores with 12m warranty for under £500 and I know where I'd rather buy from ;) EBay would have to be much cheaper for me to consider buying from their without warranty.
 
snerkler said:
Seems a lot. You can buy excellent condition used ones from stores with 12m warranty for under £500 and I know where I'd rather buy from ;) EBay would have to be much cheaper for me to consider buying from their without warranty.
Click to expand...

Ah, I was presuming the OP was looking to sell :)
 
snerkler said:
Yeah, just looked on Fuji and it is II. Which Fujis have I and which II then? I wonder if the new 24mp trans III has this effect?
Click to expand...

I think the X-Trans 1 was limited to just the X-Pro 1 and XE-1?, X-Trans 2 probably the XT1/XE2/XT-10, X-Trans 3 only on the X-Pro 2 and XT-2.
I still see issue with the newer X-Trans 3, albeit not as prevalently as with the 16mp sensors
 
snerkler said:
Will be interesting to know. I need to decide in the next couple of days whether the XT1's a keeper or not as I have til Friday to return it under the 14 day cooling off period. I do really like the camera, just not sure whether I'll be able to get past the painterly effect. If I don't keep the Fuji I'm kinda out of options on a lightweight setup though :facepalm:

I think I'll try different NR and sharpening settings, as well as LMO to see if I can reduce the painterly effects. Apparently Fuji add processing to the RAW so maybe this will effect RAWs as well. I've also been reading that there are lens adjustments embedded in both RAW and JPEG that can't be turned off in Adobe software but can with others so may look into this too. What these are and how they're different to those corrected with LMO I've no idea :confused:
Click to expand...

Photo Ninja definitely gives better image quality when manipulating X-Trans files, but I still prefer to use Lightroom as my main tool. If I had any time for serious landscapes then perhaps I'd consider changing, but Adobe's rendering has not caused me any cause for complaint over the last two years, personally.

Edit: I sharpen in LR using Pete Bridgwood's recommended settings:

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/#more-1432
 
Last edited:
chrism_scotland said:
I think the X-Trans 1 was limited to just the X-Pro 1 and XE-1?, X-Trans 2 probably the XT1/XE2/XT-10, X-Trans 3 only on the X-Pro 2 and XT-2.
I still see issue with the newer X-Trans 3, albeit not as prevalently as with the 16mp sensors
Click to expand...

X-M1 also used X-Trans 1 and X100s / X100t used X-Trans 2.
 
Sooo... I just hired a 50-140mm for the 20th-24th October... But they didn't have the 1.4x extender in stock.

Any chance anyone here has one they wont be using and wants to do a side rental :)
 
I wish painterly hadn't been mentioned, I hadn't noticed it before but can't unsee it now.
 
minnnt said:
XP1 and XE1 are the originals.
Click to expand...
Even nicer is the x100 which uses a bayer as does the xA1 and xA2
The x100 to me always gave much more natural looking rendering,the reason why ive not gone down the xtrans route after having an xT10.
Other than that lovely cameras and lenses.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top