 |
| X-T1 with 18-55mm lens @ 35.8mm; ISO 800; 1/90th sec. @ f/8 (click to enlarge) I think the X-T1 produced a lovely image here. |
After making a couple of thousand exposures under a wide variety of conditions, I have now finished extensively testing, primarily for my own benefit, my Fujifilm X-T1 and have drawn some conclusions as to how it works for me. I'll pass my thoughts and opinions on in case you may find them helpful or just interesting. If not, you may want to stop here.
Many, many people love this camera and everything about what Fujifilm is doing with their X-Trans gear. I like the camera but I don't yet love it. I've written extensively about its features, image quality, build quality, etc. I don't need to repeat what I have written. If you are interested, go back and look over the past few weeks of posts of this blog to read my experiences.
In my opinion (and remember opinions are only opinions and are neither right nor wrong but merely opinions; honest disagreement is good as it can generate a robust and respectful debate) I believe the X-T1, with all things being as they currently are, including available raw converters, would work well for me in many of my photographic endeavors. But, being primarily a landscape, nature photographer and travel photographer, again considering the current state of raw file converters, the X-Trans sensor system would cause me to choose another system as my primary gear. I wouldn't not ever use it, but I would pick up my Nikon D810 or Olympus E-M1 for landscape and nature photography before I would pick up my X-T1.
The hundreds and hundreds of images I have produced as well as ones I have seen on the web on many, many sites, clearly show that Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw and some other raw converters don't produce excellence from the X-Trans raw files. Let me be clear. The excellence is there, but you just can't realize the potential of the sensor until there is an improvement in the demosaicing algorithms in those raw most used converters. It truly is a shame. I've used Photoshop since 2001 and Lightroom since it was introduced. These two programs are, by far, the most popular image editing programs. It is a shame that the two programs most people use do a less than adequate job in translating the raw data into an image. I'm hoping Adobe Lightroom 6, which is imminent I am told, will have all the issues solved.
Other than that, the only issues I have with the X-T1 are mere quibbles. There are some small things that really don't matter much in the overall scheme of things, but are annoying "to me." And let me emphasize again, "to me." They may not be annoying to you, but they are to me. I've written about these quibbles also in the recent past, so if you are interested, take a look at my blog posts since January of this year.
Let me go one step farther and say that every camera I have ever owned (and probably you have owned) has had some minor annoyances, so one just adapts to them, works around them, and gets on with making images. These are not deal breakers.
One thing in using the X-T1 with which I still personally struggle is having what I see in the electronic viewfinder (EVF), in the form of correct exposure brightness, including the histogram reading, accurately reflect the image when in my editing software. For example, if I set my exposure to look balanced and the way I want the final image to look in the EVF, it may be too dark in Lightroom requiring some exposure slider increase. (Note: I do have a properly calibrated monitor and system) If I brighten the same image in the EVF to compensate, the histogram then shows I'm losing some highlight detail, but the histogram in Lightroom doesn't show any loss. Even though I'm using the RAW file format I thought the histogram was probably producing its reading from the JPEG settings so I set the camera on the lowest contrast film simulation (Pro Neg S) as well as have the shadows and highlights set for -2 to achieve the greatest dynamic range. But I still see this anomaly. I have also tested brightening and darkening the EVF to change my sense of brightness of the scene while looking through the EVF but still to no avail. I can't quite get this figured out. I'm sure others have done so successfully, but I haven't hit on the formula that would give me an image in Lightroom that reflects the brightness I am seeing in the EVF. So, as persistent as I am, I'll still work on understanding the visible EVF image with how the image appears in Lightroom. I'll get it sooner or later.
Now, I don't have this issue at all with my E-M1. What I see in my EVF is the brightness I get in Lightroom. I don't have to make any "exposure" slider changes when editing. It appears as how I want my final image to appear. That is what I want to happen with the X-T1 but I'm not there yet. Back to the relevant stuff.
If I were a street photographer, I think the X-T1 would be splendid because of the brightness EVF and the fast focus. The face recognition works pretty well, the camera is small and won't draw attention and fast wide primes are available. If I were a portraitist, I believe the X-T1 also would serve me well. I've made some lovely portraits of my children and grandchildren with the camera. If I were still an industrial photographer, I probably wouldn't have any issues with the X-T1. I have read some wedding photographers love the X-T1 and X-Trans systems, so it must work for them. If I were a documentary photographer, I believe the camera will serve me well, again, as it is small and focuses pretty fast. I suspect it will serve me well also if I were a product photographer. If I were just a casual photographer and just wanted a very high quality camera with a good variety of excellent lenses, the X-T1 would be a good choice as it is compact, well made, lightweight, has a good variety of lenses for all situations and not unreasonably expensive.
Additionally, the camera would make a great landscape and nature tool if only the editing software the vast majority of us used did a bit better job in interpreting the excellence produced from the sensor. One little (well, big) stumbling block for me. Maybe not for you, but it is for me. I do own Photo Ninja and it does much better in drawing out detail in the X-Trans files as well as eliminating the "mush" and "outlined" fine detail that I see in Lightroom. But, as I have said more than once in this blog, I'm trying to keep my editing process consistent, straightforward, fast and not have to add additional steps.
So there you have it. Now, with all this testing over and really knowing the capabilities, quirks and annoyances of this nice tool very well, I plan on just enjoying using it when I go out and make images. Too much worry about stuff stifles creativity.
Thanks for looking. Enjoy!
Dennis Mook
Many of my images can be found at www.dennismook.com. Please pay it a visit. I add new images regularly. Thank you.
All content on this blog is © 2013-2015 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.
Coming from the X-Pro1, I had originally reserved a fair bit of enthusiasm for the X-T1 - since it appeared to me Fuji had really re-engineered & improved a lot. But using it now more and more, I rediscover a few of the original weaknesses related to the X-series again. One of them is are the AF issues in low light shooting and a kind of odd lethargy can take the camera in the same way as it did with the X-Pro1. It's pushed back to a more extreme corner of its operational capabilities, but it's still there, and it will surprise you when you can't afford it. I'm really missing the 1-1.5 EVF of exposure difference too I'm having with my FF Nikons under the same conditions and also the ISO-behavior is 'just right' but nothing compelling anymore in 2015. Another thing Fuji didn't solve is the TTL flash firmware, which is close to what to expect from a 90's camera. Burned out faces and even with a -2EV decrease I still don't get it right. The Fuji flashes are really toys, no tools, no professionalism to be found over here. I'm not against Fuji - they really work hard to get this system really what it deserves - but for me, it's still not a valid DSLR replacement. Those who can afford this challenge must have other criteria than I have likely. Should I mention something about that WIFI implementation? There's only one word to describe it, what a PAIN! Nobody can live with such a bad implementation of a very elementary feature. I still hope that parts of these issues get a kaizen improvement, it may be gradually, I can live with that. DiBo
ReplyDeleteThoughtful review. I'm continually struck by the discourse on LR RAW processing. Some folks insist there is no issue; others see LR as clearly inferior. One can find examples demonstrating the issues to which you refer— examples that would ordinarily lead me to conclude that some folks are just less discerning than others or maintain a healthy "it's good enough" attitude. (I envy those ignorant, well-adjusted people. :-) ) However I'm anal as hell and I make my living in visual quality control yet I don't have any problems with LR. I never get the watercolor greens and the wormy artifacts in the detail of my landscapes. Makes we wonder what I'm doing that others are not...or vice versa.
ReplyDeleteThat's not to deny the differences between RAW converters—not just sharpness/detail, but highlight recovery and color palette too. And while I might choose a different processor if maximum detail is my priority, most of the time things balance out in favor of LR. This, by the way, was true with my Canon 5D3 as well.
There is one thing I expected you to mention that you didn't. The X-T1's analog dials and controls make it really easy to see how your camera is set the moment you pick it up. That's really nice. But it also eliminates the possibility of useful memory presets. For shooters that like to configure different presets so that they can quickly switch from a set of parameters designed to capture fast-moving wildlife to one ideal for video or landscapes, you just can't. The X-T1 does have presets but they can't control aperture, shutter speed, ISO, or program mode.
Thank you for the comment. Consistently, I found the "mushy" greens and "wormy" fine detail in small branches and fine pebble-like structures in my first copy of the X-T1 a year ago and, although somewhat improved in the newest version of Lightroom (5.7.1), they are still there with the X-T1 I purchased at the beginning of this year.. However, not all images suffer from these particular issues so I see the problem on an image by image basis. Additionally, if you look at the files at a reasonable and realistic size, say 50% instead of 100%, the files look very good as we no longer look at the image at pixel level. Since Lightroom 6 is imminent, I'm hoping for some additional if not full improvement in rendering of the raw files. In the mean time, if I have an image that I will submit to my stock agency, I will convert the raw file in Photo Ninja, then edit the file in Lightroom. The editors look at the image files at 100% and it has to be as good as it can get. But the import into Lightroom, export to Photo Ninja, then re-import back into Lightroom is a reasonable compromise as long as I don't have to do that for every file. Not ideal, but workable.
DeleteAs for not mentioning the ability to see my camera's settings before turning it on, well, with the 18-55 lens, which is currently the only one I own, I can't read the aperture anyway without turning the camera on, so the benefit is only for those lenses with the aperture marked on the lens itself. Comparing the controls to the E-M1, after I mastered the menu and control system, I now find the E-M1 faster to change settings than using the manual controls on the X-T1. Go figure? But, it's true.
For example, to change the ISO on the X-T1, I have to take my left out from under the lens, reach up on top of the camera, push and hold (which is not a good way to engineer this control) the button in the middle of the ISO dial, then turn it. Afterwards, I return my hand to its normal position under the lens for support.
With the E-M1, I don't have to move either hand. I simply take my right thumb, click the lever control on the top of the back of the camera (behind the PASM dial on top) from position 1 to position 2, then rotate the front control dial which surrounds the shutter button with my right index finger to the desired ISO, then again using my right thumb, click the lever back to the #1 position. Very quick and sure. Also, the E-M1 has those programmable "Myset" functions which allow you to program in several different configurations which can be accessed quickly with just the touch of a function button.
I'm still conflicted about which camera I like better. Both have pros and cons. At some point in time, I'll have to sell one of them, but I honestly don't know which quite yet. Both are marvelous image making tools.